Sunday, February 28, 2016

Unfortunately, I will not be able to hold my usual office hours this week. I will hold office hours on Wednesday from 8-9:30 and from 12-1:15. Please contact me if you need to see me outside of class and absolutely can't make those times. I will try to figure something out.

Friday, February 26, 2016

Since we didn't get to Schwitzgebel's article at all yesterday, and since you are all working on your first analyses, due Sunday, I won't make the second set of questions due until Thursday. I'll put them up sometime this weekend. 

This weekend I'll post on your Google Doc where everyone is with class participation points. Review the syllabus to see how these work. Your ideal score is a 0, with + values being exceptional.

When you post your analysis, be sure to indicate the time and date of posting at the bottom. Anything past the due date has to be written in blue.

Friday, February 19, 2016

The remaining study questions for Papineau's article have been posted.

Wednesday, February 17, 2016

Tomorrow we'll finish up Ross' article and move on to Papineau's. (I'll only hold people accountable for the first 6 questions of the latter.)

Your first analysis assignment will be this article by Stephen Law. It is a response to Alvin Plantinga's famous evolutionary argument against naturalism. There are many, many formulations, critiques and defenses of this argument easily available, so you should definitely do some background reading and use them in support of your essay where appropriate.

If you are generally friendly to naturalism, this assignment is going to put you in the position of thinking very critically about it. Please do not talk to me about how you have read Stephen Law's paper several times and can't find anything to critique because you agree with him. The job of a philosopher is to learn to develop a critical stance on his or her own beliefs. (If you are suspicious of naturalism, your job may be easier.)

Also, carefully review my analysis instructions on the schedule page. My expectations of the introduction have changed somewhat since last semester (note that I haven't made a new video which reflect these changes, so it is reflected in the document only at this point.) If you haven't watched the video, watch it, and then watch it again. This is a class where the highest standards of writing and argumentation are in effect from the very beginning. Any fundamental violations on the structure, form, or writing expectations will result in a failing or near-failing grade.  E-mail me or talk to if you have any uncertainty about these requirements.

Friday, February 12, 2016

Tuesday we'll start on "Will scientific philosophy still be philosophy?" I'll have the first set of study questions up by this afternoon.  Sorry, make that tomorrow morning. The link goes to an page. You might need to create an account to get it.

Your first analysis is due on the 28th. I'll assign the article by midweek next week.

As I noted in class, please make every effort to get to class on time. If you come in after we've started, you can assume you've already been asked a question and have lost a point. You lose two points for every absence.

Friday, February 5, 2016

Study questions for the first half of "Naturalism and the a priori" are posted. I'll have questions for the second half posted by Sunday.

Tuesday, February 2, 2016

As noted in class today, we'll try to finish up the Naturalism and common sense article on Thursday. I'll post study questions over "Naturalism and the a priori" by Friday.

I strongly recommend reading the articles before looking at the study questions, then reviewing with an eye to answering the questions. Reading with my questions in mind robs you of the pleasure of deciding what you think is interesting in the article.