PHI 5937: Theoretical and Applied Ethics

Burnett Honors College, Room 126

Thursdays, 7:00-9:50 p.m.

---

INSTRUCTOR AND CONTACT INFORMATION

 

Dr. Nancy Stanlick

CNH 411-I

e-mail: stanlick@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu

407 823-5459 or (Dept. Office) 407-823-2273

Office Hours:  Tues, Thurs 1:15-2:15; Wednesday 10:30-12:00, & by appointment

---

REQUIRED TEXT AND OTHER READINGS:

 

C. E. Harris, Applying Moral Theories, 4th ed., Wadsworth 2002

Various articles, book chapters, and Internet Resources – see schedule, below (these will be added throughout the semester)

---

COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND GRADED WEIGHT:

 

 

PHI 5937 (Theoretical and Applied Ethics) is a research-oriented course in normative (prescriptive) ethics with emphasis on application to specific issues.  Three major normative ethical theories will serve as the primary backdrop for discussion and analysis of issues.  Those theories are classical and contemporary virtue theory, deontological ethics, and Utilitarianism.  Other theories of ethics (e.g., contractarian ethics) will also be relevant.  Specific issues are Integrity, Self-Respect, The Ethics of Friendship, and Loyalty.

 

This is a writing and research-intensive course.  It is necessary to attend regularly, to contribute to discussions, to critique presentations, and to immerse yourself in attention to details of ethical theories and the application of theories to practical issues.

 

Objectives of the course include but are not limited to development of critical and analytical ability, including proficiency in discussing and dissecting theoretical principles and particular aspects of complicated moral problems as well as honing of research and writing skills appropriate for a graduate level course.

 

---

 

GRADING SCALE/POLICIES

 

A

95-100%

C

74-76%

A-

90-94%

C-

70-73%

B+

87-89%

D+

67-69%

B

84-86%

D

64-66%

B-

80-83%

D-

60-63%

C+

77-79%

F

0-59%
---

SCHEDULE – topics, dates, etc. under construction throughout the semester.

 

This on-line schedule will be updated frequently and will include topics of presentations by course participants.  Each class meeting will be divided between lectures, presentations, discussion and written assignments.  Even when you are not presenting on a particular evening, it is necessary to be sure to have reviewed relevant information on the topic and to be prepared not only to participate in discussion regarding that issue, but also to be prepared to engage in written assignments involving that particular topic.  Class meetings not including presentations by other students will still include lectures (think of them as presentations by the instructor) for which you should prepare diligently for discussion and written assignments.  Suggested and required readings appear in the schedule, below.

 

Date

Topic

Readings & Links:

Note that external readings are often given with partial citations.  This is done intentionally.  Use Philosopher’s Index and other research sources to obtain the articles.  Some articles listed with links are available ONLY IF you are using UCF (e.g., On-campus, Pegasus or proxy) access.

Presentations

Assignments/Announcements

1. 8/22
  • Introductory Information
  • Requirements
  • Schedule of Presentations
  • Lecture on Chapters 1-3: What is Ethics, Subjectivist and Objectivist Theories

Chs. 1-3

 

 

2.  8/29
  • Chapter 4: Moral Theories: Background
  • Chapter 5: Egoism
  • Chapter 6: Natural Law

Chs. 4-6

 

Regis, “What is Ethical Egoism?”

Outline of major topics in ch. 1-6

 

Sample Presentation Evaluation Form

Presentation schedule update – choose at least two – and one per person MUST be done before October 17.

 

Presentation Evaluation Sheets – html version

 

MSWord File for presentation evaluations

 

3.  9/5

Chapter 7: Utilitarianism

Continue chs. 4-6 & Ethical Egoism; Ch. 7

 

Mill’s Utilitarianism

 

J.J.C. Smart on A & R Utilitarianism

·         Act and Rule Utilitarianism – H. S.

·         Major Problems of Utilitarianism – J. Z.

Presentations have been set.  Check to be sure that yours is correct.

 

Presentation evaluations by K.K., F.C., R.L., and R.T. are/were due by Mon. 9/9

4.  9/12

Chapter 8: Deontology and Respect for Persons

Ch. 8

 

Kant’s Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals

·         The Meaning of the Categorical Imperative – K. K.

·         Limitations of Kantian Ethics -  N. M-D

First Essay is available through this link.  It is due on 9/17 at or before 9:00 p.m.

 

PLEASE REMEMBER TO SEND ME A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR YOUR PRESENTATION AT LEAST TWO DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE PRESENTATION.

 

Presentation evaluations on Kantian deontology are due by Mon. 9/16.  Evaluations will be assigned in class.

5.  9/19

Chapter 9: Virtue Theory

Ch. 9

 

1. Essential Background: Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Bks. I-III, V and VI

 

  1. Contemporary look at virtue ethics:  Daniel Statman, Virtue Ethics (available on NetLibrary), introductory chapter “Introduction to Virtue Ethics”

 

These three (below) are “recommended” for background – and the last two are the subject-matter of the essay due on 9/19 (tonight)

 

Michael Stocker on the Schizophrenia of Modern Moral Theories

 

Schneewind on MacIntyre’s virtue ethics

 

MacIntyre’s Reply

·         Aristotle’s Virtue Theory -  (OPEN) – N.S.

 

·         Contemporary Virtue Ethics – N.S.

Due tonight:  your critical commentary on MacIntyre’s position (3-5 pp, typed)

 

 

List of references/sources for the presentation on contemporary virtue ethics (compiled by F.C.):

 

MacIntyre, A. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory
(2nd edition). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame
Press.       1984.
 
MacIntyre, A. Whose Justice? Which Rationality?  Notre
Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.  1988.
 
Statman, D. (Ed.).  Virtue Ethics. Washington D.C.:
Georgetown University Press.  1997.
 
Sandel, M. J. “The procedural republic and the
unencumbered self.”  Political Theory, 12(1).  Feb.
1984.  pp. 81-96.
 
Gutmann, A. “Communitarian critics of liberalism. 
Philosophy and Public Affairs, 14(3).  Summer 1985.” 
pp. 308-322.

 

6.  9/26

Integrity

Lynne McFall, “Integrity”

 

 

·         What is Integrity? – J. R.

 

List compiled by J.R.

 

Boyle, James. ‘Anachronism of the moral sentiments? Integrity, postmodernism, and justice.’ Stanford Law Review, Feb 1999 v51 i3 p493(1)

 

Calhoun, Chesire . ‘Standing for Something.’ Journal of Philosophy XCII, (1995), pp. 235-260.

 

Friedman, Marilyn. ‘The Practice of Partiality.’ Ethics, Vol. 101, No. 4. (Jul., 1991), pp. 818-835.

 

Gutmann, James. ‘Integrity as a Standard of Evaluation.’ Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 42, No. 8. (Apr. 13, 1945), pp. 210-216.

 

McFall, Lynne. ‘Integrity.’ Ethics 98, (1987), pp. 5-20.

 

7.  10/3

Integrity (Application)

“Cheating” in Gert, Morality: Its Nature and Justification – check the index, and esp. pp. 191-194 (handout may also be distributed in class)

 

An excerpt from Sisela Bok’s Lying, pp. 24-25

·         What is the relationship of integrity to ethics? – L.S.

·         Application 1 of the concept of integrity – OPEN – N.S.

·          

Bibliography for first presentation:

 

Calhoun, Chesire.  “Standing for Something.”  The Journal of Philosophy  92 (1995):  235-260.  JSTOR.  University of Central Florida Library.  Stable URL <http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-362X%28199505%2992%3A5%3C235%3ASFS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G>

 

Carr, Spencer.  “The Integrity of a Utiliarian.”  Ethics 86 (1976):  241-246.  JSTOR.  University of Central Florida Library.  Stable URL:  <http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0014-1704%28197604%2986%3A3%3C241%3ATIOAU%3E2.0.CO%3B2-N>

 

Cox, Damian, Marguerite La Caze, and Michael P. Levine, “Integrity”,  The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2002 edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2002/entries/integrity/>

 

McFall, Lynn.  “Integrity.”  Ethics 98 (1987): 5-20.  ­JSTOR.  University of Central Florida Library.  Stable URL <http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0014-1704%28198710%2998%3A1%3C5%3AI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I>

 

Scheffler, Samuel.  The Rejection of Consequentialism:  A Philosophical Investigation of the Considerations Underlying Rival Moral Concepts.  Rev. ed.  Oxford:  Clarendon Press, 1994.

 

Williams, Bernard.  “A Critique of Utilitarianism,” in Utiliarianism:  For and Against.  Ed. J.J.C. Smart and Bernard Williams.  Cambridge:  Cambridge UP, 1973.

 

For the second presentation tonight (application):

See this link:  Academic Integrity Presentation

 

8.  10/10

Self-Respect and Human Dignity

Not available online, “Kant on Self-Respect,” Stephen J. Massey, in Journal of the History of Philosophy, 1983; 21: 57-74 (hard copy in UCF Library).

·         Application 2 of the concept of integrity – N. M-D.

 

 

9.  10/17

Self-Respect (Application)

Robin Dillon on Self Respect and Forgiveness

·         What is the moral status of valuing oneself? – K.K.

·         How does self-respect relate to respect for others? – R.T.

You will find Marilyn Frye’s book, The Politics of Reality, on reserve in the library under this course number, PHI 5937.  The chapter you need from it is called “In and Out of Harm’s Way: Arrogance and Love.”  The chapter is related to the concept of self-respect, to love, to oppression, to moral responsibility, and other elements of this course that we either have discussed or will discuss.  The chapter is the subject-matter of the second essay for this course that will be due on Oct. 31 in class.  What you need to do is write an overview and critical appraisal (with your position included in this critique) of her position.  Whether you agree or disagree, you need to justify your position regarding Frye’s analysis.  This essay should be approximately 5-8 pages in length, double-spaced.  If you single-space, do not exceed 6 pages.

10. 10/24

Friendship

Elizabeth Cady Stanton, “Solitude of Self”

 

Ralph Waldo Emerson, “Self Reliance”

 

Ralph Waldo Emerson, “Friendship”

Montaigne, “Of Friendship”

Marcia Baron, “Impartiality and Friendship” 
(available online- JSTOR)

Richard White, “Friendship and Commitment,” Journal of Value Inquiry (available online)



 

 

The presentation originally scheduled for tonight (10/24) have been moved.  L.S. will do hers on 10/31 and J.R.’s will follow also on the 31st.

 

Tonight, I’ll be dealing with a combination of Stanton, Emerson, Montaigne and other works related to the philosophical/ethical value/application of the concepts of self-respect, impartiality, and friendship.

 

Don’t forget that there is an essay due next week (10/31). 

 

Whenever you have a presentation due, PLEASE remember to send me a working bibliography by Tuesday of that week so that it can be posted in this web-based syllabus.

 

CRITICAL/ANALYTICAL/EXPOSITORY ESSAY DUE TOMORROW (FRIDAY 10/25) BY 11:00 p.m.:

 

Using Stanton’s “Solitude of Self” and Emerson’s “Self-Reliance,” elaborate on and argue for these works’ relevance to the moral scope of any two of the following (in the numbered list – that is, the numbers refer to each individual topic, so “individual and community” is not two topics, it is one):

 

1.     Individual and community

2.     Duty to self and others

3.     Responsibility for self and others

4.     Trust in self and others

 

Your essay should be between 3 and 5 typed pages, whether single-or double spaced.  You may and should e-mail the essay to me.  It is due no later than 11:00 p.m. on Friday the 25th.  You will have at least part of tonight’s class meeting time to devote to appropriate reading and preparation for this essay (which should be ample time) since Emerson and Stanton were assigned for a previous class meeting date.

11.  10/31

Friendship (Application)

(Supererogation) Paul McNamara, "Making Room for Going Beyond the Call," in Mind, available through Info-Trac online.

·         Why is friendship an ethical concern? – L. S.

·         Application of the moral value of friendship – J. R.

FINAL RESEARCH PAPERS WERE DUE ON 11/21, BUT THEY ARE NOW DUE ON DECEMBER 3 AT 7:00 P.M. 

 

Bibliography for Reynolds’ presentation on 11/7:

 

Jacquette, Dale.  “Aristotle on the Value of Friendship as a Motivation for Morality.”  Journal of Value Inquiry. S 01; 35(3): 371-389.

 

Cates, Diana.  Virtue, Friendship and Compassion for Friends.  University of Notre Dame Press, 1997.

 

Callenbach, Ernest and Leefeldt, Christine.  The Art of Friendship.  NY: Pantheon Books, 1979.

 

Blosser, Philip, ed., and Bradley Marshall Carl, ed.  Friendship: Philosophic Reflections on a Perennial Concern.  Univ. Press of America.  1997.

 

 

12. 11/7

Loyalty

R.E. Ewin, “Loyalty and the Virtues,” Philosophical Quarterly, 1992.

 

 

 

Lisa Tessman, “Dangerous Loyalties and Liberatory Politics,” Hypatia, 1998 (in Project Muse).

 

 

·         What is loyalty? – J. Z.

·         Why is loyalty relevant to ethics? – R. T.

 

13. 11/14

Loyalty (Application)

Patriotism:

Emma Goldman on patriotism – online version

·         Application 1 of the concept of loyalty – Patriotism – N. M-D.

·         Terrorism, Patriotism, Loyalty – H.S.

Course/instructor evaluations tonight.

 

Presentations for tonight are:

 

1.     Continuation and completion of J. Zehnder on loyalty.

 

2.     R. Thomas on loyalty and ethics.

 

3.     N. Marquez-Diaz on patriotism.

 

4.     H. Shoff on The Ethics of War and Terrorism.

 

Presentation 1 has ½ hour remaining.  The other three presentations will go from 7:30-10:00, which leaves approximately 40-45 minutes per presentation. 

14. 11/21

Last regular class meeting

 

Overview

I will be out of town to deliver a paper at a conference.  Please use this class meeting time to work on outlines of papers (papers are due on 12/3) and to catch up on evaluations and other course requirements.  Remember that if you have any questions regarding papers, requirements, sources, etc., you should come by during my office hours.  Research papers are due IN CLASS AT 7:00 P.M. ON DECEMBER 3 (Tuesday night).   

15.  11/28

THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY

 

 

 

16.  12/3-12/9

Finals Week – December 3rd

 

Final Research papers due in class at 7:00 p.m.

DISCUSSION OF ISSUES, GRADES, PRESENTATIONS, ETC.

 

Now for the details:

 

Presentations:

1.       Every person in this course will do at least 2 in-class presentations, but not more than four.  This depends upon the number of people in the course divided by the number of presentation topics.  There are 22 topics. 

2.       Topics as they are listed are general enough to accommodate your own particular interests within the framework of the topic.  So, for example, with respect to loyalty, you may be interested in the moral value of patriotism and think of it as a form of loyalty (or even of disloyalty to some particular ideal, group, conviction, etc.).  In this case, your presentation could be focused on the notion of patriotism as a virtue/vice, as moral or immoral, etc. and justify your position with respect to the topic.

3.       The first class meeting will include a discussion regarding possible theoretical problems and applied/topical aspects of the course that should help you to decide the theories and applications on which you wish to do a presentation.  We’ll fill out the schedule of presentations during the first class meeting and fine-tune it during the second one.

4.       Your presentations can be done in a variety of ways.  You may be proficient in the use of computer technology and create PowerPoint presentations or website content to present your position and research.  You may be more comfortable with low-tech presentations – you talk, illustrate, write on a blackboard/whiteboard.  You may prefer to stand or you may prefer to sit.  But whatever you choose to do as a manner of presentation, make sure that you have an outline available for other people in the course so that they can follow more efficiently the presentation and major points you are making.

5.       Presentations will range from 20 minutes to 1 hour each.  This will be determined by a number of factors, including your skill at presentations, discussion of the issues, and critical evaluation of the problems your presentation raises or resolves.

 

Writing Assignments:

1.       To evaluate the ideas in presentations, as well as those in readings for the course, critical appraisals of ideas, arguments, theories, issues, etc., will be required from time to time.  I anticipate no more than 5 short writing assignments (3-5 pp. each if done outside of class, 1-3 pp. each if done in class.  Clarification:  These writing assignments are those included in the 30% category.  Two presentation reviews will be included in the 30% category, and 2 will be in the 20% (attendance/participation/writing assignment) category.  Presentation reviews will be worth 5% each of the grade for this course.).

2.       Remember that there are no examinations in this course.  That’s a relief, isn’t it?