LSU Catalog Course Description: (3) Classical and recent theories of obligation and value, including works of philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Hume, and Nietzsche; topics including freedom, rights, justification of moral judgments.
General Education Learning Objective: As a general education course in the humanities, this course has the following learning objective: LSU graduates will demonstrate an understanding of historical, cultural, and philosophical complexity, which supports sophisticated discourse.
Required Texts: There is no required textbook to purchase for this course. All readings are available on Moodle as PDF files. Readings include selections and essays from a variety of influential thinkers in Philosophy, both past and present, from such thinkers as Aristotle, David Hume, J.S. Mill, Immanuel Kant, Friedrich Nietzsche, Bernard Williams, James Rachels, and others.
Required Materials: Three blue books and three scantron forms (882-E) for examinations.
Course Requirements: The final grade in this course is based on the following requirements.
- Class Attendance, 10%: For each entire class period students attend, they will earn a 100. For each unexcused absence, students will earn a zero.
- Pop Quizzes/Homework Assignments (TBD), 10%: Over the semester, there will be several short-answer pop quizzes over reading assignments and/or previous lectures, some thought experiment quizzes, and a few short homework assignments (approximately 10-15 grades). At the end of the term the three lowest of these grades are dropped. The remaining grades count for 10% of the final grade.
- Exams (3), 80%: There are three, multiple-choice/short essay examinations in the course worth 25%, 25%, and 30%, respectively. The final exam is comprehensive. Exams require students to demonstrate a detailed and comprehensive mastery of all the material covered in the course as well as an independent capacity for logical reasoning and critical thinking that is relatively free of any major errors of fact, fallacy or logical contradiction.
Grading & Evaluation: Student work is evaluated and grades are assigned based on the following criterion based on the LSU grading system as outlined in the LSU General Catalog.
- A (89.5-100): The grade of A is reserved for work that demonstrates a superior mastery of the course material my meeting all of the following standards. Work demonstrates a comprehensive and detailed mastery of all the material covered in the course. Work demonstrates a capacity for critical thinking and logical reasoning free of major errors of fact, fallacy or logical contradiction. Work follows all instructions and exceeds minimum requirements for assignments and exams. Work demonstrates excellent research and communication skills; uses and cites appropriate sources, supports claims with evidence; writing is organized, clear, and relatively free of any major or excessive grammatical/spelling errors.
- B (79.5-89.4): The grade of B is assigned for work that demonstrates an above average mastery of the course material by meeting all of the following standards. Work demonstrates an above average understanding of the required material that is comprehensive and includes some important details. Work demonstrates a capacity for critical thinking and logical reasoning that is relatively free of major errors of fact, fallacy or logical contradiction. Work follows all directions and exceeds minimum requirements for assignments and exams. Work demonstrates competency in college-level research and communication skills; uses and cites appropriate sources, supports claims with evidence; writing is clear, concise, logically organized, and relatively free of any major or excessive grammatical/spelling errors.
- C (69.5-79.4): The grade of C is assigned for average or good work that meets all of the following standards. Work demonstrates a basic understanding of all the main ideas by accurately and coherently reproducing them as they are presented in readings and lectures. Work demonstrates that the student is beginning to engage in critical thinking and logical reasoning; it analyzes and synthesizing ideas as well as correctly identifies major errors of fact, fallacy or logical contradiction. Work follows all instructions and meets minimum requirements for assignments and exams. Work does not demonstrate competency in college-level research and communication skills; uses and cites appropriate sources, supports claims with evidence; writing is organized, clear, and relatively free of any major or excessive grammatical/spelling errors.
- D (Satisfactory, 59.5-69.4): A grade of D is assigned to satisfactory work that meets one or more of the following standards. Work demonstrates a minimum understanding of material by coherently and accurately reproducing the main ideas as they are presented in required material or lectures, but leaves some important ideas missing, incomplete or inaccurate. Work demonstrates minimal evidence of critical thinking or logical reasoning or contains some major errors of fact, fallacy or logical contradiction. Work does not follow all instructions or meet all minimum requirements and expectations for assignments and exams. Work contains minor shortcomings in regard to basic, college-level research or communication skills (e.g. use of inappropriate sources, failure to document sources or support key claims with evidence; writing is disorganized, unclear, incoherent, excessive or major grammatical/spelling errors).
- F (Failing, 59.4 or below): A grade of F is assigned to unsatisfactory work that meets any of the following standards. Work does not demonstrate a minimally satisfactory understanding of the required material; most main ideas are missing, incomplete or inaccurate. Work does not contain evidence of critical thinking or logical reasoning; contains major or excessive errors of fact, fallacy or logical contradiction. Work does not follow instructions or meet minimum requirements and expectations for assignments and exams. Writing contains major or excessive grammatical/spelling errors; writing is disorganized, unclear, or incoherent. Work contains major shortcomings in regard to basic, college-level research and writing skills (e.g. use of inappropriate sources, failure to document sources, support key claims with evidence; writing is mostly disorganized, unclear, incoherent or contains major or excessive grammatical/spelling errors.)
Writing Assignment Grades: Writing assignment grades are assigned on the following scale: A+ = 100, A = 95, A- = 90, B+ = 89, B = 85, B- = 80, C+ = 79, C = 75, C- = 70, D+ = 69, D = 60, D- = 60, and F = 59, 50 or 0 depending on the severity of the problems with the writing assignment or if the assignment is not submitted.
Attendance Policy: Students are expected to attend all class meetings. Class attendance is a graded course requirement. See above. Students that find it necessary to miss class assume responsibility for all the material they miss and for making arrangements for any makeup/late work necessary. See PS-22. Attend and submit work in the section in which you are officially registered.
Make-Up/Late Work Policy: Students that miss a graded assignment or exam due to a documented, university-excused absence have a time period equal to the number of days they were out due to the absence to makeup the work. After that time period has lapsed, a zero will be recorded for the missing work. Students that miss work due to an unexcused absence will receive a zero for the missed work.
Writing and Research Assignments: See the Moodle course page for resources on researching, studying, and writing philosophy papers. Students should, unless otherwise directed by the instructor, make use of appropriate, scholarly sources and resources when writing papers in college. As a general rule, do not use sources like Wikipedia or popular websites as sources for academic papers. Work that fails to make use of appropriate scholarship or otherwise fails to demonstrate basic, college level research and writing skills will receive low or failing grades. See the Philosophy indexes and databases to research your projects and the style guides for information on documenting sources of information.
Formatting Assignments: All homework assignments and papers should be typed in 12 point, Times New Roman, double-spaced, with 1-inch top/bottom margins and 1.25 inch right/left margins. Be sure to include your name, student ID#, course #, section #, and date as well as any information identifying the assignment. If you work is comprised of more than one, typed page be sure you staple, paper clip, etc. the pages together. DO NOT SUBMIT MULTIPLE, LOOSE PAGES. Work that does not include this information or does not follow the formatting instructions above will not be accepted.
Submitting Work via Email: Submit a hard copy of your work, unless it is absolutely necessary. If you must submit work electronically by email or Moodle in an emergency, be sure to submit a Word document and to format the first part of the file name as follows: YourName.Course#Section#.AssignmentName. Submit your work as a Word Document. Work that does not follow these instructions will not be accepted.
Academic Misconduct: Academic misconduct of any kind is a serious infraction of the LSU the LSU Code of Student Conduct. All students are responsible for knowing and abiding by the code of conduct. See the Dean of Students’ website for information about avoiding plagiarism. Any student suspected of violating the code will be referred to the Office of Student Advocacy and Accountability.
Contesting Grades: Requests for higher grades based on factors not directly relevant to the student’s actual academic achievement on the course requirements listed in the syllabus are blatantly inappropriate. They violate common sense notions of fairness and merit, not to mention the university’s academic integrity policies. The instructor will ignore such requests. No additional work will be given after the final exam. If you have a legitimate question about a grade you received, please address it with the instructor in a timely fashion.
Classroom Comportment: Put all cell phones, computers, other personal electronic devices, and newspapers, etc. away during lectures and class discussions. Students engaged in conduct that disrupts the instructor’s ability to perform his university duties or distracts them or other students from concentrating on the tasks at hand will be required to leave class and will be referred to the Office of Student Advocacy and Accountability for disciplinary action. This statement serves as the one and only warning regarding classroom comportment. See LSU Faculty Handbook and the Student Code of Conduct.
Note on Screenings: Over the semester, we will screen various television shows, movies, and other elements of pop culture. Some of this material contains adult language, adult situations, various forms of violence, and other provocative and controversial material. If you are disturbed by any of this material, then please excuse yourself from class during the screening and return when it is completed. However, all students are responsible for all the material covered in the course. So, if you do leave during the screenings then be sure to get notes on the material from a classmate.
Schedule of Assignments (subject to revision)
1/14: Administrative issues, introduction to ethical theory lecture.
1/16: Arp, “The Chewbacca Defense: A South Park Logic Lesson” from South Park and Philosophy.[1]
1/19: Martin Luther King Jr. Day
1/21: Johnson, “Colbert, Wikiality, and Gut Thinking: The Colbert-Style of Doing Philosophy” from The Daily Show and Philosophy.
Meta-Ethics: The Problem of Objectivity in Ethics
1/23: Gilbert Harman, “Ethics and Observation”
Related Media: The Shape of Things.
1/26: Shafer-Landau, “Ethical Subjectivism” pg. 555-6 and 560-566.
1/28: Stephen Laymen, The Shape of the Good: Christian Reflections on the Foundations of Ethics [selection]
Related Media: Crimes and Misdemeanors, Frailty.
1/30: John Arthur, “Religion, Morality, and Conscience”
2/1: Ruth Benedict, “A Defense of Moral Relativism”
Related Media: Planet of the Apes (1968), Planet of the Apes (2001), Hotel Rwanda
Recommended Reading: Katherine Tullmann, “Dany’s Encounter with the Wild: Cultural Relativism” in A Game of Thrones and Philosophy.
2/4: James Rachels, “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism”
Meta-Ethics and the Science of Morality
2/6: Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man [selection]. Francis de Waal, “Chimpanzee Justice”
2/9: Joshua Greene, “The New Science of Morality”
2/11: Jonathan Haidt, “The Emotional Dog and its Rational Tail” [available by request from Haidt’s website.] Also see Jonathan Haidt’s TED Talk on Moral Foundations Theory here.
2/3: Joshua Greene, “From Neural ‘Is’ to Moral ‘Ought‘ The implications of neuroscientific research for moral psychology”, exam review
2/13: Exam #1
2/16-2/17: Mardi Gras Holiday
Normative Ethical Theory:
2/18: John Stuart Mill, “What Utilitarianism Is” from Utilitarianism [chapter 2]
Related Media: The Last Supper, Watchmen, The Dark Knight. South Park, “Bloody Mary”.
Recommended Readings: Kevin Murtagh, “Blasphemous Humor in South Park” from South Park and Philosophy; Nutall, “The Rorschach Test: When Telling the Truth is Wrong” from Watchmen and Philosophy; Mark White, “Why Doesn’t Batman Kill the Joker?” from The Dark Knight Rises and Philosophy.
2/20: J.J.C. Smart, “Extreme and Restricted Utilitarianism”
2/23: Bernard Williams, “Integrity and Utilitarianism”
2/25: Immanuel Kant, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals [selections]
Related Media: The Insider (1999), Watchmen, The Dark Knight, Family Guy, “Brian: Portrait of a Dog”; Daniel Malloy, “He Thinks He’s People: How Brian Made Personhood for Dogs” from Family Guy and Philosophy [Moodle]; John Loftis, “Ends, Means, and the Critique of Pure Superheroes from Watchmen and Philosophy; James Lawler, “The Moral World of The Simpsons: A Kantian Perspective” from The Simpsons and Philosophy.
2/27: Onora O’Neill, “A Simplified Account of Kant’s Ethics” or Christine Korsgaard, “Kant’s Formula of the Universal Law”
3/2: Bernard Williams, “Persons, character, and morality” or Fred Feldman, “Kantian Ethics”
3/4: Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics [selections].
Recommended Reading: Barwick, “George’s Failed Quest For Happiness: An Aristotlean Analysis” from Seinfeld and Philosophy; Sean McAleer, “The Virtue of Humor: What The Office Can Teach Us About Aristotle’s Ethics” from Introducing Philosophy Through Popular Culture; Mark White, “The Virtues of Nite Owl’s Potbelly” from Watchmen and Philosophy;
Related Media: Seinfeld, “The Fire”, The Opposite”, Watchmen.
3/6: Rosiland Hursthouse, “Normative Virtue Ethics”
3/9: Gilbert Harman, “Skepticism about Character Traits”
3/11: Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan [selections]
Recommended Readings: Richard Davies, “Lost’s State of Nature” in Introducing Philosophy Through Pop Culture; Greg Littmann, “Measter Hobbes Goes to King’s Landing” from Game of Thrones and Philosophy. Related Media: A Game of Thrones, Lost, Antz, V for Vendetta.
3/13: David Gauthier, “Why Contractarianism?”
3/16: Jean Hampton, “The Two Faces of Contractarianism”
3/18: Exam #2
3/20: David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals [selection]
Related Media: Match Point
Recommended: Michael Slote, “Sentimentalist Virtue and Moral Judgment: Outline of a Project”
3/23: Julia Driver, “Caring and Empathy: On Michael Slote’s Sentimentalist Ethics”
3/25: Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, On the Genealogy of Morals [selections]
Related Media:The Simpsons, “Bart vs. Australia”. Recommended Reading: Conard, “Thus Spake Bart: The Virtue of Being Bad” from The Simpsons and Philosophy; J. Keeping, “Superheroes and Supermen: Finding Nietzsche’s Übermensch in Watchmen” from Watchmen and Philosophy; Peter Fosi, “Metallica, Nietzsche, and Marx: The Immorality of Morality” from Metallica and Philosophy and Introducing Philosophy Through Pop Culture.
3/27: Jean Paul Sartre, “Existentialism is a Humanism”
Matthew Meyer and Greg Schneider, “Being-in-The Office: Sartre, the Look, and the Viewer”
Related Media: I © Huckabees, Leaving Las Vegas, The Office (“The Merger”)
3/30: Alvin Plantinga, “Existentialists Ethics”
4/1-4/10: Spring Break
4/13: Michel Foucault, “What is Critique?”
Recommended Readings: Judith Butler, “Foucault’s Virtue”, Margaret Beatrice Hull, “Postmodern Philosophy Meets Pop Cartoon: Michel Foucault and Matt Greoning”
Related Media: 1984, American Beauty
4/15: Alasdair MacIntyre, “Genealogies and Subversions” from Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry
4/17: Emmanuel Levinas, “Ethics and the Face” from Totality and Infinity
Recommended Reading: Anthony Beavers, “Introducing Levinas to Undergraduate Philosophers”
Related Media: The Crying Game
4/20: Alphonso Lingis, “Bare Humanity”
4/22: Ayn Rand, “The Virtue of Selfishness”
Recommended Reading: Robert White, “Egoless Egoists: The Second-Hand Lives of Mad Men from Mad Men and Philosophy.
Related Media: Wall Street (selected scene: Gecko’s “Greed is good” speech), Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps, Atlas Shrugged.
4/24: James Rachels, “Ethical Egoism and Moral Skepticism”
4/27: Annette Biaer, “What Do Women Want in a Moral Theory?”
Related Media: Family Guy, “A Very Freakin’ Family Guy Christmas Special”, Vera Drake. Recommended Reading: Empey, “Lois: Portrait of a Mother (Or, Nevermind Death, Motherhood is a Bitch) from Family Guys and Philosophy.
4/29: Marilyn Friedman, “Beyond Caring: The De-Moralization of Gender”
5/1: Final Exam Review
[1] All readings are available on Moodle as PDF files, online sources, etc.
Chris Blakley 