PHI 550: First Year Philosophy Graduate Seminar

Instructor: Adam Elga <http://www.princeton.edu/~adame>

Meetings: Thursday 9:00-11:00a at Marx 201.

This page: http://www.princeton.edu/~adame/teaching/PHI550_F2018

A seminar for first-year graduate students in philosophy. We will cover a range of topics with an emphasis on careful analysis of arguments, in part by creating argument maps (visual representations of the structure of arguments).

Logistics

Use password (to be distributed in class) to access this folder containing the readings (along with optional background readings).
Since we will be sometimes create argument maps in small groups, please always bring a charged, wifi-enabled laptop to class.
Before the first session, please:
- Read the reading assigned for that session
- Set up Mindmup using this guide: Getting started with MindMup
- Familiarize yourself with argument mapping by reading this handout: Getting started with argument mapping
- Make a few practice argument maps just to get familiar with the software.
- (Optional) Read more about argument mapping:
  - https://maps.simoncullen.org/software
  - https://maps.simoncullen.org/hints
- (Optional) Try your hand at mapping a couple of the arguments from the first-week readings
The work you do for this course may be anonymously used for the benefit of other students. If you would prefer that your work not be used in this way, please email the course instructor at any time in the semester. No explanation is required: an email with subject line “I opt out of future use of my work” is sufficient. Students who opt out will not be penalized in any way. Also, if you are generally ok with such use but there is a particular assignment you’d prefer to be kept private, feel free to include a note saying so at the top of that assignment.

Sessions

(Readings subject to change.)

Killing and letting die
- James Rachels, “Active and Passive Euthanasia”
- Philippa Foot, “Killing and Letting Die”
Abortion
- Judith Thomson, “A defense of abortion”
- Don Marquis, “Why abortion is immoral”
Skepticism (Haley)
- Ned Markosian, “Do you know that you are not a brain in a vat?”
- (Optional) Timothy Williamson, “Skepticism” (chapter 8 of Knowledge and its limits) section 8.7
Reasons for belief (Michal, Brendan)
- Susanna Rinard, “No exception for belief”
Ontology (Hao, Rob)
- John Burgess, “Being explained away”. (Pay special attention to the section entitled “Talking of Objects—Or Not” and the first paragraph of the following section.)
Personal identity (Bridget)
- Derek Partfit, “Personal Identity”
Induction (Rob, Elliot)
- Nelson Goodman, “The New Riddle of Induction” (Chapter 3 of Fact, Fiction and Forecast)
Qualia (Hao)
- Alex Byrne, “Review of ‘There’s Something About Mary’” (Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews). (PDF of review posted with rest of readings so that we can refer to uniform page numbers.)
Creation ethics (Michal)
- Robert Adams, “Must God create the best?”
- M. Spriggs, “Lesbian couple create a child who is deaf like them”
Compatibilism (Bridget)
- Harry Frankfurt, “Alternate possibilities and moral responsibility”
Incompatibilism (Haley, Elliot)
- Derk Pereboom, “Why we have no free will and can live without it”
Problem of evil (Brendan)
- Louise Antony. “No good reason”
- Eleonore Stump. “The problem of evil”

Responsibilities

Weekly (except for the first meeting)
- Read the assigned paper(s)
- Map at least one interesting argument from an assigned paper. You may work with a partner if you wish, but don’t always work with a partner and please mix up who works with who as the semester progresses. Your map should show:
  - The author(s) of the maps
  - Which passages (paper and page number(s)) are the source of each map
- Write a paragraph reacting to an aspect of an assigned paper. The paragraph should be no more than 200 words, and everyone should write their own paragraph (even if you worked as a pair to produce your map). The paragraph might clarify a tricky aspect of the paper, raise an objection, raise some pertinent questions, add a supporting argument, fend off an objection to the paper, or otherwise engage with the paper in a way that reflects serious thought.
- Submit your map and paragraph by noon on the day before the seminar through the submission form. (Link provided separately; you’ll use the same submission link each week.)
Twice per semester: lead a portion of one seminar session
- Create a handout that will act as a skeleton for a portion of the seminar discussion that day. (Submit your handout to the instructor by noon on the day before the seminar, and bring copies for everyone on the day of the seminar.)
- With approximately three 3-to-5-minute mini-presentations (to be interleaved within the class discussion), get the ball rolling for several phases of the discussion. For example, you might direct attention to a particular portion of the paper under discussion, raise a question with appropriate background, or try out an objection.
- Note that part of giving an ideal mini-presentation is giving the presentation and then stopping within 3 to 5 minutes (without my having to stop you). This is difficult because 5 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 presenter 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).
- I encourage you to choose a short passage from the reading and ask students to map that passage in pairs.