2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024
Browse
by subject...
    Schedule
view...
 

91 - 100 of 133 results for: PHIL ; Currently searching offered courses. You can also include unoffered courses

PHIL 264: Scientific Realism, Perspectivism, and Antirealism (PHIL 164)

Graduate students register for 264. Scientific realism is the view that we should think that the sciences basically get it right about the fundamental structure of reality: there really are electrons out there as part of objective reality. Various forms of antirealism question various dimensions of the realist position. Some of those who question strong forms of realism are uncomfortable with the label antirealism for their own positions. We will attempt to make sense of the various positions, arguments, and methodological and substantive issues supposedly at stake in these debates. Instructor Permission Required. Prerequisites: PHIL 60, PHIL 80, PHIL 150, and one course in contemporary theoretical philosophy ( PHIL 180 to PHIL 189); or equivalent courses.
Terms: Spr | Units: 4
Instructors: Hussain, N. (PI)

PHIL 265: Philosophy of Physics: Philosophical Issues in Quantum Mechanics (PHIL 165)

Graduate students register for 265.PREREQUISITES: previous course in philosophy of science or natural science or CS or engineering. Topic for 2023-2024: Philosophical Issues in Quantum Mechanics.
Terms: Win | Units: 4 | Repeatable for credit

PHIL 267D: Philosophy of Neuroscience (PHIL 167D, SYMSYS 167D)

How can we explain the mind? With approaches ranging from computational models to cellular-level characterizations of neural responses to the characterization of behavior, neuroscience aims to explain how we see, think, decide, and even feel. While these approaches have been highly successful in answering some kinds of questions, they have resulted in surprisingly little progress in others. We'll look at the relationships between the neuroscientific enterprise, philosophical investigations of the nature of the mind, and our everyday experiences as creatures with minds. Prerequisite: PHIL 80. (Not open to freshmen.) By application; send instructor a paragraph about why you want to be in the class and your background to rosacao@stanford.edu including course number in email.
Terms: Win | Units: 4

PHIL 270: Ethical Theory (ETHICSOC 170, PHIL 170)

(Taylor's version) In this iteration of the course we will discuss ethical dimensions of personal identity, integrity, friendship, sex, love, commitment, trust, care, childhood, death, and the afterlife. Substantial background in moral philosophy will be assumed (students should have completed Philosophy 2 or its equivalent; if you have questions, please contact the instructor).
Terms: Spr | Units: 4

PHIL 272: History of Modern Moral Philosophy (ETHICSOC 172, PHIL 172)

A critical exploration of some main forms of systematic moral theorizing in Western philosophy from Hobbes onward and their roots in ancient, medieval, and earlier modern ethical thought. Prerequistes are some prior familiarity with utilitarianism and Kantian ethics and a demonstrated interest in philosophy. Grads enroll in 272.
Terms: Win | Units: 4
Instructors: Hills, D. (PI)

PHIL 275W: Philosophy of Law: Protest, Punishment, and Racial Justice (CSRE 175W, ETHICSOC 175W, PHIL 175W, POLISCI 137, POLISCI 337)

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.
Terms: Win | Units: 4

PHIL 276: Political Philosophy: The Social Contract Tradition (ETHICSOC 176, PHIL 176, POLISCI 137A, POLISCI 337A)

(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.
Terms: Spr | Units: 4

PHIL 276A: Classical Seminar: Origins of Political Thought (CLASSICS 181, CLASSICS 381, ETHICSOC 130A, PHIL 176A, POLISCI 230A, POLISCI 330A)

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.
Terms: Win | Units: 3-5

PHIL 276J: Democracy Ancient and Modern: From Politics to Political Theory (CLASSICS 149, CLASSICS 249, PHIL 176J, POLISCI 231A, POLISCI 331A)

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, deli more »
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. )
Terms: Win | Units: 3-5
Instructors: Ober, J. (PI)

PHIL 276M: Collective Responsibility and Social Change (PHIL 176M)

Grad students enroll in 276M. What is social change, and how does it work? What, if anything, is our responsibility to contribute to change? Are each of us, as individuals, responsible for contributing to the changes we would like to see (e.g., regarding climate change, inequality, oppression, etc.)? How can that be, if the problems are so huge and our individual contributions so tiny? Are groups (e.g., states, corporations, social classes, racial groups, etc.), as such, responsible for change? How can that be, if responsibility only attaches to agents? Can groups themselves be agents? That seems to require that groups themselves have beliefs and desires. How is that possible? Must groups be agents in order to be responsible for their (collective) behavior, or is group responsibility fundamentally different from individual, personal responsibility? If groups can be responsible (e.g., for climate change), what implications follow for the individuals that comprise the group? How, if at all, is responsibility for what a group does distributed to group members? Can individuals have a duty to create a group, where creating a group is what is required to bring about social change? In this class we will discuss these and related questions.
Terms: Aut | Units: 4
Instructors: Madigan, T. (PI)
Filter Results:
term offered
updating results...
teaching presence
updating results...
number of units
updating results...
time offered
updating results...
days
updating results...
UG Requirements (GERs)
updating results...
component
updating results...
career
updating results...
© Stanford University | Terms of Use | Copyright Complaints