JURISPRUDENCE
JURISPRUDENCE II
Topics in Moral, Political, and Legal Theory
(topic for Spring 2009: Objectivity)
Brian Leiter
University of Chicago Law School
Spring 2009, Rm.
T, W, Th 1:30-2:35
Office: Rm. 425
Phone: 773-702-0953
E-mail: bleiter@uchicago.edu
Secretary: Lorrie Wehrs, Rm. 512 (lragland@uchicago.edu)
Phone: 773-702-0303
Required Texts:
Russ Shafer-Landau & Terence Cuneo (eds.), Foundations of Ethics: An Anthology
(Oxford: Blackwell, 2007) [hereafter FE]
Course Reader [hereafter CR].
Course Description: The course examines from a philosophical point of view topics and themes that are broadly familiar to lawyers and legal scholars, but which are not always treated with the attention to argumentative detail and the nuances of competing positions that are characteristic of philosophical inquiry. (Philosophy is "thinking in slow motion" as one English philosopher has helpfully put it.) The primary emphasis is on the philosophical treatment of these topics (with some attention to legal examples and problems). For Spring 2009, the primary topic will be the objectivity of ethics and of law. Our main text will be Shafer-Landau & Cuneo (eds.), Foundations of Ethics (Blackwell, 2007), supplemented by a course reader with essays by at least Ronald Dworkin and the instructor. Roughly the first four or five weeks will be devoted to considering arguments for and against moral realism (roughly, the view that there are objective moral truths) and moral anti-realism or skepticism (roughly, the view that there are no objective moral truths). Topics will include the alleged queerness of moral facts; moral disagreement; moral explanations; and select problems about the semantics of moral judgment. The remainder of the quarter will be given over to consideration of the implications of the objectivity of morality to law and adjudication. On Ronald Dworkin s view, the right answer to any legal question turns ultimately on moral considerations and arguments; thus, only if there are objectively right answers to these moral questions, can there be a right answer as a matter of law. The instructor will introduce Dworkin s general view of law and adjudication (this is the one part of the course that will duplicate some material covered in Jurisprudence I), and we will then spend some time examining and evaluating his own account of the objectivity of moral and legal judgment. This course will be philosophically demanding. While Jurisprudence I does not presuppose a background in philosophy, the instructor does not recommend this course to students who have not had some prior study of philosophy.
Course Requirements: (1) A take-home, type-written final exam: one essay (not more than 1750 words), 8 hours to complete exam; (2) Regular attendance.
Office Hours: You are, per institutional custom, welcome to try me whenever I’m around, but I will plan on being available in my office each day after class until about 3:30 for discussion. You are also free to make appointments for other times.
Reading Assignments: The syllabus is aspirational, and will depend on how much class discussion there is of each topic. If time permits, there is plenty of relevant, additional material we can add (I will do so in consultation with the class).
Topic 1: Introducing the Issues
Read Leiter, “Law and Objectivity,” pp. 257-271, in CR.
Topic 2: Moral Skepticism I: The “Queerness” of Moral Facts & Moral Disagreement
Read Introduction to “Moral Error Theories,” pp. 9-11 in FE
Read Mackie, “The Subjectivity of Values,” pp. 13-22 in FE
Read Brink, “Moral Disagreement,” pp. 376-382 in FE
Topic 3: Moral Skepticism II: The Explanatory Impotence of Moral Facts
Read Harman, “Ethics and Observation,” pp. 333-336 in FE
Read Sturgeon, “Moral Explanations,” pp. 337-340 (stop before II) and section III (“Moral
Explanations”), pp. 345-351 in FE
Read Leiter, “Moral Facts and Best Explanations,” in CR
Topic 4: The Meaning of Moral Language (and more on moral disagreements)
Read Moore, “The Subject-Matter of Ethics,” pp. 465-473 in FE
Read Ayer, “Critique of Ethics and Theology,” pp. 40-46 in FE
Read Stevenson, “The Nature of Ethical Disagreement,” pp. 371-375 in FE
Read Gibbard, “The Reasons of a Living Being,” pp. 71-78 in FE
Topic 5: Moral Realism I: Naturalistic Moral Realism
Read Railton, “Moral Realism,” pp. 186-205 in FE.
Topic 6: Moral Realism II: Non-Naturalist Moral Realism
Read Introduction to “Sensibility Theories,” pp. 132-135 in FE.
Read McDowell, “Values and Secondary Qualities,” pp. 137-144 in FE.
Topic 7: Dworkin’s Theory of Law
Read Dworkin “Integrity in Law” from Law’s Empire, pp. 225-263, in CR
Topic 8: Dworkin on Objectivity I
Read Dworkin, “Skepticism about Interpretation,” from Law’s Empire, pp. 76-85, in CR.
Read Dworkin “Integrity in Law,” pp. 263-271 in CR
Topic 9: Dworkin on Objectivity II
Read Dworkin, “Objectivity and Truth,” in CR.
Read Leiter, “Objectivity, Morality, and Adjudication,” in CR
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- religion and public life in america big sky worldview forum
- curriculum vitae frederick charles beiser
- home the university of sheffield
- bibliographies
- problem solving and meta ethics brown university
- current work on the history and nature of analytic philosophy
- jurisprudence
- curriculum vitae department of philosophy at columbia
- jurisprudence brian leiter s legal philosophy blog
- leiter reports a philosophy blog
Related searches
- jurisprudence exam quizlet
- sociological jurisprudence definition
- american jurisprudence bluebook citation
- doctor of jurisprudence degree online
- sociological jurisprudence maintains that
- legal jurisprudence definition
- sociological jurisprudence theory
- modern jurisprudence definition
- nursing jurisprudence exam free
- texas nursing jurisprudence quizlet
- quizlet nursing jurisprudence 50 questions
- texas nursing jurisprudence exam answers