Difference between revisions of "2014 Fall Proseminar Professor Blog"
m (→SEP 16) |
m (→SEP 23) |
||
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
==SEP 23== | ==SEP 23== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Thanks for a fun and, I hope, useful class. I think we're back on more recognizable philosophy terrain next week, but I find it useful to think about what philosophy is by some of its limit conditions. So I do think a story can not only make a philosophical point, but "work out" an issue in a concrete instance. Sartre's Nausea is a classic to recommend in this regard. So I go beyond "illustration" on the continuum, but you should each make your own choices. In any case, I think we were looking at some of the "edges" of what counts as philosophy and that might help you identify more clearly what it means to make a philosophical point, for example. | ||
+ | |||
+ | On a practical level, I hope some of you will consider adding an assignment to your grading scheme which allows you to explore creative fiction or non-fiction as a tool for doing philosophy. | ||
+ | |||
+ | I hope you'll come forward if the argument theory isn't settling well or if you're not sure about the reconstruction. It's an exercise. Also, a reminder to think about your views on our obligations to the absolutely poor as you work through next week's readings. That will be the prompt for our first peer review exercise. Feel free to go beyond the resources I've provided, and perhaps (in the style of a seminar) you could bring some of your own information and viewpoints (post to wiki?) to class on this question. We will write our 2.5 page philosophical responses after next week's class. I'll also have a rubric to guide the writing assignment. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Thanks again for great snacks and coffee. A snack wiki page? Now, we've never had one of those, but it's a very good idea. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Alfino | ||
+ | |||
==SEP 30== | ==SEP 30== | ||
==OCT 7== | ==OCT 7== |
Revision as of 17:17, 24 September 2014
Return to Philosophy Proseminar
SEP 2
Thanks for a good start. I hope the structure and goals of the course are clear and that we can get right to the fun part -- doing philosophy and getting better at doing philosophy. From class and from reading through your introductions this morning, I see that we have a nice diversity of intellectual interests and motivations. Your suggestions for topics were very helpful. I think we can implement a couple of them.
Some details: You should have received an invitation to share a google docs folder with me. Start keeping a log in Word or Google Doc format. My main interest is in tracking your reading experience prior to each class and having a sense of the browsing you are doing.
Next week we'll make sure everyone can add content to the wiki. For next week, I'll supply some notes. Just enjoy your reading and browsing.
Also, feel free to set up a time to come by the office and talk about about your philosophical interests. The more I know about your motivations and interests in philosophy the better!
Alfino
SEP 9
I hope the class went well for all of you. The topic of the nature of philosophy can be a bit slippery and daunting at the same time, so don't feel like there is something here to master. Hopefully, discussing it will keep you wondering a bit, as you go through the major, just what you think philosophy does and can do. So the goal here doesn't need to be defining philosophy so much as having a sense of the range of its employment.
Next week we have a somewhat ambitious task: to consolidate a view of the nature of science and its relationship to philosophy. I want to throw in a chapter or two of Bill Bryson's "A History of Nearly Everything," so I will send an email when that's posted to ereserves.
Thanks for starting the "email logs." I'm looking forward to following your interests and getting a sense of your responses to course reading prior to each class. The logs can also include exchanges on research.
Alfino
SEP 16
Class,
Thanks for your good work last night. Between the argument theory and the nature of science we looked at a lot of questions and information. I hope the contrast between the theoretical nature of science to the actual social history of science was fruitful. The task of understanding the limits of scientific knowledge and what to call everything else (non-scientific knowledge or something other than knowledge) is very live in philosophy today. Finally, we just scratched the surface of what to do with writing like Bryson. In a sense, the new cosmology is perhaps almost as radical to us as the Copernican revolution was in its time. While there hasn't been a similar revolution in neuroscience, the progress there is impressive as well and motivates lots of contemporary philosophy from epistemology to moral psychology.
Next week's readings are pretty diverse. You essentially have to short anthologies to browse and read through. Consider printing, but bring some version of them to class. Our goal will be to understand some borderlines between philosophy and non-philosophy and the extent to which non-academic writing (both creative fiction and creative non-fiction) can be used to accomplish the goals of philosophy.
Enjoy your reading and thanks for sending me you logs.
Alfino
SEP 23
Thanks for a fun and, I hope, useful class. I think we're back on more recognizable philosophy terrain next week, but I find it useful to think about what philosophy is by some of its limit conditions. So I do think a story can not only make a philosophical point, but "work out" an issue in a concrete instance. Sartre's Nausea is a classic to recommend in this regard. So I go beyond "illustration" on the continuum, but you should each make your own choices. In any case, I think we were looking at some of the "edges" of what counts as philosophy and that might help you identify more clearly what it means to make a philosophical point, for example.
On a practical level, I hope some of you will consider adding an assignment to your grading scheme which allows you to explore creative fiction or non-fiction as a tool for doing philosophy.
I hope you'll come forward if the argument theory isn't settling well or if you're not sure about the reconstruction. It's an exercise. Also, a reminder to think about your views on our obligations to the absolutely poor as you work through next week's readings. That will be the prompt for our first peer review exercise. Feel free to go beyond the resources I've provided, and perhaps (in the style of a seminar) you could bring some of your own information and viewpoints (post to wiki?) to class on this question. We will write our 2.5 page philosophical responses after next week's class. I'll also have a rubric to guide the writing assignment.
Thanks again for great snacks and coffee. A snack wiki page? Now, we've never had one of those, but it's a very good idea.
Alfino