TWENTIETH CENTURY
ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY
Spring 2000
T/Th 9:40-11:10
Miller Center 104
Email: fritzman@lclark.edu
Phone: 503-768-7477 (voice mail)
Office: Miller 318
Hours: M-F 11:30-12:00, 1:00-2:00; & by appointment
COURSE DESCRIPTION
Leonard
Linsky: "The philosophical theory which is beyond criticism has not
and will not be produced. To criticize is not to disparage, nor is criticism
incompatible with respect."
This course will study the
linguistic turn taken by Anglo-American philosophy in the 20th century,
an examination of its successes and limitations, and a discussion of its future
prospects. The "linguistic turn" consists in the belief that previous
attempts to solve philosophical problems have failed, and that these
problems can be (dis)solved either by reforming language or by understanding
more about language and its use. There is one required text for this
course: Richard M. Rorty's anthology on The Linguistic Turn: Essays
in Philosophical Method. In preparation for each class meeting, you
should have read the assigned material. You should arrive in class with
prepared questions or comments about something in the assigned reading.
There will be 27 precis,
3 take-home examinations, and 1 argumentative paper (which includes
a prospectus, draft, and mandatory rewrite). The precis will
be weighted equally, and together will count for 10% of your final grade.
The examinations will be weighted equally, and together will count for
60% of your final grade. The argumentative paper will count for 25%
of your final grade (the prospectus of the paper will be worth 5%, the
draft will be worth 5%, and the rewrite will be worth 15%). In addition,
5% of your final grade will be based on participation and attendance.
The grading scale is as follows: A = 93%-100%, A- = 90%-92%, B+ = 86%-89%,
B = 83%-85%, B- = 80%-82%, C+ = 76%-79%, C = 73%-75%, C- = 70%-72%,
D+ = 66%-69%, D = 60%-65%, and F = 0%-59%.
A precis will be
due almost every class session. Each precis will be one typed
page -- never longer -- double-spaced, with 1 inch margins on
the right & left sides and the top & bottom. It must be at least
3/4 of a page in length. Use a 12-point Times font. There will be no
spelling or grammatical errors in your precis. Your name will
typed in the upper right-hand corner. In each precis, you will
summarize -- in your own words, without using any quotes -- the
assigned reading's main claims, as well as the reasons which are given
to support those claims. You will not include any opinion, evaluation,
or commentary. At the bottom of each precis, or on the back,
you will write one question that you have about the reading; this question
may be handwritten. You will receive 1 point for each precis
which meets all of the above requirements, and 2 points if the precis
is excellent. I never will accept a late precis, but I will allow
you to drop one.
The examinations will be
essay tests on the assigned reading material and the lectures. Each
examination should be 4-5 typed pages, double-spaced. Except for the
length, the examinations should follow the same format requirement as
the precis. Only under exceptional circumstances will you be
allowed to make up an examination!
The argumentative paper
should be 8-10 typed pages, double-spaced. Except for the length, the
paper should follow the same format requirement as the precis
(see the additional helps at the end of this syllabus). There should
be no spelling or grammatical errors in your paper. It must employ argumentation.
You will formulate your own thesis, of course, but your paper must critically
examine the claims and arguments in either the essays on Austin or Hampshire's
essay on the interpretation of language (or, of course, both of these):
Hampshire's "J.
L. Austin," pages 239-247.
Urmson & Warnock's
"J. L. Austin," pages 248-249.
Cavell's "Austin at Criticism"
pages 250-260.
Hampshire's "The Interpretation
of Language: Words and Concepts," pages 261-268.
Although we will not discuss
these essays in class, it is expected that you will read all of them.
Your paper may emphasize either a historical or philosophical interpretation.
In either case, you should carefully state the problem you intend to
treat, explain its significance, assess its possible solutions, propose
an hypothesis, argue convincingly for that hypothesis, and eliminate
the major (published or imagined) competing hypotheses. You should use
three or more books or articles (for instructions on using The Philosopher's
Index, see http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/courses/philindx.htm).
Several weeks before the
draft is due, you will submit a prospectus of this paper in which you:
(1) indicate the topic and thesis of your paper, (2) fully describe
the problem or issue to be treated, (3) outline your anticipated procedure
and probable conclusion, and (4) include an annotated bibliography of
works to be consulted (a minimum of three books or articles, with at
least a paragraph discussing the relevance of each work to your project).
A word to the wise: it would
be a marvelous idea to begin thinking today about what your thesis will
be. I want you to succeed, and so I am requiring you to make appointments
to speak with me outside of class prior to submitting your prospectus,
your draft, and your rewrite. I will suggest useful resources, and -- if
necessary -- point out potential problems. When submitting your
rewrite, you must hand in both the rewrite and the copy of your draft
on which I have written comments. Except under the most extraordinary
circumstances, I will not accept a late prospectus, draft, or rewrite.
This class will be successful
only if there is a high degree of participation and attendance, and
so I want you in class participating. The final grade for the course
will be lowered by a full-letter grade if you miss four class sessions,
the final grade will be lowered by two full-letter grades if you miss
five class sessions, and you will be withdrawn from the course if you
miss six or more class sessions. For each class session, though, you
will receive 1 point if you attend and participate. Further, I will
not accept make-up work unless you can document the reason for your
absence. Documenting the reason for your absence means providing a note
from, for example, your doctor explaining why you were absent. Serious
illnesses and emergencies will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
No doubt you have realized -- 27
precis, 4 examinations, and an argumentative paper that includes
a prospectus, draft, & rewrite -- that this course will require
a lot of writing. Why? Because writing can create knowledge, and reasons
often are found by writing. We write about what we already know, but
we also produce knowledge as we write. Not only do we write down our
thoughts, we also discover what we think as we write. Flannery O'Connor
observes, "I write because I don't know what I think until I read what
I have to say." The more you write, the more you will know, and the
more you will discover what you think. As Rebecca West notes, "I really
write to find out what I know about something and what is to be known
about something...." Throughout the course you are expected to read
carefully the assigned material. It is impossible to do well in this
course without reading and studying the books. You should spend a minimum
of 3 hours preparing for each class session. I suggest that you read
the assigned material at least twice and that you take notes on what
you read. You are expected to attend all class sessions, come to class
having read thoroughly the assigned material, and to contribute to the
discussions.
Gorgias of Leontini maintained
that "those who neglect philosophy and spend their time on ordinary
studies are like the suitors who desired Penelope but slept with her
maids." Unlike ordinary studies, in philosophy there are few right and
wrong answers. However, there are better and worse arguments and ideas,
usually in direct proportion to thoughtfulness and care. What is important
is that you think for yourself, and that you develop and defend your
own ideas. It would be an excellent idea to write drafts or outlines
of your precis, assessments, and paper, and to have a comrade
read them to check on spelling, grammar, development of arguments, and
so forth. You are strongly encouraged to discuss the class material,
your ideas, your puzzles and difficulties with each other.
Another word to the wise:
Find a study partner to discuss things with outside of class. However,
when it comes to finally writing your thoughts down, do your own writing;
it is the only way you will get the full benefit of your own efforts.
I will be happy to discuss ideas with you, read outlines and rough drafts,
and so forth. That is partly why I keep office hours. A final word to
the wise. It is not difficult to do well in this class, but it also
is easy to do badly. Let me talk about the bad stuff first. You will
receive a major grade reduction -- or fail this course -- if
you do not read the material, seldom participate in class discussions,
do not write your precis, do not take the examinations, do not
write your paper, plagiarize, cheat, and so forth. About plagiarizing
and cheating. All students are expected to follow Lewis & Clark
College's Academic Integrity Policy. Except for highly unusual circumstances,
plagiarizers and cheaters will be given an "F" for the entire course
(they will not be allowed to drop or withdraw from the course). I also
will turn their cases over to the Honor Board; usually, I will recommend
that disciplinary penalties be assessed in addition to failing grades.
It is never in your interest to plagiarize or cheat! Now for the good
stuff. With a concerted effort you can do well in this class. To do
well, you must participate in class discussions, read and study the
assigned material, write the precis, critical discussion, &
paper, do your own work, be in class (almost) all of the time, etc.
I do not grade on a curve, and so there is no good reason why you should
not get an "A" for the course!
Course policy on disability
accommodation: Students with established needs or circumstances relevant
to academic performance must declare this within 1 week of the beginning
of the course. If such needs or circumstances develop during the semester,
they must be declared and documented as soon as is practical. Failure
to observe this requirement will preclude subsequently citing such needs
or circumstances as an excuse for unsatisfactory performance.
COURSE SCHEDULE: T-Th
T, 1/11 Introduction to
the course. Rorty's "Metaphilosophical Difficulties in Linguistic Philosophy,"
pages 1-39.
CLASSICAL STATEMENTS OF
THE THESIS THAT PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS ARE QUESTIONS OF LANGUAGE
Th, 1/13 Schlick's "The
Future of Philosophy," pages 43-53; precis.
T, 1/18 Carnap's "On the
Character of Philosophical Problems," pages 54-62; precis.
Th, 1/20 Bergmann's "Logical
Positivism, Language, and the Reconstruction of Metaphysics," pages
63-71; precis.
T, 1/25 Carnap's "Empiricism,
Semantics, and Ontology," pages 72-84; precis.
Th, 1/27 Ryle's "Systematically
Misleading Expressions," pages 85-100; precis.
T, 2/1 Wisdom's "Philosophical
Perplexity," pages 101-110; precis.
Th, 2/3 Malcolm's "Moore
and Ordinary Language," pages 111-124; precis.
METAPHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS
OF IDEAL-LANGUAGE PHILOSOPHY
T, 2/8 Copi's "Language
Analysis and Metaphysical Inquiry," Bergmann's "Two Criteria for an
Ideal Language," and Copi's "Reply to Bergman," pages 127-135; precis.
Th, 2/10 Black's "Russell's
Philosophy of Language," pages 136-146; precis.
First examination, on pages
43-124, due.
F, 2/11 Last day to speak
with me about your prospectus.
T, 2/15 Ambrose's "Linguistic
Approaches to Philosophical Problems" and Chisholm's "Comments on the
'Proposal Theory' of Philosophy," pages 147-159; precis.
Prospectus due.
Th, 2/17 Cornman's "Language
and Ontology," pages 160-167; precis.
T, 2/22 Quine's "Semantic
Ascent," pages 168-171; precis.
METAPHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS
OF ORDINARY-LANGUAGE PHILOSOPHY
Th, 2/24 Chisholm's "Philosophers
and Ordinary Language," pages 175-182; precis.
T, 2/29 Passmore's "Arguments
to Meaninglessness: Excluded Opposites and Paradigm Cases," pages 183-192;
precis.
Th, 3/2 Maxwell & Feigl's
"Why Ordinary Language Needs Reforming" and Thompson's "When Is Ordinary
Language Reformed?," pages 193-205; precis.
Second examination, on pages
127-171, due.
T, 3/7 Hare's "Philosophical
Discoveries" and Henle's "Do We Discover Our Uses of Words," pages 206-223;
precis.
Th, 3/9 Geach's "Ascriptivism,"
pages 224-226; precis.
F, 3/11 Last day to speak
with me about your draft.
T, 3/14 Cornman's "Uses
of Language and Philosophical Problems," pages 227-231; precis.
Draft due.
Th, 3/16 Urmson's "J. L.
Austin," pages 232-238; precis.
T, 3/21 Spring break.
Th, 3/23 Spring break. RECAPITULATIONS, RECONSIDERATIONS,
AND FUTURE PROSPECTS
T, 3/28 Shapere's "Philosophy
and the Analysis of Language," pages 271-283; precis.
Th, 3/30 Hampshire's "Are
All Philosophical Questions Questions of Language," pages 284-293; precis.
Third examination, on pages
175-238, due.
F, 3/31 Last day to speak
with me about my comments on your draft.
T, 4/4 Urmson's "The History
of Analysis" and "Discussion of Urmson's 'The History of Analysis',"
pages 294-311; precis.
Th, 4/6 Class canceled:
APA Pacific Division meetings.
Strawson's "Analysis, Science,
and Metaphysics" and "Discussion of Strawson's 'Analysis, Science, and
Metaphysics'," pages 312-330; precis due 4/11.
T, 4/11 Black's "Language
and Reality," pages 331-339; precis.
Th, 4/13 Katz's "The Philosophical
Relevance of Linguistic Theory," pages 340-355; precis.
T, 4/18 Bar-Hillel's "A
Pre-Requisite for Rational Philosophical Discussion," pages 356-359;
precis.
Th, 4/20 Reading day.
TWO RETROSPECTIVE ESSAYS
BY RICHARD M. RORTY
Th, 4/27 8:30-11:30 AM.
Rorty's "Ten Years After" and "Twenty-five Years After," pages 361-374;
precis.
Rewrite due.
WRITING A PHILOSOPHY PAPER
Wright Morris:
"You write -- and find you have something to say."
A philosophy paper is argumentative
rather than informative. A informative paper is one which simply reports
or presents the facts as either you or someone else understands them.
There are four primary rules you need to follow in writing a argumentative
philosophy paper: First, you should clarify key ideas. For example,
are the philosophically troublesome ideas defined? Are the theories
in question clearly stated and exemplified? Second, you must test the
soundness of the arguments for or against the theories in question.
Are the premises true? Third, you should evaluate the theories. Are
the assumptions correct? Are the consequences plausible? Fourth, most
importantly, you must support what you assert with reasons! Are your
claims backed with arguments? Do they follow from other claims already
established?
You should not support your
case merely by: labeling the case as your own; asserting the case's
superiority over the competition; citing an authority, whether philosophical
or scientific. You must never use ad hominum arguments -- that is,
attacking a person's character or circumstances, rather than criticizing
that person's arguments.
Your paper will be evaluated
on the following sorts of criteria: Is your case supported with arguments?
Is the paper clearly written? Have you fairly and accurately presented
other's views? Is your paper well organized? Have you tried to think
for yourself?
Organizational strategies:
Formulating the problem:
Focus the general topic you have decided to deal with into a specific
question or statement which will be the thesis of your paper. Clarify
key terms. Think through any assumption of the question or statement
you are attempting to answer or discuss&endash;how do these influence
the kind of answers that might be given?
Deciding on the format.
Some common formats are: Comparing and contrasting two or more theories
in order to determine the most adequate one for the problem. Criticizing
a single theory or argument. Defending another philosopher's view against
a mistaken criticism. Supporting an original theory of your own.
Ways to incorporate another
philosopher's view: Restating a philosopher's argument or theory in
a clearer, more incisive way. Applying that argument or theory to areas
not discussed by its original proponent. Admitting that the view is
mistaken in places, but attempting to remedy those deficiencies and
thus producing a modified view.
Some features of a good
introduction: It should state the problem to which you will address
yourself. It should state what you intend to show&endash;for example,
that a theory should be modified or that one is preferable to another.
It should state how you propose to show what you have stated&endash;for
example, by showing that one theory rests on highly questionable assumptions.
To achieve coherence, ask
yourself the following questions as you re-read your first draft sentence
by sentence, paragraph by paragraph: What is the relevance of this passage,
and does it fit clearly here? Is the passage an essential link in my
argument? Is it used to clarify something? Does it tell the reader where
I am and where I am going? If it is an argument, is it relevant to what
I am trying to show? Does this sentence add anything to the substance
of my essay? Does my introduction really state my main point?
Achieving clarity. Some
rules of thumb for presenting a clear statement of your ideas: Avoid
vagueness, particularly of key terms and sentences; a vague expression
is one which fails to specify exactly to what objects or circumstances
it should be applied -- give definitions, use examples, restate
things in different words, etc. Avoid ambiguity; ambiguity happens when
the reader is unsure which among several possible meanings of an expression
is intended. Minimize your use of technical or profound-sounding expressions
like "reality," "absolute," "subjective," or "cosmic." Do not rely heavily
on metaphors and analogies; metaphors can be used in addition to, never
in place of, argumentation. Make what you mean and what you say harmonize;
make sure that your words actually say what you intend.
Using examples: Remember
that examples are not arguments, but illustrating devices. Think through
carefully the relation between the examples and what it is you wish
to illustrate.
Writing well: Keep your
sentences short! Use devices that tell your readers where you have been
and where you expect to go -- for example, "Let us now turn to our
first argument," or "Following my presentation of theory X, I shall
offer two criticisms of it." Do not pad your paper with too many examples,
restatements of the obvious, and extended quotations. Use active voice
rather than passive voice -- for example, instead of writing "Theory
X was earlier shown by me to be false," write "I have demonstrated X
to be false."
Guidelines for Submitting
Finished Papers: All papers must be typed, double-spaced. You should
number your pages. Your paper should not contain any spelling or grammatical
errors. Do not quadruple-space between paragraphs. If at all possible,
use a computer or a word-processor when writing your paper; this will
make revising much easier. Do not make corrections on your paper -- ;if
you find a mistake, retype that page. The copy you submit must be clean
and printed with a dark ribbon. Margins should be 1 inch at the top,
bottom, and on the right & left sides. If you are using a computer,
use a size 12 Times font. Papers must meet the required length. Papers
must be titled. Do not include a title page. In the upper-right corner
of the first page, type your name, the course number, and the date.
Staple your pages once in the upper-left corner. Do not use folders
or those plastic things -- use a stapler. You must keep an extra copy
of your paper -- if I cannot find your paper, I will assume that you
did not submit one. When you submit a rewrite, you must hand in both
the rewrite and the copy of your draft on which I have written comments.
All papers must be turned in on time!
Writing an excellent paper
can get you more than a good grade. It can serve as a writing sample
when applying to graduate schools. There is honor and glory too! There
are a number of philosophy journals for undergraduates. Here is a list
of some of them: Aporia, Carleton University Student Journal of Philosophy,
The Dialectic: University of New Hampshire Undergraduate Philosophy
Journal, Dialogue, Discourse, The Dualist, Episteme, Exordium, Hampshire
College Journal of Philosophy, The Lyceum, The Philosopher, Philosophika:
The Internet Journal of Philosophy, Public Sphere, Purdue Calumet Undergraduate
Conference in English and Philosophy, Santa Clara Undergraduate Philosophy
Conference, Student Philosophical Journal, and Student Philosophy Online.
Also, there are philosophy
conferences for undergraduates. For information about undergraduate
conferences, visit http://www.earlham.edu/~phil/undjourn.htm -- this
site has information about undergraduate journals too.
503-768-7477
503-768-7359 (fax)
Updated
on 22 December 2001
|