PHL 234: Philosophy and Modern Society



Phil 2230-001: MORAL PHILOSOPHY

Peter Gratton, PhD

FALL 2014

Class Time, Location: M/W/F, A 1046 10-10:50

Office Hours: M/W/F 11:00-11:55 AA 3012

Course web site: grattoncourses.

e-mail: pgratton@mun.ca

 

Description and Objectives

Recent statistics in Canada reveal that the average level of education is Grade 8, 80% of offenders have addiction or substance abuse problems, 80% of federally sentenced women have been sexually abused, and almost half of all offenders required mental health care in the past year--all while overall spending on prisons have increased by 23%, far more than any other area of provincial and federal budgets. As we'll see as the semester progresses, the situation in the U.S. is notoriously worse and the war on drugs there has been, without a pretense to balance as I'll present it in this class, a war on those of color and the poor. This is, of course, a class in "moral philosophy" and the student would be right to wonder why "crime and punishment" will be our focus. Most moral philosophy courses take you through the drills of readings on virtue ethics (e.g., Aristotle), deontological ethics (e.g., Kant), as well as utilitarianism (e.g., John Stuart Mill and Beccaria), the main areas of Western ethical thought.

You will see these theories well represented below. But at the heart of each of these readings is a question about what is the blameworthy life and each of these thinkers has a specific consideration of what merits being called a crime and thus what is a worthy punishment. And indeed, each of these areas of ethical thought has its analogical area of theories of punishment, e.g., retributivism and the deterrence theories of punishment. 

Philosophy begins with Socrates facing the ultimate penalty for crimes, Plato tells us, he did not commit. Plato's whole corpus, in a way, can be read as a defense of Socrates against those charges and thus a critique of the punishment he faced. On the other hand, Socrates willingly faced that punishment in the name of arguing that it would undo something of a social compact each of us makes in our societies: to receive punishments, even if innocent, less the laws have no force. Philosophy has thus always, it seems, accepted the logic of crime and punishment, at least until relatively recently. Often enough, we think there is something natural about this link between crime and punishment: that if there is a crime there must be a punishment. This logic is there in just about every area of our lives: if we screw up at work, we might expect to be fired; if we think a loved one has wronged us, we might make ourselves "punish" them by not speaking to them or withdrawing demonstrations of affection; we bow before God often as a means of fire insurance, to keep from the punishment of hell for our original sin; even in health people often treat disease as something of a punishment for laziness with exercise or bad habits earlier in life. Yet, as soon as one considers this seemingly inexorable and undefeatable logic (for every crime, there must be a punishment), as Plato did at several keys points, including in his Republic, it seems far less obvious why bringing harm to someone somehow makes up for a supposed crime. Thus the race in all of these theories to connect these two: we do it for the sake of community (virtue ethics) or the greatest happiness (utilitarianism) or for no effect at all, except that it is simply just (the "eye for an eye" of the Judaic Masoretic text and the retributivism of deontological ethics).

Nietzsche's view is that, as we'll see, crime and its link to punishment is but a convoluted leftover from the earliest trading: we take something so we must give something in return, and that punishment is not the result of an erudite theory, but because it provides the pleasure of our will to power over others. Whatever we will think of this view, we must not treat, as writers on crime and punishment often do, especially in philosophy, this issues as an abstract armchair discussion: the penitentiaries of our prison landscapes are not just the result of various theories of punishment, but also, perhaps, as authors we will read set out to demonstrate, are the result of labeling some (visible minorities and the poor) as always already guilty of a given crime, and thus always available for punishment. And, in turn, there are those who are always already deemed innocent, or at least non-punishable: we can think here of the various Wall Street CEOs and so on who were involved in the credit default swap frauds that nearly brought down the world economy, though not one has faced any jail time (think of that the next time you read of someone getting jail time for minor drug use that affects no one) or the police officers in the U.S. who can kill with impunity, even when caught on tape.

When most women in prison are victims of sexual assault, with results on the psyche that are well known, and half of all inmates have received mental health care in the last year--who is it that we are punishing? Are certain types of lives already blame worthy and thus brought within our prisons systems in Canada in the U.S.? We will see that these considerations will make up much of the latter part of the course. Thus the task of this semester is to learn the difficult ethical theories on offer from key historical figures as well as to apply those theories to a given area of concern, namely the kinds of punishment on offer in the modern age, namely the death penalty (at least in the U.S.; Canada's last executions, as you all know, was in 1962) and the prison, itself a dominant form of punishment only since the beginnings of the 19th century. But we need to think of this more broadly in the age of the war on terror, since each of these missions, including those involving Canada, are "police actions" that use drones and military forces to kill and maim those guilty of ties to terrorism--no matter how nebulous that turns out to be. Below are the readings (I will revise as we move along) that will help us take up this theme.

Requirements

Reading: You must read the assigned texts prior to class and it is highly recommended that you read any philosophical texts at least twice. Given the breadth of any survey course, but especially one in philosophy and literature, it will be important for you to keep up with the readings and bring to class any questions you have about the text(s). Use a dictionary to look up words that you don’t understand, and come to class with any questions you have. This is a work-intensive class, as you will see below. You should do your best to keep up with the readings and homework assignments from the beginning, since it will be difficult, if not impossible, to catch up later on. The readings, as you will see, speed up when we do works of literature. Be sure to take notes on major themes and characters and you should be fine. (Please note that at least one of these works takes up mature themes and situations. I will provide you page numbers to skip in case this should be a problem for any of you.)

Quizzes (45%): Quizzes will be given as either in-class tests or pre-assigned discussion papers to ensure that everyone is keeping up with the readings. There will be no make-ups for the quizzes, though extra assignments can be used to make up for missed quizzes. They will be announced on the course site and in class at least two classes prior to any in-class quizzes.

Class Participation (15%): You will be expected to attend each class having read the relevant materials and able to comment upon them to other members of the class. Your participation grade will be assessed with the following in mind: (1) attendance (no more than three absences during the semester, no exceptions) and (2) level and quality of participation. If you are shy, you will need to get over this rather early in the class, given the importance of class participation in your overall grade.

Each student is required to write a two-page, single-spaced protocol for one of the days’ reading assignments listed below. The handouts can be a summary of the material, a response to one of the ideas contained in the reading, or some combination thereof. Since you will be writing these handouts on readings that we have not gone over, you are not expected to have mastered the material. Rather, it is more than fair to raise in your handout any passages that were particularly difficult and that we need to go over. You should make enough copies or printouts at the computer lab for everyone in the class, or send it to me via email so that I can put it up on the front projector. Everyone must complete this assignment in order to receive any participation points in the course.

A final note about participation:

If you suffer from any disabilities, such as a social phobia and/or a physical or mental condition, which you believe may impede your progress and participation in the course, either with regard to the class itself or quizzes and exams, please let me know as soon as possible. I have worked with students with special circumstances before and I will be glad to do so again to make this classroom as inclusive as possible.

Extra Credit: Each semester, I make extra credit available to students because I am aware that simply one bad class or missing notes or a bad cold during finals week can greatly affect one’s grade. I will come up with extra credit assignments during the semester provided that you are keeping up with the homework assignments and participating regularly in the course.

Final Exam (40%): The final examination will be cumulative and no make-up will be available. We will have a study session prior to the exam and I will provide a guide before the exam. If you have kept up with the readings, asked questions during class about difficult passages, and met with me when the need arose, then you will have little difficulty with the final exam, which will be a series of essays to be written during the final examination time available.

Books ordered:

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, ISBN: 0872204642 (Hackett)

Nietzsche, Genealogy of Morals, ISBN: 0679724621 (Vintage)

(Most readings will be available online below.)

Reading Schedule and Resources

Monday January 5

Introduction to the course

Wednesday January 7

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics: Book I, 1-5.

Resources

1. BBC In Our Time: Virtue (podcast)

2. Nigel Warburton, Philosophy Classics, Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics (podcast) 

3. Table of Virtues (MS Word File)

Friday January 9

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics: Book I, 7-13.

Monday, January 12

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics: Book II, 1-9.

Wednesday, January 14

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics: Book III, 1-5.

Friday, January 16

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics: Book III, 6-12; Book IV, 1-9.

Monday, January 19

Martin Luther King, Jr., "Letter from a Birmingham Jail."

Wednesday, January 21

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics: Book VI, 1-9, 13

Friday, January 23

Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishment, I-VI

Monday, January 26

Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishment, VII-VIII, XI-XV

Wednesday, January 28

Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishment, XIX-XXV

Friday, January 30

Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishment, XXVIII

Monday, February 2

Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishment, XLV-End

Wednesday, February 4

Kant, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals: Preface; pp. 7-19

Resources

1. Professor’s Overview (MS Word File)

2. Paul Guyer, “Kant’s Ethics” (.pdf)

3. Nigel Warburton, “Kant’s Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals” (podcast)

4. L. Alexander and M. Moore, “Deontological Ethics” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Phil.)

Friday, February 6

Kant, Lectures on Morality

Monday, February 9

Kant, Lectures on Morality

Wednesday, February 11

Kant, Lectures on Morality

Friday, February 13

Kant, Lectures on Morality

Monday, February 16

Winter Break

Wednesday, February 18

Winter Break

Friday, February 20

Kant, Lectures on Morality

Monday, February 23

Rawls, selections from A Theory of Justice

Resources

1. Rawls and Social Justice podcast, Partially Examined Life

2. Leif Wenar, John Rawls, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Wednesday, February 25

Rawls, selections from A Theory of Justice

Friday, February 27

Rawls, selections from A Theory of Justice

Monday, March 2

Bonnie Honig, "Rawls on Politics and Punishment."

Wednesday, March 4

Thom Brooks, "Retributivism" and "Deterence"

Friday, March 6

Nietzsche, Genealogy of Morals

Monday, March 9

Nietzsche, Genealogy of Morals

Wednesday, March 11

Nietzsche, Genealogy of Morals

Friday, March 13

Nietzsche, Genealogy of Morals

Monday, March 16

Michelle Alexander, The New Jim Crow (Chapter 5)

Wednesday, March 18

José Martín, "Policing is a Dirty Job, But Nobody has to Do It," Rolling Stone.

Loïc Wacquant, "Social Insecurity and the Punitive Upsurge," in Punishing the Poor (2009).

Friday, March 20

Loïc Wacquant, "Theoretical Coda," in Punishing the Poor (2009).

Monday, March 23

Lisa Guenther, ch. 1, "An Experiment in Living Death," from Solitary Confinement: Social Death and Its Afterlives (2013)

Wednesday, March 25

Lisa Guenther, ch. 1, "Beyond Dehumanization," from Solitary Confinement: Social Death and Its Afterlives (2013)

Friday, March 27

Angela Davis, Prison Abolitionism

Monday, March 30

Angela Davis, Prison Abolitionism

Wednesday April 1

Angela Davis, Prison Abolitionism

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download