Ancient Philosophy (weeks 1 - 3)

Lecturer: Dr Simon Scott

Main Text: Plato’s Gorgias

Students should note that the allocation of different topics to different lectures is approximate and one topic may run over into the following lecture.

 

Lecture 1: Introduction to Socrates (lecture slides)

Question:

• What are the advantages and disadvantages of the dialogue form for philosophy?

Secondary reading:

Irwin, Terence, 1995, 'The Argument of The Gorgias' in Plato's Ethics (Oxford University: Oxford).

Irwin, Terence, 1995, 'Plato, Socrates, and the Dialogues' in Plato's Ethics (Oxford University: Oxford).

 

Lecture 2: The Socratic method (lecture slides)

Main reading: Gorgias, 447a-461a

Secondary reading: Irwin, Terence, 1995, 'Socrates' Method' in Plato's Ethics (Oxford University: Oxford).

Reading questions:

• How does Gorgias explain oratory?
• Does Gorgias’ position change during the discussion?
• Does Socrates successfully refute Gorgias’ argument?
• Is Socrates as unknowing as he claims to be?

Essay questions:

• Critically assess the Socratic method of questioning.
• Socrates claims to be ignorant. Is this a philosophical position?

 

Lecture 3: Eudaimonia and Socrates’ ethics (lecture slides)

Main reading: Gorgias, 461a-481b

Secondary reading: White, F.C., 1990, ‘The Good in Plato’s Gorgias’, Phronesis (35:2), pp.117-127.

Reading questions:

• What are the different conceptions of eudaimonia held by Gorgias, Polus and Socrates?
• Why does Socrates think the elenchus is ethical (this is implied, not stated)
• How does Polus’ position differ from Gorgias’ position?

Essay questions:

• Do you agree with the claim that it is worse to commit wrong than to suffer wrong?
• Critically assess the importance of eudaimonia for Socrates.

 

Lecture 4: Socrates' political philosophy (lecture slides)

Main reading: Gorgias, 481b-486d

Secondary reading: Archie, Joseph Patrick, 1984, 'Callicles' Redoubtable Critique of the Polus Argument in Plato's 'Gorgias', Hermes (112:2), pp.167-176.

• What is Callicles' concept of the strong individuals? Is his argument persuasive?

 

Lecture 5: Criticisms of Democracy (lecture slides)

Main reading: Gorgias, 486d-499b

Secondary reading: Stauffner, Devin, 2002, 'Socrates and Callicles: A Reading of Plato's "Gorgias"', The Review of Politics (64:4), pp.627-657.

Essay question:

• Critically assess Callicles' and Socrates' criticisms of democracy in the Gorgias.

Further secondary literature:

Guthrie, W.K.C., 1969, A History of Greek Philosophy vol.3 , Cambridge University Press. Part of this is reprinted as The Sophists, Cambridge University Press, 1971.

Guthrie W. K. C., 1975, A History of Greek Philosophy vol.4 part 4. Cambridge University Press

Irwin, T. H., 1995, Plato’s Ethics. Oxford university Press

Kraut, R., 1992 (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Plato. Cambridge University Press

Morrison, Donald R., 2011 (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Socrates. Cambridge University Press

Santas, G., 1979, Socrates: Philosophy in Plato’s Early Dialogues. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul

For those interested in taking a look at Leo Strauss:

Drury, Shadia B. The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss.

Smith, Steven B. The Cambridge Companion to Leo Strauss.

Klosko, George. 'The 'Straussian Interpretation of Plato's Republic'.

The Leo Strauss Center (includes transcripts of Strauss's classes on the Gorgias)

 

Political Philosophy (Weeks 4 & 5)

Lecturer: Professor Fabienne Peter

Main text: Thomas Hobbes Leviathan, ed. by R. Tuck, Cambridge University Press.

Lecture 1: Why do we need political institutions? (lecture slides)
Hobbes, Leviathan, ch. 17

Further Reading:

• Hampton, Jean. 1996. Political Philosophy. Boulder: Westview Press, chs. 1 & 3.
• Tuck, Richard. 2007. “The Utopianism of Leviathan.” In T. Sorell and L. Foisneau (eds.) Leviathan after 350 Years. Oxford, Oxford University Press, p. 125ff.
• Wolff, Robert Paul. 1970. In Defense of Anarchism. New York, Harper & Row, chapter 1.

Lecture 2: What would the world be like without political institutions? (lecture slides)
Hobbes, Leviathan, ch. 13

Further Reading:

• Hampton, Jean. 1986. Hobbes and the Social Contract Tradition. Cambridge UP. Chapters 2 & 3.
• Rawls, John. 2007. Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, lecture 2.

Lecture 3: The idea of a social contract (lecture slides)
Hobbes, Leviathan, chs. 14 & 18

Further Reading:

• Hampton, Jean. 1986. Hobbes and the Social Contract Tradition. Cambridge UP. Chapters 6 & 7.
• Rawls, John. 2007. Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, lecture 1.

Lecture 4: What are the limits of our political obligations? (lecture slides)
Hobbes, Leviathan, ch. 21

Further Reading:

• Rawls, John. 2007. Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, lecture 4.
• Wolff, Jonathan. “Political Obligation, Fairness and Independence.” Ratio 8: 87-99.

Suggested essay titles for Hobbes:

• Why does Hobbes think that our natural equality leads to a war of all against all?
• Does Hobbes have a good answer to the question of how can it be rational to consent to the creation of political authority?
• Explain and assess Hobbes’ claim that there are two ways in which legitimate political authority can be created: by “institution” and by “acquisition”.
• Does the right to self-defense make absolute sovereignty impossible?

 

Lecturer: Dr Karen Simecek

Main text: Mill, John Stuart. 1998. Utilitarianism. Edited by Roger Crisp. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lecture 1: What is the highest good? (lecture slides and handout)
Mill, Utilitarianism, ch. 2.

Further Reading:

• Donner, Wendy. 2005. “Mill’s Theory of Value.”In West Blackwell Guide to Mill’s Utilitarianism, pp. 117 – 138.
• Griffin, James. 1986. Well-Being. Oxford: Oxford University Press, chs. 1 – 4.
• Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 42 – 45.

Lecture 2: Should we be Utilitarians? (Lecture slides and handout)

Mill, Utilitarianism, ch. 4

Further Reading:

• Skorupski, John. 1989. John Stuart Mill. New York: Routledge, chapter 9.
• West, Henry. 2005. “Mill’s ‘Proof’ of the Principle of Utility.” In West (ed.) Blackwell Guide to Mill’s Utilitarianism. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 174 – 183.

Suggested Essay Questions for week 7:

• Assess Mill's claim that there are higher and lower pleasures.
• What does Mill’s “proof” of utilitarianism aim to show. Does it succeed?
  

Lecture 3: Utilitarianism and Justice (lecture slides and handout)
Mill, Utilitarianism, ch. 5

Further Reading:

• Berger, Fred. 1984. Happiness, Justice, and Freedom. Berkely: University of California Press, ch. 4.
• Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, §5.
• Sumner, L. W. 2006. “Mill’s Theory of Rights.” In West (ed.) Blackwell Guide to Mill’s Utilitarianism. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 184 – 198.

Lecture 4: Does Utilitarianism Undermine Moral Integrity? (lecture slides and handout)
Mill, Utilitarianism, ch. 3

Further Reading:

• Railton, Peter. 1988. “How Thinking about Character and Utilitarianism Might Lead to Rethinking the Character of Utilitarianism.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 13: 398 – 416.
• Smart, J.J.C. and Bernard Williams. 1977. Utilitarianism: For and Against. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 82 – 118.

Suggested Essay Questions for week 8:

• Mill recognizes that how it deals with justice is one of the main objections against utilitarianism. Does Mill offer a satisfactory solution to this problem?
• Assess Bernard Williams' objection that utilitarianism undermines moral integrity.

 

Continental Philosophy (Weeks 9 & 10)

Lecturer: Professor Peter Poellner

Main Text: Friedrich Nietzsche Beyond Good and Evil (BGE), trans. Hollingdale, Penguin.

Lecture 1: critique of morality

For the lecture handout click here.

Sections referred to in the lecture: BGE, sect. 33, 62, 108, 186, 188, 191, 194, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 220, 260.

Also relevant: Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morality, Essay 1, esp. sections 10-14 (these expand the mini-genealogy of BGE 260).

Suggested essay question: What are the grounds of Nietzsche’s critique of morality? Is that critique plausible?

Secondary literature:

Brian Leiter, Nietzsche on Morality (Routledge Guidebook, 2002), chapters 4 and 6.

David Owen, Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morality (McGill UP, Montreal, 2007), chs. 2 & 5.

The current debate on ressentiment:

Wallace, Jay 'Ressentiment, Value, and Self-Vindication' in B. Leiter and N. Sinhababu (eds.) Nietzsche and Morality (Oxford UP, 2007), pp. 110-137.

Poellner, Peter 'Ressentiment and Morality’, in S. May (ed.) A Critical Guide to Nietzsche’s 'On the Genealogy of Morality' (Cambridge University Press, 2011), pp. 120-141.

(Both of these are available in the Short Loans section of the Library.)

Lecture 2: philosophy, truth, and the philosophical will to truth

For the lecture handout click here

Sections referred to in the lecture: BGE, sect. 1, 3, 4, , 5, 10, 16, 34, 230, 296.

Also relevant: Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morality, Essay 3, sections 11, 12, 23-27.

Suggested essay question: What is it that Nietzsche objects to in philosophy’s concern with truth? Or: Is Nietzsche proposing a novel understanding of truth, or of the value of truth? Discuss the merits of his position.

Secondary literature:

Ken Gemes ‘Nietzsche’s Critique of Truth’ in B. Leiter and J. Richardson (eds) Nietzsche (OUP, 2001).

Peter Poellner ‘Perspectival Truth’ in Leiter & Richardson, Nietzsche (OUP, 2001).

Lecture 3: subjectivity and the will

For the lecture handout click here

Sections referred to in the lecture: BGE sect. 13, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 24, 36, 225.

Also relevant: Nietzsche, The Gay Science, sect. 354, 357

Nietzsche, The Will to Power, sect. 229, 377, 479, 663, 676, 656, 689, 696, 707.

Suggested essay question: Discuss Nietzsche’s psychology of the will.

Secondary Literature:

Bernard Reginster, The Affirmation of Life (Harvard University Press, 2006), chapt. 3 (‘The Will to Power’), pp. 103-147, or

J. Richardson, ‘Nietzsche’s Power Ontology’, in Leiter& Richardson (eds) Nietzsche (OUP, 2001).

Lecture 4: Nietzsche’s ethics: The ideal of the Free Spirit

BGE Part 2, ‘The Free Spirit’; plus sections 21, 29, 32, 34, 187, 188, 212, 213, 224, 225, 227, 296.

Also relevant: Nietzsche, The Gay Science, sect. 290, 301, 335, 347.

Nietzsche, Thus spoke Zarathustra, ‘Of Self-Overcoming’.

Suggested essay question: Discuss Nietzsche’s ideal of the free spirit.

Secondary Literature:

The following commentaries stress different aspects of Nietzsche's ideal of the free spirit:

R. Lanier Anderson, 'What is a Nietzschean Self?', in C. Janaway and S. Robertson (eds) Nietzsche, Naturalism and Normativity (OUP, 2012). [On self-creation].

Ken Gemes, ‘Nietzsche on Free Will, Autonomy, and the Sovereign Individual’ in K. Gemes and S. May (eds) Nietzsche on Freedom and Autonomy (OUP, 2009). [On unity of style].

Bernard Reginster, 'The Will to Power and the Ethics of Creativity', in B. Leiter and N. Sinhababu (eds) Nietzsche and Morality (OUP, 2007). [On affirming the will to power].

Peter Poellner, ‘Nietzschean Freedom’, in Gemes & May (eds), Nietzsche on Freedom and Autonomy. (OUP, 2009). [On 'creating a law for oneself' and metaphysical indifference].

Peter Poellner, 'Aestheticist Ethics', in C. Janaway and S. Robertson (eds) Nietzsche, Naturalism and Normativity (OUP, 2012). [Esp. sections 6 & 7: on self-overcoming and going beyond what is understood and known].