Study Group

On Wednesday, December 15th at 4:30p, 5ish, a few of us are going to study for the final somewhere on campus (the library can get pretty crowded this time of year). All are welcome. Bring your notes, so we can compare them, and we all can have fully developed answers. Call or text (904)537-7451.
~~Tonja

Probably going to be my last blog

Staying up late studying Plato's Republic, I find it really funny to imagine Batman in the debate. I have no idea why, but I picture him sitting there with Glaucon, Thrasymycus, and everyone else who's busy agreeing with Socrates, and, well, just being Batman. 

"But how do we define Justice?" "I AM JUSTICE! FEAR ME!"

"Will these children ever have the opportunity to know their parents?" "MY PARENTS ARE DEAD."

"You have three men living in a cave..." "I LIVE IN A CAVE."

Socrates becomes this really annoying character who would tear down everyone elses' arguments by twisting their own words. I wish the work was just an essay, rather than attempting to have a story. It bugs me that no one has any personality, and the only function characters have is to agree emphatically with the author.

If it's going to be a story for our time it needs more explosions, drama, tricky situations, and a pointlessly tacked on love interest. 

study session

hey guys i'm gonna be in the library around 5 to study for a little bit. if anyone wants to come or needs any help, youre more than welcome to come.

see you there

Carpe Diem

So after talking about Epicurus and the importance of "living in the moment," what aspects of Stoic philosophy also emphasize this idea and why? Also what differences may there be in the Stoic conception of "living in the moment"?

The Catepillar with an appetite for philosophy

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14696413

The Caterpillar with an Appetite for Philosophy

by Marina Lewycka

September 28, 2007

Images Courtesy of Eric Carle Studios

"He started to look for some food."

Enlarge

"On Thursday he ate through four strawberries, but he was still hungry."

"On Thursday he ate through four strawberries, but he was still hungry."

Enlarge

"Now he wasn't hungry any more — and he wasn't a little caterpillar any more. He was a big, fat caterpillar."

"Now he wasn't hungry any more — and he wasn't a little caterpillar any more. He was a big, fat caterpillar."

September 28, 2007

You really must read The Very Hungry Caterpillar by Eric Carle, first published in 1969. It's not just a children's classic, it's a human classic — which is strange, because it has no humans in it at all. It's about a big green caterpillar.

The story is simple: the caterpillar is born, eats too much — far too much — learns to eat less, has a snooze, and changes into a butterfly.

But of course, there's far more to it than that. Carle's Hungry Caterpillar is an iconic figure whose journey from egg to butterfly is a metaphor for human development and progress, offering profound insights into the human condition.

As a thinker, he is second only to that great Greek philosopher, Aristotle, who first proposed that rational thought advances through thesis and antithesis — in other words, you eat a lot, and then you feel awful, so you stop eating. What could be more rational than that?

In fact it was also Aristotle who taught us that "moderation in everything" was the secret of happiness, so he may well have been watching an ancient ancestor of Carle's Hungry Caterpillar nibbling his way delicately through a nice classical Greek green leaf.

We will only find happiness, said Aristotle, if we can find the middle path between excess and deficiency. Isn't there a lesson for us all in that, in these times of hyper-consumption that are threatening the very existence of our planet? The Hungry Caterpillar knew when to stop — do we?

But there's something puzzling about this book. All those things the Hungry Caterpillar ate — the sausage, the cupcake, the salami, the Swiss cheese — where did he find them? Surely those are not suitable food for caterpillars. Did someone leave them lying around, or did he go looking for them? It makes me wonder whether it was not Aristotle at all, but the visionary poet, thinker and mystical proto-hippie William Blake, who was the real voice of the Hungry Caterpillar. Blake takes the opposite line from Aristotle — "the road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." Without all that excessive eating, the caterpillar would never have been ready to pupate, and move on to the next stage, the beautiful butterfly stage.

Then again, I've always thought there was a touch of Ludwig Wittgenstein about the Hungry Caterpillar. He was the founder of modern linguistic philosophy, famous for the statement, "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent." Well, the caterpillar doesn't say a lot, does he?

Oh, forget all that. The real reason this is a great book is because of the little round wormholes in the pages. Even if your own fingers are now too big to be able to fit through the wormholes, you can have huge pleasure reading this book with a young person with caterpillar-sized fingers and a butterfly-colored imagination.

Reading for after the break

These READINGS ARE ON BLACKBOARD

Week 14:       

M         11/29   Epicureanism    BB: 102-158

W        12/1     Epicureanism cont.

F          12/3     Stoicism           BB: 344-429

Week 15:       

M         12/6     Stoicism cont.

W        12/8     Skepticism        BB: 450-461

F          12/10   Review for Exam

The Void

http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2010/11/17/131383533/avoiding-the-void-a-brief-history-of-nothing-ness#more

What are we Reading?!

Just to let you guys know we have been reading the Nicomachean Ethics. The page numbers are wrong on the agenda bc I didnt realize you guys were getting a different edition of the text than mine. I broke up the book into three different class days. We have covered the first 2/3 in class so far. For tonight I want you to read the last 1/3, so by tomorrow you should have read the entirity of the Ethics.
Sorry for the confusion,
Dr. Layne

Incontinence

Analyze Aristotle's understanding of the incontinent man. Be sure to tell me how his actions relate to knowledge and desire. Furthermore, do you agree with Aristotle or Socrates on the question of whether incontinent action is even possible. In other words if you had true knowledge of the good could you act counter to that knowledge?

See you tomorrow,
Dr. Layne

Read until Book VI

Okay guys we discussed the ultimate end of all action for Aristotle today: happiness understood not as a psychological feeling but as the fulfillment of one's excellence. That is, the happy life becomes the life in its best or most flourishing state.

For next time tell me what Aristotle means by voluntary action and decision/deliberation. How are these two concepts related to virtue in general as well as justice in particular.

Have a happy (flourishing) weekend,
Dr. Layne 

Throwback: Protagoras

I came across this book on Amazon.com last night.Looking at it after studying Protagoras, its interesting to me that a book exists to teach parents how to teach their children virtues. Protagoras' belief that virtue must be taught in order to compensate for the relativity of justice and value is very present in today's society, as evidenced by this book. Its interesting that not only do we need to teach our children values, but we must first be taught how to teach them. It also got me thinking about the attitude each generation has towards the generations that come after. It seems that as people age, they adopt a "when I was your age" mentality towards those younger than them.Many people seem to view the generations below them as less moral or more resistant to the solid values of the good ol' days. Does this mean we are getting worse at teaching virtue? Are virtues becoming increasingly relative? Or, are virtues changing at a pace that prohibits them from being passed down to subsequent generations?

fun story relating to Socrates' waves of paradox...

When reading the Republic I was especially interested in Socrates’ three waves of paradox, specifically the idea that women are equal and eugenics. Socrates essentially said that when males and females are born, they are the exact same, there are no difference between the two, besides the obvious. He is stating that he could raise a boy as a girl and have him be a completely normal girl and vice versa. I am refuting this idea. I was interested in this because it relates to what I am learning about in my developmental psychology class. We were discussing the classic “nature vs. nurture” controversy and a story was brought up about a male who when he was in surgery to be circumcised, the doctors made a HUGE mistake and accidently chopped off his private parts completely. The doctor’s simply said that since he was a baby, they could reconstruct his genitals into that of a female and that the parents could raise the child as a girl and that he (or she?) would function and develop like any normal girl. Unfortunately for the boy, this was not the case. His parents raised him as a girl, grew his hair out and put him in dresses and gave him estrogen hormones. The boy wasn’t informed of his true history until he was 14 and finally voiced his struggles growing up. He knew something was wrong and told his parents that he was a boy, without them even admitting the truth to him. Needless to say he had quite a messed up childhood and ended up unfortunately killing himself after years of reconstruction surgeries, a wife and children. This ultimately relates and refutes Socrates idea that males and females are the same when born. I thought this was just an interesting story that is relative to this idea of Socrates’.

Pop Quiz #3

WORLDVIEWS AND ETHICS

POP QUIZ #3

Directions: In the next twenty minutes you need to write out an answer to the question below clearly and concisely. Be sure to organize your thoughts so as to have a clear thesis statement supported by evidence. It might be helpful to organize your thoughts into an opening paragraph containing your thesis statement followed by two to three short body paragraphs which detail the reasons why you hold your particular thesis. Once “in-class writing” has been completed you will be allowed to take your answer home so that you may type it up and expand upon it. You are may edit your answer for clarity and add further evidence to your paper. Finally, you will be required to staple this written draft to your “final” typed up and edited draft on Friday Nov.  12. Final Quizzes need only be 1 page long of no less than 300 words but no more than 500. Please turn these two copies in along with posting your answer to the class blog. If you do not turn in your “hand written quiz” with your final copy, your grade will be lowered 1 point from the 5 total points possible.

Question: Using any of the theories of justice and the good from the Republic (Polemarchus, Thrasymachus, Glaucon or Socrates), tell me if justice is something good only for itself, good for itself and for its consequences or not good in itself but only for its consequences. If you choose to focus on Socrates be sure to integrate one of his defenses of the nature of justice/the good in the City/Soul Analogy, the Tripartite Division of the Soul, the Analogy of the Good, the Divided Line, the forms of Government corresponding to types of souls and/or they Myth of Er into your answer.

Aristotle's Ethics

So read Book I Chapters 1-13 of the Nicomachean Ethics.

What is the function of the human being and how does determine our good?

See you tomorrow,
Dr. Layne

Sex, Physics, and Constructing Reality

This blog is pretty interesting, especially coming off of our latest class discussion. 

http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2010/11/09/131184982/sex-physics-and-constructing-reality#more

The Democratic Man and The Myth of Er

So go ahead and read book VIII (I found out in the second class that it was actually in your edition of the text and not mine) and Book X.

Either

describe to me origin of the democratic spirit and then tell me how it is a perversion from the good or just city/soul

or,

read the myth of Er in the final book of the Republic and tell me what eschatology can be gleamed from it.

Cheers,

Dr. Layne

The Soul and the Cave

So today we started to read the allegory of the cave more closely, emphasizing the importance it lays on understanding "our nature" and its education and development rather than merely a political description reinforcing a kind of intellectual elitism. We are all in the cave, we all possess the potency of seeing, of distinguishing between reality and appearances but most fail to turn their gaze on reality as most are content with opinion, the shade of knowledge created not by an eternal light, the sun, but by a man made fire. This is the part of each of us that tends toward relativism, i.e. the dismissal of any one, common and eternal truth. In contrast, when we begin to question the reality of those shades, of those opinions, and ask for their source, we take the first steps toward the light, toward the rays of the sun. In this turn we discover the puppeeters, that aspect of each of us that is content with appearance and projecting appearances (not simply as the politcal reading would demand, the sophists or politicans/heads of state-of course this is a valid reading of the text but one which unfortantely neglects the psychological demand that Socrates explicitly emphasizes). Of course, we ascend slowly, with much struggle and ultimately reality itself is blinding. Here, in the clearing, we squint and gaze first at shadows again but this time shadows (perhaps true opinions) that are caused by the light of the sun on the objects of reality. Next we turn to images in the water, then the "things in themselves," and finally the acknowledgment of the source of the things, the sun/the good. In the end, this conversion of the soul toward reality simply begins with turning toward the light of the Good, striving to ascend from out of the world of illusions, becoming and opinion, perhaps even of meaninglessness. For Socrates, only when we loosen and shake off the bonds of the particular world and do what is difficult, and seemingly crazy (not only to the others in the cave but also via the psychological reading, crazy even for ourselves), does are nature thrive, reach true happines. Only those who distinguish the one from the many, reality from illusion, opinion from knowledge, do the work that allows for the harmony of the soul.

Okay that's enough rambling.
For next time in the first class we will talk about your own analogies of the Good, while in the second class we will finish talking about those analogies. I will also lecture on the opening of Book VIII, instead of Book X as in Book VIII there is a wonderful section describing the various kinds of goverment that are analogous to individual souls.

We will read Book X for Monday.

Hope you are well,
Dr. Layne

An Effort to Gain the Repute of Justice....

Hey classmates!

I was going to make this announcement anyhow, but considering the reading about the importance of APPEARING just, I figured I'd play into that.

So, Platonically speaking...this is me trying to get you to think of me as a "just individual"

The Loyola University Sociology Student Organization is holding a food drive and petition until this Friday. The food will be distributed by Second Harvest Food Bank, and the petition urges the federal government not to cut funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). To sign this petition you can either talk to me, or find our table in the Danna Center from 11-2 for the rest of the week. You may also make food or money donations at this table.

Come appear just with us.
Thanks,
-Max

Good Analogy

So what parallels are there between the Analogy of the Good to the Sun, the divided line and the Allegory of the Cave?

Also, I just wanted to remind you to come prepared with your own analogy of the good for class tomorrow. For example if you think the Good doesn't exist, you might compare it to a mythical creature like the unicorn, something beautiful to contemplate but unfortunately something that only resides in imaginative pictures and children's fantasies. Or if you think the Good is something real but elusive, you may compare it to a fox that always knows how to hide. So to do this assignment well you need to think about some of the characteristics of the good and then attempt to furnish us with a concrete object that mirrors those qualities.

See you soon,
Dr. Layne

A Philosopher President?

Thought this was an interesting article considering our last dicussion on philosopher kings...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/28/books/28klopp.html?_r=3&src=me&ref=general

The Good

After having discussed the true nature of the philosopher Socrates now turns to their absolute concern: the study of the Good. To be sure though, upon being questioned Socrates admits that he cannot tell his comrades exactly what the Good is. In light of this inablity though he says that he can at least attempt to discuss an offspring of the good.

So for this blog, tell me what he offers as a likeness of the Good. Be sure to explain how it works and how this offspring helps us understand the Good itself. Futhermore, for those adventurous sorts give me your own analogy of the good. What do you think it is in itself or is like?

Cheers and Happy Halloween,
Dr. Layne

Hate Speech, Pornography, and the Ring of Invisibility

I am posting a blog right now. Because I am registered under a class, my name is displayed; however, many blogs allow total anonymity. Internet users all over the world utilize this anonymity to spew racist, sexist, creedist, or homophobic content onto the web.

Internet pornography viewing is on the rise in recent decades. Previously, an individual would need to enter into a pornographic/ adult store, wearing the only face that they have, and purchase content that depicts their sexual fantasies/fetishes/preferences, all the while surrounded by other individuals who can see you. Increasingly, individuals are gaining home access to computers & internet, thus allowing for anonymity while viewing/selecting sexual content.

My point is this: the internet is the Ring of Invisibility. We elect to turn it inward or outward. And we all have the option to use it to do things we would otherwise not do out of fear of public shame. This is slightly different than actual invisibility, in that you cannot kill someone, steal something (except for copyrighted materials such as music) or perform an elaborate prank. My rhetorical questions are: how far have you taken your invisibility? What moral lines have you crossed? Does invisibility diminish all sense of right and wrong for pleasure and satisfaction, or do we operate within a framework, though with a little more freedom than we would normally act? Or maybe the morals vanish overtime, and we have only had the internet for a short time?

City Soul Analogy

In the second half of Book II Socrates makes a stunning analogy. He argues that to understand justice in the individual soul one can turn to justice on a larger scale in the state. Thus in describing his state, he also describes the soul and churns out a simple construct of individuals who do there own work and function well together before turning to a "luxurious state/soul" where war and strife abound and guardians are needed.

So in the vein of Socrates let us now turn to ourselves and the city within:

Describe the kind of city that may adequately reflect your own soul or character? That is, if there was a city that best resembled yourself what would it look like?

The Ring of Gyges

So if you had a ring of invisibility, would you still behave ethically or would you do as you "pleased"? Be sure to explain/justify your answer.

Cartography as a Worldview?

I just saw this fun gallery and thought of you guys.

http://www.edge.org/documents/Edge-Serpentine-MapsGallery/index.html

Hope studying is going well,
Dr. Layne

Prometheus and Bob

In between reviewing for our Midterm I rediscovered this little piece of gold from our childhood.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zt9tQVudqVo

Wisdom and Virtue

For the next class I want you to be thinking about virtue in general. Is virtue analogous to wisdom? Can it be divided? Can you only possess a part of virtue? Is virtue a unified concept or must we always divide it into parts like temperance, courage and/or piety. Further, how are these parts related or unified. Finally, as Socrates questions and Protagoras hopes, is the virtue of courage distinct from all the other virtues? Must one be wise to be courageous?

Cheers,
Dr. Layne

Heidegger

Heigegger is someone we briefly talked about in class. But he is scandalous, and he really relates back to questions first posed by Plato.

"For many Heidegger’s reputation is tainted by his association with Nazism in 1930’s Germany; he actively supported Adolf Hitler during the dictator’s first years in power and after World War II he was banned by the Allies from teaching and publishing for five years.

Despite this, his work has been widely influential, especially on the thought of twentieth century philosophical giants such as Sartre, Lacan and Derrida." (Excerpt from bbc.co.uk)

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/heidegger-thinking-the-unthinkable/

Sophistry and the Supreme Court?

Okay here is an excellent example of how the sophistic view of human reason steers away from the project of discovering truth. Rather reason in this depiction drives highspeed toward simply becoming a crafy device for swaying others to one's own opinion. To be sure I am not taking sides with this article but I just thought it was a really interesting essay that may help us understand the role of rhetoric for shaping one's morality. Interestingly enought it also broadens its meaning to include the totality of one's actions in an argument.

http://www.slate.com/id/2269715/pagenum/2

The Problem of Relativism and Pluralism for Democracy

Check out this book review for an interesting discussion that fits within our discussion these last few days....

http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=21609

Pop Quiz #2

Pick from any of the Pre-Socratic philosophers (Thales, Anaximader, Anaximenes, Heraclitus, Parmenides, Zeno, the Pluralists, the Atomists or the Sophists)and discuss how their worldview(s), specifically their cosmology, i.e. their understanding of the origin/arche of all things, influences or leads to a particular moral understanding of nature, the divine or humankind itself. Be sure to pick the one you most readily relate to as it may in fact be easier to write about.

Sophistry and the Protagoras

Is virtue something teachable?

Historians Admit to Inventing Ancient Greeks

http://www.theonion.com/articles/historians-admit-to-inventing-ancient-greeks,18209/

The Atomists

First and primarily tell me what the ethical doctrine of Democritus is and how is it connected to his metaphysics? Second, what might be the dangers of such a theory with regards to the relationship between pleasure and reason?

Cheers,
Dr. Layne

P.S. To all who need to discuss your pop quiz grade, please just come by my office tomorrow. I follow the tenet that everyone can do well in my class regardless of one's beginnings. So come by and find out how I can help you do better next time.

Pluralists

First tell me why these philosophers are deemed the pluralists and then describe the different arche of both Empedocles and Anaxagoras? Finally, tell me which of the two is more attractive of a thinker for you and why.

Cheers,
Dr. Layne

Zeno's Paradox

According to Zeno, why would it be impossible for you to show up to class on Wednesday? What must we presuppose in order to account for your presence in the classroom and why.

Let the absurd answers fly but the first person to give me Zeno's answer wins.

Have fun,
Dr. Layne

Seneca on Anger

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ0g7IKWG7E&feature=PlayList&p=3AB2124A01423D7E&index=0&playnext=1

This is a pretty cool video, relevant to the brief conversation we had about anger on Friday.

Parmenides

I know according to the agenda we shouldn't be reading Parmenides until Wednesday but for a reason I will divulge to you on Monday, I expect all of you to have read the fragments of Parmenides for the next class.

As for the question of the day, big drum roll please, I want you to tell me how Parmenides and Heraclitus are opposed in their philosophical thinking but also be sure to pinpoint how they may coincide in their thought.

Finally for class discussion I want all of you to be able to summarize what we have learned from the Pre-Socratics thus far. Be sure that you can show knowledge of at least two or three relevant features of each of these philosophers by having quotes from their fragments ready to hand. Also, to tie together how these old dead white guys are still relevant to each of our lives, I would appreciate if all of you found a way to relate at least one of the philosophers to your major.

Have a nice weekend,
Dr. Layne

Shan'Tra S. Henry-Heraclitus

Most of the fragments of Heraclitus are insightful, but I must say that three of them are my favorite. Fragment number eight is true from beginning to end. “Divine things for the most part escape recognition because of unbelief,” this is fragment number eight. The fragment can hold for the example of why most people do not believe in God. God and of that he has created was through his divinity. But because this was such a great task and accomplishment, people have a hard time accepting Him. So most either ignore it or go against it, so I see this fragment as being very true even today. Fragment number thirty –two is also among my favorites. Fragment thirty-two, “All that can be seen, heard, experienced-these are what I prefer.” This fragment in particular suggests that life is meant to be lived, so stop treating it as an option and not a priority. We are supposed to experiences a new thing that is what a life that has been lived means. Everything should not be taken for granted, every great opportunity, triumph and adventure should be embarked on and celebrated. I sure hope everyone feels this way.

Heraclitus

For Friday read ALL of the fragments of Heraclitus. Post your favorite ones, or the ones that you think are the most important and explain why.

Cheers,
Dr. Layne

The "First" Philosophers

Today we discussed the origin of philosophy from wonder. I argued that philosophy is not a mere replacement for a primitive or naive form of thinking but rather, philosophy is the basis for all forms of thinking whether it appears in the guise of mythological or creative works of literature or, more commonly, the  philosophical treatise. I ultimately argued that anyone who ever questions or "wonders," to use the words of Aristotle, approaches the door to philosophy. Thus questioning the origin of philosophy is not a matter of determining the exact day and time that philosophy/rational thinking appeared. Rather the origin of philosophy is something intimate to each of us as human/rational animals. Consequently when we question the historical origin of philosophy in such thinkers like Thales, i.e. when we question who the "first" philosopher is and why he thought the way he thought, we are still investigating how philosophy may arise in each of us rather than just collecting or amassing historical information. Keeping this in mind then, I want you now to read over and analyze the surviving fragments of Thales, Anaximander and Anaximenes. Tell me primarily what "worldview" these men share and why this may earn them the title of the "first" philosophers. Consider also  whether their work is any more "rational" than say the mythology that we were presented with in Homer, Aeschylus or Euripides.


See you Wednesday.
Cheers,
Dr. Layne

Pop Quiz #1

So today we discussed the end of the Bacchae while also reviewing Prometheus Bound and the Iliad. We discussed the worldviews and consequent ethics that arise from these texts while also analyzing their similiarities and differences.

At the end of class and all this reviewing, we had our first quiz. For those of you who missed it. Do not fret, you can still turn in an answer as all were allowed to take the quiz home. Unfortunately if missed class and did not inform me before class, your quiz grade will automatically be deducted 1 point from the 5 as the directions below indicate.

Good Luck Guys!
Dr. Layne

Directions (from the in-class prep): In the next twenty minutes you need to write out an answer to the question below clearly and concisely. Be sure to organize your thoughts so as to have a clear thesis statement supported by evidence. It might be helpful to organize your thoughts into an opening paragraph containing your thesis statement followed by two to three short body paragraphs which detail the reasons why you hold your particular thesis. Once “in-class writing” has been completed you will be allowed to take your answer home so that you may type it up and expand upon it. You may edit your answer for clarity and add further evidence to your paper. Finally, you will be required to staple this written draft to your “final” typed up and edited draft on Monday, Sept.  13. Final Quizzes need only be 1 page long of no less than 300 words but no more than 500. Please turn these two copies in along with posting your answer to the class blog. If you do not turn in your “hand written quiz” with your final copy, your grade will be lowered 1 point from the 5 total points possible.

Question: Pick from the Iliad, Prometheus Bound or the Bacchae. Discuss the worldview(s), (i.e. the cosmology, theology, axiology, anthropology etc.), that the author illustrates in their text and describe how the author criticizes the ethics/morality that may arise from such conditions/beliefs.

A documentary relevant to Wednesday's class

Link:

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/emasculating-truth/

According to the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, testosterone is declining in American men at the alarming rate of one percent a year. But why? That’s what Casey Neistat and Oscar Boyson sought to uncover in their film An Emasculating Truth.

Ultimately, the short film goes beyond this question to further the current dialogue about today’s definition of masculinity in light of changing gender roles. Boyson, the film’s producer and on camera emcee, came to some very personal conclusions about what it means to be a man today, turning the camera on himself and asking the question ‘what does it mean to be a man?’

And the moral of the story is.....

So after reading the entirety of the Bacchae and discussing the various concepts like gender, human nature, power, freedom and the roles we are given and make for ourselves in society, tell me in a few sentences the moral of the story. What is the identity we can safely assign to this text?

Personally I have always found the Bacchae to be one of the most disturbing tragedies. In fact, the first time I read it, with its gruesome finale along with its stunning portrayal of Dionysus and his followers, I was initially struck by the thought that perhaps Aristotle had been correct in accessing whether such tragedies were meant to be mediums of psychic purification. In the merciless destruction of the ruler of Thebes, his family and finally the city itself we are indeed brought to our knees, forced to fear the divine, this unforgiving god, and pity those hapless fools who followed the relentlessly stubborn Pentheus to his demise. Moreover, both Pentheus and Dionysus seem to be monsters rather than heroes. In this regard I tend to think Nietzsche may have  been correct in regarding Euripides as the murderer of tragedy, as the one who utilizes irony, the character of Dionysus and the literary tool of "role reversal" not to affirm suffering in spite of itself, but to destroy the hope that tragic heroes like Prometheus are intended to instill in the other characters of the play as well as the audience. What in the end is purified by the end of this show? Are there really any winners? Does the good prevail? I tend to regard this as the perfect “swan song” for tragedy, where the meaning or aim of theater is itself questioned as the monstrous nature of both man and god are brought to the fore. 

See you soon guys,
Dr. Layne

Would you rather be right, or be loved?

http://www.adaringadventure.com/life-coaching/would-you-rather-be-right-or-be-loved/

Sex and Going out of Your Mind

Issues of sexuality and madness predominant the next section of the play. In a few sentences, give me your opinion of the role of these topics and what you think Euripides may be suggesting in the confrontation between manly Pentheus and effeminate Dionysus. Think about various things. Some examples might be like what place do the woman have in Pentheus' city? What opinion of women does Pentheus himself hold? Why might Dionysus be the androgynous deity? Why might women more than men need to go mad? What do you make of the actions of the woman in their ecstatic state?

See ya soon,
Dr. Layne

Shan'Tra S. Henry- The Bacchae

In the Euripides Bacchae characters Pentheus and Dionysus seem to continually have an ongoing battle in regards to how much power one may hold over the other. In the particular text, Penthesus’ arrogance and persecution of the Bacchants can be justified. It seems that Pentheus’ city has been receiving some terror from the Bacchants, as I understood it is in regards to the mistreatment of their women or at least it’s affecting them the most. In this case why wouldn’t Pentheus feel that is important to condemn the Bacchants? Any ruler of a particular area wants there citizens to be at peace and will bring to justice those that are causing an up roaring. Dionysus was attempting to spread ideals in the kingdom of Pentheus, how disrespectful. I just think that Dionysus is being extremely sensitive when it comes to Pentheus not treating him like a “real” god. I believe Pentheus refers to Dionysus as a “new god” because maybe he does not yet deserve the respect that other gods have, so Pentheus refuses to treat him as such. Throughout this text Penthesus is justified in all that he is doing, it’s just that because Dionysus is a “god” that he comes off as being arrogant. But any king that cares about his people and kingship would have committed the same actions as Pentheus.

The Bacchae

Now after discussing the importance of combining Power and Intellect for true freedom, we shall turn to a text which pits the two concepts of Faith and Reason against each other.

In light of this, most readers of the text immediately regard Pentheus' rationalism and refusal to believe in Dionysus as a tyrannical hubris or stubborn/disgusting arrogance which will ultimately lead to his downfall. Regardless of this instinctual characterization of Pentheus, can you give me reasons that may justify his arrogance and his consequent persecution of the Bacchants. If you don't think their is any justification for his arrogance, please explain why you think this.

Have fun,
Dr. Layne

Just a reminder it doesn't matter how great your post is, if I read it in class and you aren't in there to defend it your participation grade will be affected.

And the Cow Enters the Room

Today I attempted to argue that Prometheus is not the freest character in the first half of the text. I referred to his almost insufferable self-pity and submission to his own fore-knowledge/fate. He, I believe, felt bound long before he was physically chained to the rock. In both classes though, I alluded to my belief that Prometheus changes in this text and ultimately becomes free. In this vein then I ask two questions. You are "free" to answer both or only one.

For those who agree with me that Prometheus laments and suffers fate and is therefore bonded or enslaved by fate, how do you think this changes in the second half of the text? Does he change at all in fact? If so, how do you think this transformation comes about and how do you think Io is related to this change?
Or 
For those who believe that Prometheus always represents true freedom, what role does Io play in the text? Why do you think she was an important character for Aeschylus with regards to the plot and "moral" of the story. Here I want you to think about the similarities between Io and Prometheus. How are these two characters lives intertwined and why would such a relationship be important in a text were issues like free will, fate, destiny and the human relationship with the Gods, particularly the tyrannical Zeus, are constantly invoked?

See you soon guys,
Dr. Layne

Prometheus Bound Question 3 Due before 12:00 on Sept. 8

Turning now from a "Iron Age" text by Homer to a "Classical" Greek text by Aeschylus, name the most powerful character in Prometheus Bound. Do not forget to justify why you think the character you have chosen is the most powerful. It may help to define what power is.

Have fun with this text. It is one of my all time favorites.

Cheers,
Dr. Layne

Food for the Weekend

Okay guys, I talked a lot today in class. You got to hear my opinion of the text. If you would like, please post your opinions. Do you agree with me that the Iliad doesn't glorify war or heroism but criticizes it? Don't the appeals to dipolmacy, peace, and the care of concrete others over abstract, remote ideas like honor prevail in the end? Furthermore, feel free to share your opinions on contemporary war and the bravery of combat soldiers. Does the Iliad have anything to teach both ourselves on the home front and, more importantly, our soldiers in Iraq? Or are these wars incomparable? Just think of the difference in the way we fight, the methods of war? Yet, don't we honor soldiers in a similar way? Do we not consider those who die for this cause brave, do we not commemorate them, immortalize them, for the commitment to their country regardless of their personal feeling toward the war?



Of course this isn't a required question....I would just like to see what you think.

Cheers,
Dr. Layne

PS I will post my question on Prometheus Bound Monday around 12.

Response to Question 2

In my opinion it is unreasonable to still call Achilles a hero. I do not believe Achilles has the respect of others because he is a "hero" but more in how much power he holds. If a person is valued more for their power versus their character then I do not think it is right to refer to them as a hero. I believe that Achilles is blinded by his rage, in that he is not able to see Hector as a human being. If Achilles were able to see Hector this way, then maybe he would be able to understand Hector's faults and imperfections. I, therefore, do not believe the death of Hector was ethical. Achilles was simply interested in the power and fame of Hectors death versus solving a problem in killing Hector.

Hillary Marker Book 22 Blog Response

While I do not think that Achilles should be stripped of his title as a hero, the uncontrolled rage he exhibited in book 22 is far from heroic behavior. His actions lessen the physical bravery he may have displayed in battle because of his total lack of moral standing. It becomes clear from his rage that fighting in battle and killing is no difficult feat for Achilles. Showing compassion for one's enemy and displaying moral bravery would have been significantly more difficult. In contrast dragging Hector's dead corpse around the city is in no way courageous or heroic. He simply disregards the importance of honor and lets his primitive rage take control. It would have shown more courage to have honored Hector's wishes than not to.

Achilles' actions show immoral and irrational behavior far from the Greek ideal. As we discussed in class, the Greek virtues are wisdom, courage, piety, and prudence. Achilles' behavior in Book 22 does not represent any of these virtues. Therefore even by the Greek standard I do not believe that Achilles' behavior would be considered heroic. This also brings me to question Achilles' motives throughout the book. While I have not read it in it's entirety, I can gather that Achilles is considered a very good and courageous soldier. However, his actions at the end put into question his so called heroism as a soldier. Is Achilles showing true heroism throughout the battle or is he simply driven by anger and rage the entire time?

Book 22 Response

Though Achilles is painted as a heartless butcher in Book 22, I think his treatment of Hector is heroic so far as the Greek hero is deemed honorable by fulfilling the commands of his superiors in battle. Achilles appeases both Agamemnon and Athena by, respectively, taking out an opposing hero (Hector) in an enemy territory and softening up the city's (Troy's) defenses, as well as dutifully carrying out the wishes of his goddess-mother for Hector to be killed. Both Agamemnon and Athena are his superiors in political and existential stature, and likewise, their tight control over his fate evince another reason that Achilles' behavior in Book 22 is heroic: simply because he accepts this fate and gives into its direction. By befitting his attitude and behavior to the situations manifested largely by Athena and Agamemnon, Achilles acts not out of vengeance towards Hector, but out of necessity to maintain his own and the Greek's heroic principles. Finally, Hector's death is absolutely ethical, as he provoked Achilles into a battle to the death and failed to defend himself against it. While Achilles' denying him his last wish was extremely cruel and certainly unethical, I cannot believe it detracts from his ultimate heroism. If anything, the Greeks would celebrate such an act of war in light of the fact that it came at the expense of their enemy and it glorified the hero responsible.

Shan'Tra Sarah Henry Question 2 post

Book 2 of the lliad is very interesting. I finally get a visual of Achilles in battle, but honestly I don’t like it! He is very boastful and I don’t think his actions were that of a hero. As stated in the question, he actually does have blind rage and he admits it. When Hector is begging him to uphold his honor after death, but Achilles refuses and instead taunts Hector about how his fury will drive him to basically mutilate him. This is not a way in which a hero is supposed to act. Given, this is a time when war and killing seems to be honorable and that’s fine, kill if you must but the mocking of the enemy to the death is totally unnecessary. The only thing that I am confused about is that action that caused all of Achilles’ rage. What lead him to mutilate Hector? Until I know this answer, I do not think that Achilles’ actions were justifiable. Yet, I do understand that ethically, the actions of Achilles could be right. Considering that fighting for ones honor and pleasing the gods is a sort of code of conduct. I just honestly do not believe that neither the taunting nor the lack of empathy on Achilles’ part can be justified.

Rage, Achilles and the Death of Hector

Okay today we discussed the importance of honor in the Greek worldview and the role of knowing one's proper place. Here, we saw that characters like Nestor supported the "toe the line" submission to the social hierarchy where Achilles, a soldier, was expected to submit to his political better, Agamemnon. Furthermore, we argued that Agamemnon also behaved unethically, or transgressed the social order, insofar as he should have submitted to his own better, the will of the gods. His hubris was what brought about the plague and Nector pleads with him to restore order, to appease the gods by acting as he should have in the first place, i.e. respecting the supplicant's wishes and returning his daughter.We brought this around to discussing the importance of Achilles' aggression, his rage against submitting to established figure heads of authority and the importance of Homer putting forward a literary depiction of civil disobedience. I argued that Achilles becomes the source or the paradigm for heroism where the hero is judged more for his moral bravery than his physical bravery.

Now turning to Book 22, I want you to tell me what you think of Achilles and his behavior. Can we reasonable still call him a hero, or does his rage blind him, move him to behave immorally...do you think he has crossed the line or do you think that his vengeance is justified. Is the death of Hector ethical? Keep in mind that Achilles has the support and assistance of the goddess Athena.

Cheers and see you Friday,
Dr. Layne

Ashley Stevens - Post 1 on the Iliad

Of the two main male characters in The Iliad, King Agamemnon seeks power over all other lands and authority of all men. Achulles, however is seeking glory - glory for winning battles and for winning Hera. Both share the belief that the gods are intimately involved in the decisions they make in life and have ultimate authority over the paths their lives lead. Achilles take Athena's direct request and blatantly defies her, again his morals, whereas King Agamemnon fears and respects the god's wishes.

Response to Question 1

The characters of the Illiad share the worldview that people rely on god for all that is good and bad in their lives. Many of the characters rely on god for answers during times of confusion or struggle. It seems then there is little room for self-reliance or trusting themselves in trying situations. Not only do the characters rely on God, but they also feel protected by God. God then acts a escape or protection from the whatever problems the characters experience. Depending on the issue it seems the character will immediately turn to God for answers, versus problem solving on their own. This is, in some ways, similar to the way problems are dealt with in today's society. Each person's struggles are different and while some people may be self reliant, others turn to God for answers. God is many ways the same escape or protection for people today as it is for these characters.

SHANTRA SARAH HENRY QUESTION 1

The characters in Book 1 of the lliad are, or at least they seem to be very engulfed in the religious view that the gods are the beginning and ending of society. So, in that regard they must be pleased above all else. The idea of loyalty and pleasing the gods so comes to mind when it comes to the religion as well. As read, the gods have those "special" followers; these are those that remain loyal to them the fullest extent. Such as Chryes, who seems to be a fateful follower of Apollo, not automatially Zeus. And, because of his loyolaty Apollo punished the whole Achaeans army. These beliefs order the characters life on a daily basis, in accordance to how they bahave and what is ultimately acceptable in society. This is where i believe communal ethics plays an important role. A code of conduct is established when it comes to obeying the gods and thier rulings as a final say or solution. Such as accepting what the gods rule as final, Achilles,the famous warrior, was stopped in his tracks of rage to listen to the gods Athena and Hera. He did not fight their word nor did he disobey them. other examples of communal ethics in this text I believe would include reaching out to the gods for solution and reasoning.This is exactly what Chryses, Achilles, and Thetis have done. In regards to personal morality, I honestly believe that these immortals have been coerced into taking the gods' ideas on right and wrong and on how to enrich a person's life so that they may be a ''good person.'' Personal morality has to do with one deciding for themselves the difference between rght and wrong according to their beliefs. But, when you think about it, being forced feed ideas and values is not much different in this text that how things are in present day America. We have been. for the most part, forced to accept ideas and traditions wiothout giving it a second tought. So maybe our Greek god in the society we live in and its ethics that we are forced to accept.

Response to Reading Question 1

All of the characters described in Book 1 of The Iliad seem to practice a premodern form of polytheism, where gods (immortals) are actually inhabitants of the mortal world who rule from their mystical palace at Olympus. Throughout the reading, Homer presents countless examples of the Greek gods exchanging words and even blows with mortals, from Thetis confronting Achilles about Agamemnon to Apollo's weeklong scourge of the Achaean camp; and more significantly, The Iliad's entire dramatic backdrop consists of family feuds being fought between the gods and their extended mortal families. For instance, Thetis is the mermaid mother of Achilles, and she is carrying on illicit communications with Jove, whose wife is Juno. Jove is also the father of Apollo, who scourged the Achaean camp because Agamemnon dishonored one of Jove's priests by taking his daughter as his wife and denying his attempt at ransom. Finally, Achilles and Agamemnon are at odds throughout Book 1 because Agamemnon (who, by the way is the son of Atreus, or "king of men") refuses to give up the priest's hostage daughter unless Achilles gives up his wife (or, "prize" as they are repeatedly referred to) to Agamemnon to replace the daughter when she is returned.

Overall, the characters in Book 1 apply their polytheistic worldview both communally and ethically. As a community, it seems obvious, even with such a limited scope of the entire Achaean camp, that the community leaders are those connected in some way to the gods, and that the welfare of the community largely depends on the welfare of these leaders. Therefore I understood the communal application of their worldview to be a very conservative bureaucracy largely determining the welfare of everyone based on the desires and mood of a select few, such as in Homer's description of how selfishly the gods regard their decisions over the "pack of mortals" in their meeting at Olympus. Lastly, the ethics of the Greeks' polytheism follows a very similar trend in favoring selfish desires over common welfare; in that women are subjugated to property, affairs and overindulgence are condoned and even enacted by the gods, and war, sacrifice, and pestilence are all just means to the ends that the immortals throughout The Iliad invent.

Question 1 - The Iliad: Book 1

The characters of the Iliad seem to share a common belief in Polytheistic divinity. Not only do they believe in the existence of the Gods and Goddesses described in Book 1. They also believe their fortunes and lack there off can be directly influenced by how much they revere and appease their immortal counterparts. In the poem, this is carried out through ritualized practices of worship, such as prayer and sacrifice. However, unlike most organized world religions who portray their divine head’s of authority as being omnibenevolent. The Gods, as depicted in the Iliad show no moral obligation to transcend the flaws of those whom they govern. If anything, they amplify humanity’s imperfections often to drastic proportions as see in lines 38-60 where Apollo upon hearing his priest’s prayers becomes so enraged that he chooses to punish all of the Greek soldiers instead of just Agamemnon with whom Chryses had the original conflict with.

Therefore it would seem the personal actions of one individual would have a resonating effect on the community they belong to. Apollo’s reprisal also shows his clear preference for those who align themselves to his side just as Athena shows preference to the Greeks because they chose to make her the Patron of their greatest city. As such it seems the fates of the characters as seen in the Iliad really are at the mercy of those whom they remained loyal to because to do anything but almost always guaranteed swift and merciless retribution.

Tonja Howard

The characters of the Iliad seem to share the worldview that the gods rule the world and that humans are to do only what pleases the gods or they will endure pain and suffering until they make amends with the gods. Because some humans follow one or more gods more closely than others, there is conflict. To solve these conflicts, they follow the tradition of "eye for an eye." For example, when Agamemnon stole Priam's daughter, Priam prayed that the god Apollo would avenge him. Then Agamemnon refused to return Priam's daughter without taking another girl in her stead, particularly Achilles' girlfriend, Briseis. Achilles wanted to kill Agamemnon, but was told by the goddess Athena not to. If Achilles had killed Agamemnon, it would have sparked an on-going chain of killing and retaliation among the Greeks. Because of his loyalty to Athena, Achilles did not kill Agamemnon. If he had not listened to her, she could have exacted her rage on him and everyone around him.

The religious worldview that the mortals share in the Iliad is one of fear and awe of the gods and goddesses. Any of their thoughts and actions can be called into check by the various gods and goddesses and rarely do the mortals dare to disobey the wisdom of the divinities. But when they do, the divinities show their power. The communal ethics of the mortals seems to hold honor and custom in high regard. Within these communal ethics though their exists room for those who hold power to act by their own individual morals. Some of these morals are not so ethical as seen with Agamemnon and his vow to keep Achilles' desired girl away from him. When Achilles vows to take revenge on Agamemnon for his insult he is breaking his own moral of self-control seeing to it that most Greeks hold reason and logic in high regard as well. When Athena intervenes, Achilles yields to the demands of the goddess.

Question 1 Comments Due 9/1 at 12:30

Good class today guys. Hope you are all starting to feel comfortable with the online tools for this class.
So let's put our feet in the water and talk about the first reading, Homer's Iliad Book I. Remember your answer to these questions will take time as I require some thoughtful, versus rash, responses to the reading. Also feel free to add anything you like just so long as it responds to the material.

Okay, your first reading question is:

Describe the religious worldview that the characters of the Iliad share and determine how it orders their communal ethics and personal morality?

Good Luck! Remember there are no wrong answers, just lazy ones.
Cheers, Danny

Welcome!!!

Hey Class,

For those who figure out how to comment on a post I would love to find out who you are. Give me a small blurb about yourself, share anything you like. Personally, I like the funny stuff like "I am Dr. Layne and I enjoy eating until I almost puke."

After the fun and games are over, I would also like you to tell me a little bit about what you think this class will be about. That is, what do you think a worldview is? what do you think ethics is? how do you think they are related?

Here's hoping you figure it out and get blogging.
Cheers,
Dr. Layne

(to comment see below in the syllabus or just try to post without an account and this will send you straight to the sign up for a google account. Then just sign up for a google account with your loyno.edu account and afterwords make yourself a member of the Worldviews and Ethics group)

Syllabus

PHIL U260 Worldviews and Ethics

Fall 2010

Class Time: MWF 12:30-1:30, 1:30-2:30                     Instructor: Dr. Danielle A. Layne

Classroom:  CM 303                                                    Office Location: Bobet 448a

E-mail: dalayne1@loyno.edu                                         Office Hours: T/TH 9a.m-3.pm.

Text:

Blackboard Readings = BB

Aeschylus, Prometheus Bound

Euripides, Bacchae

Readings in Ancient Greek Philosophy: From Thales to Aristotle. Ed. S. Marc Cohen, Patricia Curd and C.D.C. Reeve. Hackett Publishing Company (Cambridge:1995). = AGP

             

Course Description:  What role do our worldviews, i.e. our understanding of nature/science, the individual, society, the divine etc., take in shaping our moral philosophy or ethics? In fact what is the difference between morality and ethics itself? Furthermore, what is the nature of ethics within a religious framework? How does a particular theology condition a morality? On the flip side, what is the nature of ethics if religious foundations are rejected? In this course, these and other questions will be addressed by turning to the philosophers and thinkers of classical Greece. In this approach we will explore and discover the foundations of Western ethical thinking that all individuals rely on when deciding how one ought to live.

Learning Goals:

1. To pinpoint the fundamental assumptions about reality which classical philosophers have used to support their ethical and moral philosophies.
2. To develop students’ awareness of complex ethical issues imbedded not only in philosophical texts but also in their daily lives.
3. To strengthen critical thinking skills in both the classroom and in writing.
4. To clearly discuss ancient ethical systems for the sake of discovering their relevance to contemporary issues.
5. To learn to advance one’s own position, and to defend this position through argument.

COURSE GRADES

Course grades will be determined by participation, journal assignment, written assignments and 2 essay exams.

 

·        Participation (25%): Determined by class discussion and the class blog at http://worldviewsandethics.blogspot.com. Each day, throughout the semester, sections of the text will be assigned and I expect that all of you will read each text with great joy and enthusiasm. However, just in case you ever feel deterred from such splendid activity, the incentive becomes the threat of having to actively answer questions related to the text in class each day. If you have not done the reading assignment, then your ignorance of the text will become obvious to both me and your fellow classmates. How humiliating, I say! Thus to ensure that you read, participate and avoid horrible embarrassment, in each class students will be given 1 question to answer, helping navigate and focus the assigned reading. Your answer must be at least three sentences long and written well.

o       Example Question: What role do the gods serve in the Iliad and what ethical system may be derived from such a conception of divinity?

o       Example Answer: Unlike contemporary conceptions of divinities where one expects to see a caring or just god, the Greek gods of the Iliad are capricious. Due to such an anthropomorphic characterization, these gods can behave erratically and, as such, individuals may not necessarily know what the reverent and ethical response may be in any and all circumstances. In light of this, an ethics based upon the Greek pantheon may indeed be impossible.

 

o       EVERYONE MUST POST THEIR ANSWERS TO THE CLASS BLOG PRIOR TO EACH CLASS. The most interesting answer will be read in class and with a little bit of luck this should stimulate class discussion. Further reactions or comments on the class discussion or lecture should then carry over to the CLASS BLOG at http://worldviewsandethics.blogspot.com. By the end of the semester the participation grade will be evaluated on the basis of class discussion and participation on the blog. Each student’s overall participation grade will also reflect your ability to form questions and ideas which explicitly deal with the text and issues at hand.

o       You may earn EXTRA PARTICPATION CREDIT by blogging on whatever you find relevant with regards to the material of the class. That is, you are more than welcome to post comments on the movies we screen, the material we read as well as other material you believe “fits” the theme of the class.

·        Take Home Pop Quizzes (15%): There will be three take home pop quizzes in which you answer a single question by writing a 300 word essay (1 page). Since you are allowed to take these quizzes home you will be graded on grammar, punctuation and style as well as quality of insight and argument in your essay. The day that the quiz is announced, one question will be given and your response is due the following class and must be submitted to the CLASS BLOG at http://worldviewsandethics.blogspot.com!

·        Midterm Exam (30%): This exam will be in a short essay format.  We will review prior to the exam and I will provide study questions to aid your preparation. You are required to bring a blue book for the exam. The exam is primarily based on the reading assignments. 

·        Final Exam (30%):  This exam will consist of the same format as the midterm.

Blackboard and CLASS BLOG: Many of the readings are only available on blackboard. Moreover, you are all required to post your daily assignments (your answers to the questions given in and discussed in class) on the CLASS BLOG at http://worldviewsandethics.blogspot.com. In light of this, all of you must familiarize yourself with using Blackboard. To get started on BLACKBOARD go to http://www.loyno.edu/ and click on the Blackboard icon located in the upper right hand of the screen. Your Blackboard username is the same as your Loyola e-mail username. If your Loyola e-mail address is iggy@loyno.edu, your Blackboard username is just iggy (in lowercase letters). If you do not know your Loyola e-mail address, you can find it under the "Personal Info" section of your LORA account. Password: Your password will be 6 characters long, consisting of the first two letters of your first name, lowercase, followed by the last four digits of your SSN. e.g. Mary Smith SSN xxx-xx-3456 the PIN will be ma3456 (lower case) If you have questions about Blackboard, you may: Visit the Learning Commons desk at the Monroe Library or call the 24/7 Blackboard assistance numbers at 1-866-562-7278.

WAC Lab: WAC administers a writing center and electronic classroom in Room 100 Bobet Hall where students can conduct Internet research, draft papers, consult with writing tutors, and revise their work. The writing center makes available a library of print and online resources for writers, including discipline-specific guides to college writing, dictionaries, handbooks, grammar guides, style and citation guides, and other resources. For more information about WAC and WAC services, contact Robert Bell at rcbell@loyno.edu.

Disability Services: A student with a disability that qualifies for accommodations should contact Sarah Mead Smith, Director of Disability Services at 865-2990 (Academic Resource Center, Room 405, Monroe Hall). A student wishing to receive test accommodations (e.g. extended test time) should provide me with an official Accommodation Form from Disability Services in advance of the scheduled test date.

Academic Dishonesty:  Your written work must be your own. I have absolutely no tolerance for any kind of cheating and/or plagiarism and, to be sure, I am constantly fiddling on the internet and checking up on all my students’ work so if you cheat you will be caught. Also to be clear, the Loyola University Bulletin follows Alexander Lindley and defines plagiarism as “the false assumption of authorship: the wrongful act of taking the product of another person’s mind, and presenting it as one’s own” (Plagiarism and Originality). They also turn to the MLA Handbook and similarly define it as  “Plagiarism may take the form of repeating another’s sentences as your own, adopting a particularly apt phrase as your own, paraphrasing someone else’s argument as your own, or even presenting someone else’s line of thinking in the development of a thesis as though it were your own.” The Philosophy Department’s Policy requires that every case of plagiarism receive all three of the following sanctions: 1) A report of the incident to the Department Chair and the Associate Dean; 2)  A zero on the particular assignment; 3)  A failing grade in the course.

Late Assignments:  Late assignments will be accepted, however, your grade will be penalized. If you are unable to hand in an assignment and you know in advance, then you must contact me at least 24 hours prior to the deadline.  I do not accept hardcopies of your papers as I want everyone to send electronic versions. I must receive this email with your papers before the class in which the assignment is due.

Emergency Evacuation Procedures: It is Loyola University’s policy that classes continue during evacuations and other emergencies. In the event of a long evacuation (more than two days), students are required to check their Blackboard accounts within 48hours. Here I will post updates to the class and adapt assignments for online grading.

General Policies: 

1. Your attendance is expected but not mandatory. Keep in mind though that class participation is 1/5 of your grade and every time you are absent you are hurting this grade.
2. The lectures will be based on the assigned readings, therefore you are expected to bring the course material to class, be prepared to take notes, and to answer and ask questions.
3. Laptops in class are to be used for note-taking purposes only. 
4. Turn off your cell phones when in class.
5. Lastly and perhaps most silly of me, I expect that everyone in class come ON TIME, READY (NOT HALF ASLEEP), and dressed appropriately (NO PYJAMAS or BUNNY SLIPPERS). If you cannot do this, then do not come at all!

If you are falling behind in the course, or are earning a below average grade, I strongly encourage you to stop by my office to discuss your work in the class. I will be happy to address any questions concerning the material and I always love helping students. I am good at it. So even if you think it is impossible, just come and we can figure things out.

 

 

Schedule

(I reserve the right to change or adapt this agenda at anytime.)

Week 1:         

M         8/30     Introduction to Course

W        9/1       Homer, Iliad Book I     BB                              

F          9/3       Homer, Iliad Book 24  BB                              

Week 2:         

M         HOLIDAY

W        9/8       Aeschylus, Prometheus Bound

F          9/10     Aeschylus, Prometheus Bound                                               

Week 3:         

M         9/13     Euripides, Bacchae                                                                                          

W        9/15     Euripides, Bacchae

F          9/17     Euripides, Bacchae                                          

Week 4:          From Myth to Worldviews

M         9/20     Xenophanes     AGP: 21-23

W        9/22     Milesians          AGP: 8-14

F          9/24     Heraclitus         AGP: 24-29

Week 5:          The Battle Between the One and The Many, Ethically Construed?

M         9/27     Heraclitus         AGP: 29-34

W        9/29     Parmenides       AGP: 35-41

F          10/1     Parmenides and Zeno   AGP: 57-61

Week 6:          Ethics from Number, Plurality and even Empty Space?     

M         0/4       Pythagoreans    AGP: 15-20

W        10/6     Pluralism           AGP: 42-56

F          10/8     Atomism           AGP: 62-69

Week 7:          Can Virtue Be Taught? Sophistry and Socrates

M         10/11   Sophistry and Plato, Protagoras          AGP: 74-82 and 136-140

W        10/13   Plato, Protagoras        AGP: 140-150

F          10/15   Plato, Protagoras        AGP: 150-162

Week 8:          Beyond Being: Virtue, Justice and the Transcendent Good

M         10/18   No Class                                                                     

W        10/20   Mid-Term Exam                                  

F          10/22   Plato, Republic Book I             AGP: 253-261

Week 9

M         10/25   Plato, Republic Book I             AGP : 261-271

W        10/27   Plato, Republic Book II            AGP: 272-285

F          10/29   Plato, Republic Book VI          AGP: 343-358

                       

Week 10:       

M         11/1     Plato, Republic Book VI          AGP : 358-369

W        11/3     Plato, Republic Book VII         AGP: 370-375

F          11/5     Plato, Republic Book X           AGP: 418-431

Week 11:        Virtue, the Fulfillment of our Nature?         

M         11/8     Aristotle           AGP: 660-673

W        11/10   Aristotle           AGP: 673-695

F          11/12   Aristotle           AGP: 695-719

Week 12:        Hellenism

M         11/15   Epicureanism    BB: 102-125

W        11/17   Epicureanism    BB: 125-149

F          11/19   Epicureanism    BB: 149-158

Week 13:       

M         11/22   Stoicism           BB: 344-368

W        11/24   No Class         

F          11/26   No Class

Week 14:       

M         11/29   Stoicism           BB: 368-386

W        12/1     Stoicism           BB: 386-410

F          12/3     Stoicism           BB: 410-429

Week 15:       

M         12/6     Skepticism        BB: 450-461

W        12/8     Plotinus            BB:

F          12/10   Plotinus            BB:

FINAL EXAM SCHEDULE

12:30-1:30 Class 

Friday, DECEMBER 17 @ 11:30-1:30pm

1:30-2:30 Class

Monday, DECEMBER 13 @ 9:00-11:00am