Freshman seminar: Free will and the problem of evil

Feb 6. Introduction

Feb 13. Problem of evil

Feb 20. Normative constraints on divine creation

Feb 27. Normative constraints on human creation

Mar 5. The free will defense to the problem of evil

Mar 12. Free will overview

Mar 19. No seminar meeting (Spring Break)

Mar 26. The consequence argument for incompatibilism

Apr 2. Freedom, responsibility, and higher-order desires

Apr 9. No seminar meeting.

Apr 16. 8:30am-11:20am Freedom through agent causation?

Apr 23. Hard incompatibilism

Apr 30. Is conscious will an illusion?

May 7 11:30a-2:20p 8:30a-11:20a. Final paper workshop

Overflow: Neuroscience of free will

Overflow: Is free will a mystery?

Overflow: More on what happens if there is no best possible world

Overflow: free will and punishment

Weekly responsibilities

Main assignments

• Be “the explicator”
  
  • Topic: a starred reading from the syllabus that is not from the same week as a reading that is the topic of your Paper 1 or Paper 2.
  • Your job is solely to understand and explain the reading and to help structure the discussion. In your role as explicator you are not expected to come up with creative new ideas or objections of your own.
  • Write a 1-2 page “bullet-point” handout:
    • Due at noon the day before we discuss that reading. For example, if we discuss the reading on February 20 the paper is due at noon on February 19.
    • Maximum length 300 words.
    • Using bullet points, numbered lists, named claims, and/or outline structure, state in your own words the main arguments and claims from the reading, distilling these claims down to their essence.
    • If the reading accomplishes more than one main task, your handout should be clearly broken into parts corresponding to each main task.
    • For at least one central argument in the paper, lay out the argument in premise-conclusion form.
    • If something important in the reading is unclear to you, explain briefly what that is. (Perhaps we can clarify it in class.)
    • The role of your handout is to act as a “skeleton” for a portion of the seminar discussion that day
  • Responsibilities during class discussion:
    • Be prepared to help lead the class by giving a 1-to-3-minute mini-introduction to get the ball rolling for several phases of the discussion. You might for example direct attention to a portion of your handout, explain it, and ask a pertinent question to start a discussion on that portion of your handout.
    • Note that part of giving an ideal mini-presentation is giving the presentation and then stopping within 1 to 3 minutes (without my having to stop you). This is difficult because 3 minutes is so short. It is almost impossible to do well unless you practice your mini-presentation in advance with the help of a stopwatch.
    • One of your goals as explicator should be to bring out the best in the other students in the class. That means fostering discussion (perhaps by posing questions using the opt-out convention).
    • Try to especially encourage participation from students who have spoken less (during the day’s session, and over the course of the semester).
• Paper 1
  
  • Maximum length 500 words.
  • Due at noon the day before we discuss that reading. For example, if we discuss the reading on February 20 the paper is due at noon on February 19.
  • Topic: an argument or arguments from a starred reading from the syllabus for weeks 2-6.
  • Aim to make the most interesting/surprising contribution that you can support well. You will need to home in on a very specific argument in order to make progress with respect to it. (Also applies to Paper 2 and Paper 3.)
  • Include only as much description of the author’s argument as is needed to make your point understandable.
  • Those who submit paper 1 in the first couple of weeks get special grading consideration because they won’t have the benefit of having seen feedback on papers others wrote.
• Paper 2 canceled
  
• Paper 3
  
  • Maximum length 1,000 words.
  • Topic: any single argument from an assigned portion of a starred reading on the syllabus, except that you should not write your paper on the same reading that you wrote your paper 1 on.
    • Other topics allowed only if approved by the instructor no later than April 23.
  • Due at noon on Monday May 11.
• General paper guidelines
  
  • Things to think about when getting started on your paper
    
    • First read the paper and get clear on what the arguments are.
    • Do you see a non-obvious objection to an argument’s premise? Do you see a way to strengthen an argument in the paper? Do you see an objection someone might raise against an argument that you have an answer to? Do you see a reason someone might think supports one of the premises of the argument, but which you think is no good? Do you see any non-obvious or implausible implications of the argument? Answering any of these questions and supporting your answer are all ways to make progress on an argument.
    • In each case it is not sufficient to merely assert your agreement or disagreement with a particular position. Rather, you should give supporting reasons.
    • Your job in writing your paper is to explain the relevant portion of an argument and the progress you make on it as clearly, simply, and succinctly as possible.
  • Structuring your paper 3
    

    The structure of your paper should make it blindingly obvious to the reader what argument your paper considers, and exactly what progress your paper makes on that argument. One straightforward and good way to proceed:

    • Have an introduction briefly describing the contention of the argument you consider and the way in which you propose to make progress on the argument.
    • Give just enough explanation of the target argument that the reader will be able to understand the progress you propose to make on it. One common pitfall is spending too much space on this part of the paper, leaving not enough space for you to develop your own idea and objections to it.
    • Make your progress. This is the most important part of your paper. Here you describe your counterexample, or explain your new supporting consideration, or explain an objection and say how to answer it, etc.
    • Anticipate objections. Think about the weakest point or two of your proposal, or the best way to object to it. Answer the objection if you have a good answer. But if you notice a serious objection that you don’t know how to answer, it is better to describe the objection and admit that you don’t have an answer than to ignore it.
    • A brief conclusion is optional.
  • How your paper will be assessed
    

    In assessing your papers, your grader will in part be asking “Which of the following boxes can I check off in good conscience?”. Your grader will also take into account the word-limit constraints you are operating under for each paper.

    • The paper focuses on just one argument and gives it careful attention, rather than listing a number of considerations and giving them superficial treatment.
    • The paper reflects and conveys a correct understanding of that argument.
    • The paper gives reasons, rather than simply asserting that such-and-such argument is or is not convincing.
    • The content of the paper was easy to follow. I didn’t have to go back and reread it to figure out what was going on.
    • The language was simple, clear and clean. The sentences were short and punchy. Simple words were used wherever possible, rather than obscure or unfamiliar jargon.
    • Direct quotation was used sparingly, if at all. No large “filler” quotations were included.
    • The writing was grammatical and everything was spelled and punctuated properly.
    • The paper gave just enough background to make sense of its reasoning, and no more. It didn’t have unnecessary “filler” text that explained peripheral matters.
    • The paper reflects a creative contribution. Either it introduces a novel argument or provided a fresh perspective, criticism, or supporting point to an argument. Perhaps the contribution isn’t mind-blowing, but it also is not one that occurs to one right away, given the readings.
    • No straightforward objection to reasoning in the paper occurred to me. Or if it did, the paper addressed that objection somehow (even if only to register it at as an unsolved problem).
    • The paper included the author’s name in the header, an appropriate word count, and page numbers.
    • The paper reflects not a mechanical slog but rather a genuine spark of interest from the author in the topic.

Communications

Office hours

Snacks

Stretching and bathroom breaks

How to submit work

Late work policy

If you miss a seminar session

Collaboration policy

• More detailed guidance especially relevant to the papers:
  

  You must write your own paper. However, you may discuss the ideas in your paper with others in the class. In particular, you may if you wish brainstorm for paper ideas together with others from the class. You must give credit where credit is due: if you write a paper based on your own development of an idea kernel that someone else came up with, you must explicitly credit that person. More generally, document what help you have received by not just listing who helped you, but how exactly each of the people helped you did so. Examples of (some of) the sorts of information it would be appropriate to include:

  “Quentin reacted to my argument that such-and-such with the objection that so-and-so. That led to me writing the discussion in section 3 of my paper.”

  “I discussed such-and-such paper with Una. She thought it odd that [so-and-so]. That led to the idea that […], which led to the main idea of my paper, which is […].”

  Another example: suppose that you have a paper idea. You may explain the idea to someone else from the class to see if it makes sense to them. You may ask them to help you come up with objections and weak points in your reasoning. But this should all take place within the context of a discussion of ideas, as opposed to the manner in which those ideas get expressed. As usual, give credit for any objections or observations that your classmates supply.

  You should not be working with anyone else when you are actually typing the text of your paper.

Use of work

Grade percentages (supercedes information on registrar’s page)

Grading standards

• A-range work will typically have the following characteristics
  
  • Papers
    • All assignments submitted on time in the specified format according to the submission guidelines
    • Written assignments rarely contain mechanical errors
    • Written assignments all reflect having read the assigned readings carefully and having thought about and digested them
    • Many papers contain a worthwhile and original high-quality thought or suggestion
    • All writing is extremely clear
  • In-class small-group work sessions
    • Full attendance
    • “Share the wheel”:
      • Work with your partner together on work done in pairs
      • Contribute your own ideas and ask questions to clarify matters, even if you are confused and/or feel as though your partner understands things better than you. In other words: don’t just be a “passenger” and let your partner steer the work the whole time.
      • Let your partner contribute to the project, and help answer their questions, even if you know just what to do and/or feel as though you understand things better than your partner. In other words: don’t just be “the driver” and steer the work the whole time.
    • Keep discussion on class-related matters (as opposed to general chatting)
    • Do not use phone or laptop for non-class purposes. For example, don’t check messages even a single time during the semester. (Checking messages during a designated in-class break is OK.)
    • If you and your partner get done with the assignment or get stuck before time is up, ask the instructor to come over so that they can take a look at your work, set you up with something to think about, or give you help, as appropriate. Do not just start chatting about non-class matters or stare into space.
  • In-class discussions
    • Whenever called upon to lay out a central argument from the readings, have read and taken adequate notes on the reading to give a sensible account of the argument (this is compatible with your identifying points or aspects of the argument that you had a hard time following).
    • Your comments in class reflect having done all of the required reading carefully. For this component of your grade, there is no expectation that you read any of the optional readings.
    • You come to each class session with some sort of angle or issue that your consideration of the assigned reading raised. For example, you might have identified a portion of the reading that you had trouble following, or that you have an objection to or question about, or that you think could be strengthened with an additional consideration. Or maybe the reading got you to think of an argument of your own on the topic. This goes beyond just reading passively, and is often associated with the sort of reading that one needs to have a pen or laptop in hand to do (to make notes and record questions).
    • When an instructor or student says something you don’t understand, you typically ask a question.
• B-range work will typically have some of the following characteristics
  
  • Papers
    • Written assignments contain a few mechanical errors
    • Written assignments almost all reflect having read the assigned readings fairly carefully and having thought about them a bit
    • Some papers contain a worthwhile and original thought or suggestion
  • In-class small-group work sessions
    • Full attendance or perhaps one partial absence
    • “Share the wheel” followed fairly well, but some times of either wheel-hogging or pure-passengering
    • A small amount of non-class-related-chatting
  • In-class discussions
    • Mostly, when called upon to lay out a central argument from the readings, you have read and taken adequate notes on the reading to give a sensible account of the argument
    • Your comments in class mostly reflect having done all of the required reading reasonably carefully.
    • You come to several class sessions with some sort of angle or issue that your consideration of the assigned reading raised.
    • When an instructor or student says something you don’t understand, you sometimes ask a question.
• Work that earns a C-range grade or below
  
  • Overall, lowered versions of the above standards are met or some of the above standards are met but others are very far from being met

Academic integrity policy

Academic accommodations because of a disability