Philosophy 1: Introduction to Philosophy
(Officially: The Nature of Philosophy)

Spring Quarter 2004. UCSD.
Time: M 5:00-7:50pm
Room: U413-2
Instructor: Rick Grush (rick$mind.ucsd.edu -- http://mind.ucsd.edu)
Office Hours: M 11:30 - 1:30. 7038 HSS.
Office Phone: 822-4440 (note that email is a much more reliable way to contact me)

[ Schedule ]
[ Short Description ]
[ Grades ]
[ Exam Statistics ]
[ Score Sheets ]
[ Email list ]
[ ]

Readings
All readings and study questions for the first third of the course are collected in a single large (430K) pdf file here.
Readings for the second third of the course are colelcted in a single pdf file (244k) here.
All readings for the final third of the course are collected in a single pdf file (160K) here.
The Parfit reading is here.

Schedule:

Session 01 (03.29): Introduction to course, proofs for existence of God, and the argument from Design.

Readings
Aquinas: 'Five Ways' from Summa Theologica
Paley: Natural Theology: Chapters 1 and 2
Hume: Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Parts 1-8
Swinburne: The Argument from Design

Session 02 (04.05): Argument from Design (Continued) & Cosmological argument

Quiz #1 (on all readings listed under Session 01 & 02)
Readings
Aquinas: 'Five Ways' from Summa Theologica
Hume: Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Part IX

Session 03 (04.12): Cosmological Argument & Ontological Argument

Quiz #2 (on all readings listed under Session 03) 
Readings
Taylor: 'A Critique of the Cosmological Argument'
Edwards: 'The Cosmological Argument: A Defense'
Anselm: Proslogion (with reply from Guanilo)
Plantinga: The Ontological Argument

Session 04 (04.19): Exam I & Intro to Biomedical ethics.

Readings
Grush: Introduction to some basic ethical orientations [here]

Session 05 (04.26): Topic TBA

Quiz #3 (on all readings listed under Sessions 04 and 05)
Readings
Tobriner (majority opinion). Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California
Clark (dissenting). Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California
Moss and Siegler: Should alcoholics compete equally for liver transplantation?
Cohen and Benjamin: Alcoholics and liver transplantation

Session 06 (05.03): Topic TBA

Quiz #4 (on all readings listed under Session 06)
Readings
The Nurmeberg Code
The Tuskegee Syphilis Study
London: Children and minimal risk research: The Kennedy-Krieger lead paint study
Andersen: Genetics and human maleability.
Glover: Questions abut some uses of genetic engineering.

Session 07 (05.10): Exam II & Intro to Personal Identity

Readings:
Descartes, Rene: Meditations on First Philosophy, Meditations 1 and 2
Locke, John: Essay Concerning Human Understanding: Book II, Chapter 17

Session 08 (05.17):

Quiz #5 (on all readings listed under Sessions 07 and 08)
Readings:
Dennett, Daniel: Where am I?
Dennett, Daniel: The self as a center of narrative gravity.

Session 09 (05.24):

Quiz #6 (on all readings listed under Session 09)
Readings:
Williams, Bernard: The self and the future.
Parfit, Derek: Personal Identity.

Final Exam: Friday June 11, 7pm-10pm

Short Description:

Content.

This course will introduce students to some of the central methods and concerns of philosophy through three topics, each of which will occupy us for about a third of the quarter. First, we will look at a central topic of philosophy of religion: attempted proofs for (and against) the existence of God. Next, we will look at topics in biomedical ethics, such as genetic engineering, euthanasia, and health care-related resources. The final third will be concerned with personal identity -- that is, what exactly is it that makes you you. Each of these will be discussed in a bit more detail below.

The existence of God. Though they are no longer at the center of philosophical concerns, attempted proofs for the existence of God have been discussed by philosophers a least since Anselm (1033-1109), and through the 18th Century. And even now they remain a topic of interest. We will look at three 'proofs' for God's existence, and one 'proof' against. The cosmological argument attempts to establish that there must be some being which caused the physical universe to exist, this being itself being an uncaused cause. The teleological argument or argument from design argues that order in the universe can only be explained on the assumption of an intelligent designer. And the ontological argument attempts to prove that a supremely perfect being must exist, since the assumption that such a being does not exists leads to a contradiction. We will examine each of these arguments in some detail.

Topics in Biomedical Ethics. Biomedical ethics is a broad field concerned with ethical issues raised by health care and medical science. Of the many dozens of topics, we will explore only two. First, the issue of genetic engineering. Proponents see the technology as a promising way to prevent many maladies and enhance human characteristics, while opponents fear that it could widen social inequalities, create different 'classes' of people, and perhaps open the door for horrific abuses or accidents. The second topic will concern the distribution of medical resources. On one side, many have argued that tying health-care resources to financial concerns is unacceptably unfair, resulting in situations where, for instance, poor regions of the world simply cannot afford certain kinds of medications. On the other hand, the development of new treatments and drugs is a very expensive and risky business that would certainly no longer be persued by many groups if they could not make money or at least finance their own research. [I may substitute euthanasia for resource allocation.]

Personal Identity. It is not uncommon for people to feel as though they are not the same person they were in their childhood, or that someone is 'not herself' when under the influence of drugs, alcohol, or even a neurological disorder. Such loose metaphors aside, it is often important to answer questions such as 'Are A and B the same person?', and this is what personal identity is about. In legal contexts it may be important to know if a will made out by someone in 1990 should be superceded by the wishes of a patient in a hospital bed who is suffering from severe dementia -- is that the same person, who has authority to change the will, or is this a different person in some legally significant sense? Science fiction presents us with many cases, some of which my one day be science fact, where personal identity is an issue. Do the transporters on Star Trek move a person from one location to another, or do they destroy a person at the first location and create a duplicate, (with the same memories, of course) at the new location? Would it be possible to become immortal by having the synapses in your brain replaced by (or moved to) silicon relays in an undying machine, or would this simply result in your death and the creation of a new being that was under the delusion that it had once been implemented in a biological brain?

 

Structure.

There is one lecture per week. Grades will be based on two in-class midterm exams and one in-class final exam, and intermittent multiple-choice quizzes on the readings.

Text and other materials.

All readings for this course will be available from this website for free. There will be a password-accessed section of this site that will have all readings when the class begins.

 

Grades:

Grades will be based on a number of factors:

1. Quizzes. There will be 6 in-class quizzes worth 10-20 points each, for a total of 100 points.

2. There will be three exams, each of which will have a multiple choice section worth 30 points, and two essay questions worth 35 points each, for a total of 100 points per exam.

Thus the total points possible for the course will be 400.

Essay Questions for Exam 3.

1. Explain the Cartesian view of personal identity. Your explanation should include discussion of Descartes’ wax example, the distinction between substances and properties, and Descartes’ take on how each of us knows that we are, essentially a thinking thing. What would Descartes say about the identity (or lack thereof) of Leonard Shelby (main character of Memento) over time after his accident? What would he say about the identity between clones (with the syncorded memories) and the persons they are clones of, and whose (q-)memories they have?

2. In the year 1684, May 31, at 5pm Pacific time, a certain collection of atoms (supposing all the atoms in the universe are numbered, this collection might contain atom number 1, atom number 2,134, atom number 234,563, etc.) makes up John Locke's body. At this time, John Locke also has a certain collection of memories: he remembers entering Westminster School in 1646, going to Oxford in 1652, etc. As a matter of striking coincidence, exactly 320 years later, all the same atoms make up the body of your philosophy professor Rick Grush (the same set of atoms). Also, it turns out that meddling neurosurgeons have messed with Rick's hippocampus in such a way as to erase all his memories and install memories of entering Westminster School in 1646, going to Oxford in 1652, etc. Now , how would Locke's theory handle the following questions: Are Locke's body on 06.31.1684, and Grush's body on 06.31.2004 the same mass? Are Locke on 06.31.1684 and Grush on 06.31.2004 the same primate (homo sapiens)? Are Locke on 06.31.1684 and Grush on 06.31.2004 the same person? Be sure you explain WHY Locke's theory provides the answers you say it does.

3. One plausible interpretation of Dennett’s article 'Where am I?' is that none of the things that people usually think are important for personal identity really are important. The two things people usually fixate on are the body and the brain. Dennett tries to argue that neither of these things is needed for personal identity. What is Dennett’s argument for the claim that the body is not needed for personal identity through time? The case of the brain is more difficult. How does Dennett try to show that even the brain can be irrelevant for personal identity? Making use of his article "The self as a center of narrative gravity" explain what, according to Dennett, is important for personal identity?

4. Williams’ article contains two different cases: the first which can be described as a machine that allows people to change bodies; and a second involving an evil tyrant in whose power you are, and who is telling you about bad things he will do to you soon. Describe both of these examples, and the intuitions that Williams thinks each of them supports. Williams points out that there is a difference between these cases, but that it doesn’t seem to be a significant difference. Briefly state what this difference is and why Williams thinks it doesn’t matter. After answering all of this, in a brief final paragraph explain what you would choose if presented with the options given in the ‘body switching’ example. That is, you and the person you hate most (call this person X) will be put into the machine Williams describes in [1]-[12]. Afterwards, one of the resulting people will be beaten with a sock full of nickels, and the other one will receive millions of dollars and a year’s supply of Turtle Wax. And which person gets which is completely up to you right now. Do you choose i) the person in what is currently your body (the you-body-person) gets the goods, and the person in what is currently X’s body (the X-body-person) gets treated badly; or ii) vice versa? Why?

5. Parfit claims that the ‘problem’ of personal identity is not that there is such a thing as personal identity and we haven’t figured out yet what it is, but is rather that we think in terms of personal identity at all. This involves trying to show that i) identity cannot work in some cases; and ii) everything we really care about can be captured in terms other than identity. His argument for (i) hinges on the example of a person who undergoes fission and becomes two people. Why does Parfit think that the notion of identity cannot handle this case? His argument for (ii) is complex. As clearly as you can, describe Parfit's position on the kinds of (legitimate) relations that can hold among 'selves', and the notions he develops for explaining these relations (variations of memory and intention; psychological continuity; psychological connectedness; ancestors; future selves; past selves; etc.). What is Parfit’s analysis of why we have been fooled into thinking of these issues in terms of identity?

6. Leonard Shelby (main character of Memento) certainly had no doubts about 'his' personal identity over time: he says things like "I can't remember what I did five minutes ago," which implies that he takes himself, when he utters this sentence, to be the same person whose activities he cannot remember. Consider three different episodes: a) Leonard-body-person's argument with his wife about her book (before the accident); b) Leonard-body-person's writing Teddy's license plate number on the back of the photo; and c) Leonard-body-person's shooting of Teddy. What would each of Descartes, Locke, Dennett, and Parfit say about the identity of the three people involved in (a), (b) and (c)? That is, write a paragraph or two explaining what Descartes would say about the identity or lack thereof of the Leonard-body-person(s) involved in (a), (b), and (c) (are they all identical? some of them identical but not others? Why?). Then do the same for Locke, Dennett and Parfit. Be sure to explain why each author would give the answer you think they would give. Keep in mind that the Leonard-body-person(s) do two interesting things: develop habits through routine, and keep notes and photographs. Could these facts have any impact on the answers that any of these authors (Descartes, Locke, et al.) provide? How?

Exam Statistics:

TBA

Score Sheets

Score sheets are here. They are listed by a coded version of your student ID in order to protect privacy, as per University regulations. In order to dtermine what your coded ID number is, do the following. Take your student ID number. This will be something like a letter followed by 8 digits, like "A01234567". Remove the letter and the first digit, and you're left with a string of 7 digits, like "1234567". Take the first four digits, and treat this as a 4 digit number (something between 0000 and 9999); and take the last four digits and treat this like another 4-digit number. In the exxample above, they would be "1234" and "4567". Add these two numbers together, for example: 1234 + 4567 = 5801. If the number you get is 5 digits, remove the first digit to make it 4 digits long; if it is 4, then keep it at 4 digits. This is your coded ID number. To see another example: If your student ID is "A05367921", you drop the first letter and number: "5367921"; then take the first 4 digits: "5367"; and the last 4 digits "7921"; add them together: 5367+7921=13288. If the result is 5 digits, remove the first digit: "3288".

Email List:

IMPORTANT: All of the email addresses on this page have been altered to keep them from being spammed. Replace the dollar sign with an ampersand '@' to get the real email address in all cases. I.e. if the address listed is joe$hotmail.com this really means joe@hotmail.com.

Email List: There is an email distribution list for this course. It is required that you subscribe to this list. Do it IMMEDIATELY. You can always unsubscribe later if you drop the course. The purpose of the list is to allow me to distribute information regarding due dates for assignments, passwords for the readings, changes of schedule, etc. Some of this information is crucial, and some of it will be distributed early on. To subscribe, you simply need to send a message to the following address:

phil1-sub$mind.ucsd.edu

(the message must be sent from the account that you want to be subscribed) NOTE that the address to which you send an email in order to subscribe is NOT the same as the address of the list to which you will be subscribed. Notice that the subscription address has a 'sub' in it.

The subject line and any content in the message are ignored. You only need to send the message to the appropriate address from the account that you want to be subscribed.

How to do well in this course:

1. Be sure to read the assigned material before class. This will help to ensure that our class time is quality time, and not wasted with me and some of the students reiterating the material to those who haven't read it. Reading the material before class will also help you get some points on the quizzes, and that is a good thing.

2. Use the study questions to help you focus on the important topics in the readings, and also to help you determine if there is some topic you don't understand. Try to get to the point where you would feel comfortable answering all the study questions before class meets. But if there are a few that you are still finding difficult, don't panic.

3. Bring specific questions with you to lecture. Even if there are aspects of the readings or study questions you didn't fully grasp, the fact that you tried should help you to narrow down what it is that you don't get.

4. See me in office hours, or email me, if there are still questions you are unclear about. That's what office hours are for. Don't be shy.

5. After class, re-read the material for the session, paying special attention to the questions that you had before. Hopefully the material will make much more sense to you now.

6. Manage your time well. Many students are lazy, and wait until a few days before exams to start studying. That is bad time management. The same number of hours devoted to the material BEFORE lectures can lead to a much more efficient use of your time, better understanding, and higher grades.