221 - 230 of 317 results for: PHIL

In this course, we will examine some of the central questions in philosophy of law, including: What is law? How do we determine the content of laws? Do laws have moral content? What is authority? What gives law its authority? Must we obey the law? If so, why? How can we justify the law? How should we understand and respond to unjust laws? What is punishment? What is punishment for? What, if anything, justifies punishment by the state? What is enough punishment? What is too much punishment? What does justice require under nonideal conditions? Prerequisite: one prior course in Philosophy.

(Graduate students register for 276.) What makes political institutions legitimate? What makes them just? When do citizens have a right to revolt against those who rule over them? Which of our fellow citizens must we tolerate?Surprisingly, the answers given by some of the most prominent modern philosophers turn on the idea of a social contract. We will focus on the work of Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Rawls.

Political philosophy in classical antiquity, centered on reading canonical works of Thucydides, Plato, Aristotle against other texts and against the political and historical background. Topics include: interdependence, legitimacy, justice; political obligation, citizenship, and leadership; origins and development of democracy; law, civic strife, and constitutional change.

Modern political theorists, from Hobbes and Rousseau, to Hannah Arendt and Leo Strauss, to Sheldon Wolin and Robert Dahl, have turned to the classical Greek theory and practice of politics, both for inspiration and as a critical target. The last 30 years has seen renewed interest in Athenian democracy among both historians and theorists, and closer interaction between empiricists concerned with 'what really happened, and why' and theorists concerned with the possibilities and limits of citizen self-government as a normatively favored approach to political organization. The course examines the current state of scholarship on the practice of politics in ancient city-states, including but not limited to democratic Athens; the relationship between practice and theory in antiquity (Thucydides, Plato, Aristotle, and others); the uses to which ancient theory and practice have been and are being put by modern political theorists; and experiments in democratic practice (citizen assemblies, deliberative councils, lotteries) inspired by ancient precedents. Suggested Prerequisites: Origins of Political Thought OR The Greeks OR other coursework on ancient political theory or practice. (For undergraduate students: suggest but do not require that you have taken either Origins of Political Thought, or The Greeks, or some other course that gives you some introduction to Greek political history or thought. )

This seminar will chart the genealogical roots that led to the making of the Leviathan, the modern sovereign body politic. Political Theology seeks to provide an irresistible answer to the quandaries of political legitimacy - the source of authority of the supreme authority. The seventeenth-century classics of political thinking - Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan and Baruch Spinoza's Theological-Political Treatise will play an axial role in our discussion. These works draw upon long traditions from antiquity on the one hand, and on contemporary legitimation crisis on the other. Understanding the political imaginaire they hope to forge and the theology they invest in doing so, the configuration of a subject capable of sovereignty, is our task. Seminar is open to both grads and undergrads.

Grad students enroll in 276M. A meritocracy is a society in which influence (of some sort) is possessed on the basis of merit (whatever that means). Meritocracy is of perennial interest and has shaped - for good or ill - political, economic, and cultural life in the East and the West. In this course we will consider questions such as: What is merit? What is it for someone to deserve something? What is it for people to have equal or adequate opportunities? Are meritocratic arrangements justified? What are the main objections to meritocratic arrangements?

Grad students enroll in 276T. Do we have free will? What are the relevant senses of "freedom" and "the will"? One of the main reasons 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, and the like. Accordingly, questions about free will often transform into questions about moral responsibility. Are we ever morally responsible for our behavior? Do we deserve credit or rewards for our success or hard work? Do wrongdoers deserve to be blamed or punished? In this course we will explore debates from roughly the past 100 years between philosophers who defend the common sense view that we do have free will and are sometimes morally responsible for our conduct and philosophers who argue that we do not have free will or are not morally responsible for our behavior. In turn, we will explore practical applications of these debates, such as reasons to change (or not) our social practices and ways of relating to one another, such as the kinds of angry blame that are commonplace in ordinary relationships, and the role of incarceration and punishment in our legal system.

The philosophy of social science is both descriptive and prescriptive. It describes the philosophical assumptions that form the basis of the practice of social inquiry and criticizes them for securing their ability to explain and predict social phenomena. This course provides an extended overview of the central debates in the philosophy of social sciences. First, we will discuss whether there is an epistemological import difference between natural and social sciences. Second, we will discuss what is the method (or methods) in social sciences, what type of knowledge social inquiry produces, and discuss the ontology of social kinds. Finally, we will discuss whether research in the social sciences can be objective and value-free.

How should human beings interact with the natural world? Do we have moral obligations toward living parts of nature? Non-living parts? And what do we owe to other human beings, including future generations, with respect to the environment? In this course, we will tackle ethical questions that confront us in our dealings with the natural world, looking at subjects such as: climate change, conservation, environmental justice, economic approaches to the environment, access to and control over natural resources, pollution, technology, and environmental activism. We will frame our inquiry with leading ethical theories and divide our approach to these topics by ecosystem, dedicating time to each unique environment and its specific nuances: aquatic, land, and aerospace.