Dr. Nancy Stanlick	PHI 3670	Ethical Theory	Fall 2003
CNH 411-I 407-823-5459		CL1-308
Dept. Office: 407-823-2273	stanlick@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu
Office Hours:	Tuesday 9:50-10:20 and 3:00-4:30	Thursday 3:30-5:00	& by appt.

Some elements of this syllabus are under construction through the first week of classes.

The syllabus is regularly updated throughout the semester.

Texts:

• Paul A. Newberry, Ethical Traditions (Mountainview, CA: Mayfield (McGraw-Hill), 2000, 2002).
• Kelly James Clark and Anne Poortenga, The Story of Ethics (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2003).

Message Board: Use THIS LINK

Course Requirements/Course Description and Objective:

• Four examinations - #1 = 10%, #2=10%, #3=15%, #4=15%, Examination total: 50%
• 2 in-class essays – topics TBA on dates assigned (dates determined in class only): 10% (5% each)
• 1 2-page essay: 10% – see topics and instructions at this link.
• These are due on different dates, based on the first letter of your last name (see the link above).
• Research Paper or 2 Research Essays: 30% - See instructions in this link.
• The research paper is recommended for philosophy and humanities majors, but regardless of your major, it is up to you whether you wish to write one long research paper or two short research essays.  The research essays are short (5-7 pages) essays based on one primary and one secondary source and your critical appraisal of an argument, concept, or position in theoretical or applied ethics. Topics are in the link.  The research paper is recommended for philosophy and humanities majors because of the portfolio requirement.  You may be able to use a paper from this course as a research paper inclusion in your portfolio prior to graduation.
• NEW: See this link: Ethics Updates guide to writing ethical theory papers

Ethical Theory is an upper-division course in philosophy dealing with major theoretical movements in normative and meta-ethics in the history of Western philosophy. Some “applied” topics are relevant to the course. They are the ethics of friendship, supererogatory actions, and selflessness and self-respect. In this course, you should gain a solid background in major theories of ethics, developing the ability to discuss these theories from an explanatory and critical point of view. Many movies contain ethical themes, and there will be opportunities throughout the semester to incorporate the use of films, plots of films, and literary sources to illustrate various elements of course content.

Grading Scale and Policies

A = Superior, far exceeds average understanding as evidenced in course work and goes significantly beyond the basics.	95-100%	C = Average, meets minimum expectations and satisfies course requirements.	74-76.x%
A- = Excellent, exceeds average understanding as evidenced in course work and goes well beyond the basics.	90-94.x%	C- = Slightly below average, meets bare minimum expectations and satisfies course requirements.	70-73.x%
B+ = Far above average, meets or exceeds average understanding as evidenced in course work and fully understands the basics and goes somewhat beyond that level.	87-89.x%	D+ = Below average, meets most minimum expectations and satisfies all or most course requirements.	67-69.x%
B = Far above average, fully meets average understanding as evidenced in course work and fully understands the basics and can deal with concepts somewhat beyond that level.	84-86.x%	D = Below average, meets many minimum expectations and satisfies all or most course requirements.	64-66.x%
B- = Just above average, fully meets expectations for basic understanding as evidenced in coursework and fully understands the basics and can deal with concepts at that level.	80-83.x%	D- = Far below average, but meets most minimum expectations and satisfies most course requirements with minimal understanding evidenced in course work.	60-63.x%
C+ = Slightly above average, fully meets expectations for basic understanding as evidenced in coursework and understands the basics.	77-79.x%	F = Fails to meet minimum expectations in understanding and course work as evidenced by performance and submission of graded elements.	0-59.x%

• Grades and Grading Scale: If you prefer not to take a course using the +/- grading scale, then don’t take this one. Arguments abound about how it is unfair to use this scale. One of the arguments generally runs like this: If I get a B- in a course, and I am competing with other people for the same job or a spot in graduate school, then other people who DIDN’T have grades based on +/- might have a “B” (say, an 82) but their average was the same as mine (B-, also an 82). In that case, I am disadvantaged by the +/- system. Counter-argument: If you are competing with people who did not take a course with +/- grading, and their average was an 88 (B), but yours was an 88 (B+), then YOU have the advantage. It works both ways.
• Plagiarism or cheating of any kind on an examination, quiz or assignment will result at least in an “F” for that assignment (and may, depending on the severity of the case, lead to an “F” for the entire course) and may be subject to appropriate referral to the Office of Student Conduct for further action. See the UCF Golden Rule for further information.
• If assignments are to be done out of class, they must also be your own work. There is nothing wrong with seeking the assistance of others (in fact, helping each other to study for examinations is highly recommended) for help in understanding concepts, principles, or methods, but simply obtaining answers from another person and turning them in as your own is certainly unacceptable.
• I will assume for this course that you will adhere to the academic creed of this University and will maintain the highest standards of academic integrity. In other words, don’t cheat by giving answers to others or by taking them from anyone else. I will also adhere to the highest standards of academic integrity, so please do not ask me to change (or expect me to change) your grade illegitimately or to bend or break rules for one person that will not apply to everyone.
• All papers in this course are subject to submission to turnitin.com.

I will not take attendance in this course. It is up to you to keep track of yourself. If you do not intend to attend on a regular basis, you may wish to re-think taking this course. You do not get "credit" for showing up for class.  Being in class, one would think, is a given. Although attendance will not be taken, you are responsible for meeting all the course requirements, being present for examinations, quizzes, and assignments, and submitting all required coursework on time. Graded assignments for this course can be made up only with good, legitimate, and verifiable reason. Otherwise, missed examinations or any graded element may not be made up. There is no extra credit available in this course. Also keep in mind that grades are earned, they are not "given." Changes of grade are made only for legitimate reasons (e.g., clerical errors) after the semester has ended.

This on-line schedule will be updated as necessary (generally, about once a week) and will include chapters of the required texts, articles available online, in the library, or on reserve, links to other information relevant to chapters and topics, assignments, as well as examination and paper due dates. The schedule below is meant only as a guide. Changes and alterations in the schedule, scheduled topics, assignment or examination dates (except the final) may be necessary to facilitate completion of all major sections listed below. The schedule chart below contains useful information about this course. Remember to refer to it often.

Schedule

Dates	Topics	Readings in Texts or on-line*	Links/Notes/and Suggested Readings**
8/26	Introductory Meeting	Course Requirements, syllabus, etc.
8/28-9/25 2-page Essay 1 (letters L-R) is due on 9/25.	Ancient Ethics and Medieval Ethics (Virtue Theory)	Plato and Aristotle N, Plato 22-35 (Euthyphro) and 36-44 (Republic) N, Aristotle 45-67 (Nic. Ethics) C&P, “The Ancient World,” 5-30. Epicurus, Epictetus, Augustine, Aquinas N, Epicurus (Letter to Menoeceus & Principal Doctrines) 68-77 N, Epictetus (Encheiridion) 78-96 N, Augustine (The City of God) 97-107 N, Aquinas (Summa Theologica) 108-121. C&P, “The Medieval World,” 31-50.	Background info on ethics More background and “cases” Plato’s Euthyphro Plato’s Republic Aristotle’s Ethics and Political Theory Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes and Locke in one file. Epicurus Virtue Theory (General) Virtue Theory Graphic File Review for Test 1 on September 25 2003
9/25	TEST 1	9/25
9/25-10/16 2-page Essay 2 (letters S-Z) is due on 10/9. THE TOPIC IS AVAILABLE ONLINE IN THE 2-PAGE ESSAY LINK, ABOVE	Early and Late Modern Ethics (Rights-Based Ethics, Individualism, and the Return to Community)	Hobbes, Hume, Kant, Wollstonecraft N, Hobbes (Leviathan) 122-136 N, Hume (Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals) 152-169 C&P, “The Modern World,” 51-78	Hobbes Hobbes on Equality Hobbes MMP (graphic) file Egoism Supplemental and entirely optional: See this link for an ethics “test”/game called “taboo.” It is from The Philosopher’s Magazine – go to http://www.philosophersmag.com/games/taboo.htm Locke Locke MMP (graphic) file Hobbes & Locke (links to Hobbes and Locke combined) Hume LINK TO THE REVIEW FOR TEST 1 from Summer 2003.
10/23	TEST 2	10/23 – Note that this test has moved from 10/16 – also see that the first short research essay due date has been moved to October 30 from Oct. 23. See below for the due date for the 2 page essay for letters A-E (due 11/06).	Remember that the review for the test on Hobbes, Locke, and Hume is found by looking at the questions on Locke and Hobbes in the Link to the Review for Test 1 from Summer 2003 and the questions on Hume in the link to the review for the final exam from Summer 2003.
10/23-11/6 2-page Essay 3 (letters A-E) is due on 11/06. The first research essay is due on October 30.	Continue late Modern Ethics and begin Contemporary Ethics (Emotivism, Communitarianism and Political Liberalism)	Kant, Wollstonecraft N, Kant (Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals) 170-184 N, Wollstonecraft (Vindication of the Rights of Woman) 194-201 C&P, “The Late Modern World,” 7 Marx, Mill, Nietzsche N, Marx (Comm. Manifesto) 217-229 N, Mill (Utilitarianism) 202-216	1. Kant 2. Ethics Updates Presentation on Kantian Ethics - Supplemental Wollstonecraft (with Mill, Baier and Held)Rights-Based Ethics – extra notes only Marx Mill Ethics Updates site on Utilitarianism - Supplemental Kant and Mill in one file Act & Rule Utilitarianism - addition Emotivism & Anscombe
11/18	TEST 3	11/18 The content of test 3 will be Kant, Wollstonecraft, Marx, and Mill. Ayer is omitted since we talked about emotivism in the section on Hume. TO REVIEW FOR THE THIRD EXAM, GO TO THE “REVIEW FOR FINAL EXAM FOR SUMMER 2003” LINK FOR KANT, WOLLSTONECRAFT, MARX, AND MILL (QUESTIONS 4-8). YOU MIGHT ALSO WANT TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: What are some of the objections to utilitarianism, and how did Mill answer them? What is the problem of distribution with respect to Utilitarianism? What are the sanctions of the Principle of Utility? What IS the principle of utility? For Kant, what is the difference, if any, between the first two formulations of the CI? Why can you call the first one the “universality” formulation, and the second one the “respect for persons” formulation? What is the function of reason in Kant’s ethical theory? How does he justify the claim that the only thing good without qualification is a good will? How does Marx’s critique of capitalism relate to ethics? That is, why it is an ethical issue? What are the forms of alienation? How do they manifest themselves? Is Marx right that they wouldn’t exist under communism? Do they really exist in capitalism?	Important note added 11/4/03: To make it a bit easier for you with due dates, I’ve changed the 2-page essay for F-K to November 13^th, the term papers to Nov. 25, and the second research essay to December 2^nd. Test 3 has been moved to November 18^th. Remember the listing at the top of the syllabus about “in-class” essays? They’re here. There will be one assigned for November 13^th and its topic is this: If you were a Kantian (or a Utilitarian), what would you say is the moral value of friendship? Although this is called an “in-class” essay, it really is not. You have ‘til Tuesday of next week (Nov. 18) to do it, and it requires no more than a 1- or 2-page typed essay. The idea here is to employ the use of a general (or even some specific) concept from either Utilitarianism or Kantian deontology and explain, in your considered view, what the utilitarian or the Kantian would say about the moral status or value of friendship. Remember that THIS IS YOUR ARGUMENT using one of these theoretical frameworks. You don’t need any sources other than Kant or Mill – and your own ideas and arguments. A second “in-class” essay will occur during the last week of class (and might even be actually “in class”). The general topic will be announced here and during an upcoming class meeting.
11/18-12/9 2-page Essay 4 (letters F-K) is due on November 13. Term papers are due on November 25^th. That way, you’ll have it done BEFORE Thanksgiving. The second research essay is due on December 2. Topic for the last essay of the semester – due on the day of the final exam (12/9): If you were to try to live by one of the ethical theories that was discussed in this course, which one would it be, and why? Your essay must be no more than 2 pages in length, whether single or double-spaced. (I prefer one page!)	Contemporary Ethics (Communitarianism and Liberal Individualism) and Issues (Self-Respect, Ethics of Friendship, Supererogatory Actions)	Nietzsche, and begin THE RETURN TO NORMATIVE ETHICS in Anscombe, Rawls and Nozick N, Nietzsche (Genealogy of Morals, Beyond Good and Evil) 230-242 N, Anscombe (“Modern Moral Philosophy”), 310-326 C&P, “The Post-Modern World,” sections on Ayer and Anscombe. N, Rawls (A Theory of Justice), 327-338 Sections from Nozick are online (see the column to the right). ADD online source: Michael Sandel, “The Procedural Republic and the Unencumbered Self” (Pegasus & proxy access only) – from Political Theory, Vol. 12, No. 1. (Feb., 1984), pp. 81-96 N, Held, “Feminism and Moral Theory,” pp. 379-end of Newberry Text. Supplemental: Rosemarie Tong’s Essay on Feminist Ethics from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy C&P, “The Post-Modern World,” sections on Rawls and MacIntyre Selflessness & Self-Respect, Supererogatory Actions, and the Ethics of Friendship 1. N, Hill (“Servility and Self-Respect”), 355-368 2. N, Wolf (“Moral Saints”), 369-385	1. Nietzsche 2. Rawls (and Nozick) 3. More Rawls Nozick image file Links to Nozick-relatec websites: http://www.humanities.mq.edu.au/Ockham/y64l17.html http://www.missouri.edu/~philrnj/nozick.html http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2002/01.17/99-nozick.html See the link to Sandel in the column on the left (Communitarianism/Contemporary Virtue Ethics) There are no on-line notes (at least not yet) on Sandel. In class only. Feminist Ethics Link to notes on Hill’s article on self-respect. Link to notes on Wolf’s article on moral saints. For section on Selflessness, Self-Respect and Supererogatory Actions: See notes on Emerson on “Self-Reliance” and self-respect. You should also read Emerson’s “Self-Reliance” in First Series of Essays at http://books.mirror.org/emerson/essays1.txt - you have to scroll down through other essays to reach this one. Optional: (After Hill and Wolf): Supererogatory Actions (link to article – Pegasus & proxy access only) Nancy Stanlick, “The Nature and Value of Supererogatory Actions,” Journal of Social Philosophy, Spring99, Vol. 30 Issue 1, p209, 14p– go to the UCF Library Website at http://library.ucf.edu, then go to online journal subscriptions, type in “Journal of Social Philosophy,” and then choose the appropriate issue. Suggested/Optional: C&P, “The Post-Modern World,” sections on Gilligan, Rorty and Human Nature…. REVIEW FOR THE FINAL EXAM FROM SUMMER 2003 Review Questions for the Final Exam for Fall 2003. PHI 3670, Ethical Theory, Review Questions for Exam 4 on Nietzsche, Rawls, Nozick, Sandel, Held and Wolf What is the meaning of Nietzsche’s concept of ressentiment? What is the distinction, for Nietzsche, between master moralities and slave moralities? What does it mean to do a “genealogy” of morals? What are Rawls’s two principles of justice? What do they mean or imply? What is the meaning of the concepts of “veil of ignorance” and “original position”? What is a “maximin strategy”? In what primary ways is Rawls’s theory Kantian? In what primary way(s) is Nozick’s theory Lockean? What are Nozick’s principles of justice? What does it mean for Nozick to claim that liberty upsets patterns? What is Sandel’s primary criticism of liberal moral and political systems? What does it mean to say that we live in a “procedural republic” and are “unencumbered selves”? What does Sandel say about the implications of pure procedures and the conception of the self created by liberal moral and political systems? What is V. Held’s position with respect to the activity of nurturing behavior and its moral import? What is Susan Wolf’s general attitude toward moral sainthood and moral perfection? How does she characterize the “loving saint” and the “dutiful saint”? Why is moral sainthood inconsistent with both Kantian and Utilitarian moral theories? What is Wolf’s position with respect to the development of non-moral perfections? Also see the questions in the text on Nietzsche, Rawls, and Held.
12/9	TEST 4	Final Exam Day: December 9, 10:00-12:50, actual time is 10:00-11:30
		*N=Newberry, CP=Clark and Poortenga	**On-line notes are NOT complete and are not a substitute for reading the text, attending class, and taking notes of your own. Some links with notes are more complete and detailed than others, but it is ALWAYS the case that more information and discussion occur in class than what appears in the links.