11 - 20 of 317 results for: PHIL

Do dead people exist? If not, what do we refer to and think about when talking and thinking "about them?" Am I going to die? Am I just my body, or could I somehow survive its destruction, perhaps as a soul or an uploaded computational system? That I have not always been alive does not trouble me like the fact that I will die; is that rational of me? Is mortality a drawback to a life, a positive thing, or what? Is suicide ever a reasonable choice? Can death be bad for the dead person, given that they no longer exist, and are not here to suffer? Do the wishes that dead people had when they were alive matter? Should the expectation of death structure how I live? We will discuss these questions, and in the process participants will be introduced to central issues in metaphysics, the philosophy of mind, and ethics. Preference to Freshmen.

Preference to frosh. Most of us assume we live in a three-dimensional, physical world of people, tables, chairs, squirrels and electrons. Very few of us worry that we might be in the infamous Matrix. But how do we really know that the external world exists? The only evidence available to us seems to be our ever changing sensations. Do those sensations really give us reliable evidence for the existence of the external world? We'll look at Descartes' classic arguments but most of the class will be focused on contemporary philosophical discussions of the issue. A significant portion of the class will involve learning the modern tools of mathematical logic, probability theory, and Bayesianism. The class will begin with a short test to figure out how much of that material needs to be covered based on the knowledge-level of the participants.

Is it really possible for an artificial system to achieve genuine intelligence: thoughts, consciousness, emotions? What would that mean? How could we know if it had been achieved? Is there a chance that we ourselves are artificial intelligences? Would artificial intelligences, under certain conditions, actually be persons? If so, how would that affect how they ought to be treated and what ought to be expected of them? Emerging technologies with impressive capacities already seem to function in ways we do not fully understand. What are the opportunities and dangers that this presents? How should the promises and hazards of these technologies be managed?Philosophers have studied questions much like these for millennia, in scholarly debates that have increased in fervor with advances in psychology, neuroscience, and computer science. The philosophy of mind provides tools to carefully address whether genuine artificial intelligence and artificial personhood are possible. Epistemology (the philosophy of knowledge) helps us ponder how we might be able to know. Ethics provides concepts and theories to explore how all of this might bear on what ought to be done. We will read philosophical writings in these areas as well as writings explicitly addressing the questions about artificial intelligence, hoping for a deep and clear understanding of the difficult philosophical challenges the topic presents.No background in any of this is presupposed, and you will emerge from the class having made a good start learning about computational technologies as well as a number of fields of philosophical thinking. It will also be a good opportunity to develop your skills in discussing and writing critically about complex issues.

In everyday life, we ask each other to be reasonable, and we fault unreasonable behavior in ourselves and others. Moreover, the Anglo-American legal system makes extensive use of the "reasonable person standard" in everything from negligence to administrative law. What is it to be a reasonable person? What do we mean by "reasonable"? This course will look at applications of the concept and at attempts by philosophers and legal theorists to understand what reasonableness is. First preference to Sophomores; second preference to Freshman. No prior Philosophy courses needed.

Tutorial taught by grad student. Enrollment limited to 10. Since the 1970s, feminist theorists of cinema have critically discussed the "male gaze" as a persistent feature of Western visual culture. The male gaze presents images of women as objects to be looked at, rather than subjects directly engaging with the world. Under this mode of presentation, a woman becomes, in John Berger's words, "an object of vision", the vision of a real or imagined man. In this tutorial, we will explore the philosophical claims made by theorists of the male gaze and other dominant "gazes" through engaging with feminist, queer, and post-colonial philosophy and film theory. In addition, we will watch and discuss four films that feature, subvert, or otherwise engage with the concept of the "dominant gaze". We will utilize both philosophical analysis and the close reading of formal cinematic features to explore how the male gaze both reflects the patriarchal values of our society as well as how it actively influences women and gender minorities view of themselves.

Tutorial taught by grad student. Enrollment limited to 10. Do we have free will? What, exactly, does 'free will' refer to? Does it refer to the ability to do otherwise, holding fixed the facts? That one is the source of one's behavior? Does it refer to something else? Why does it matter whether or not we have 'free will'? In turn, what kind or kinds of control over our conduct should we be interested in, and why? One reason questions about free will matter is that some sort of freedom or control seems to be required in order to fairly hold people responsible for how they have behaved -- for praise and blame, rewards and punishments, etc. In that case, is 'free will' simply whatever sort of control over our conduct would make sense of holding one another, and ourselves, responsible? Or, rather, do we have an independent conception of 'free will' that props up our practices of holding one another responsible, such that if it turns out that we don't have 'free will,' no one is ever really responsible for their behavior? In this tutorial we will explore these and related questions, focusing on developments in these debates in approximately the past 50 years.

Tutorial taught by grad student. Enrollment limited to 10. By permission of instructor. Large Language Models (LLMs) have taken the world by storm, and their successes (and failures) raise many interesting philosophical questions. Are LLMs' outputs meaningful? Do they genuinely understand language? Do they have world models? Does it make sense to attribute folk-psychological states to them, such as beliefs and desires? Could an LLM be conscious? Could a system built on an LLM matter morally? In this course, we'll discuss these questions and more.

Tutorial taught by grad student. Limited to 10 students. The Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) stands as one of the controversial yet intriguing metaphysical principles in the history of philosophy, asserting that everything must have a reason, ground, cause, or explanation.Throughout this course, we will delve into the various versions of PSR, spanning from pre-modern philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle to modern philosophers like Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Du Châtelet, Kant, and Jacobi. We'll explore how they received their predecessors' views on PSR and linked the principle to important philosophical notions such as truth, substance, God, and reason. Towards the end of the class, we will also discuss the contemporary reception of the principle. Readings will primarily be drawn from primary texts, supplemented occasionally by secondary literature.

Tutorial taught by grad student. Enrollment limited to 10. What is consciousness? Are all thoughts conscious? Is consciousness the same as reflection? What is the difference between conscious and unconscious mental states? In this class, we'll see how philosophers (Descartes, Locke, Leibniz, Kant) from the early modern period responded to these questions and revolutionized our conception of the mind. Readings will be drawn from both primary texts and secondary literature. Towards the end of the class, we'll connect the historical ideas with some of the most important issues in contemporary philosophy of mind and cognitive science. This class will be of interest to a wide range of students: philosophers, historians, psychologists, and cognitive scientists.