Instructor: Rick Grush
Course Number: 2421.
NOTE TO SEMINAR PARTICIPANTS: Here are links to my notes to Ch.s 4 and 5 of Evans' Varieties of Reference. Chapter 4 -- Chapter 5.
[Notice: this course description is currently under construction, and will be updated as more information becomes available.]
Description:
In this seminar we will investigate the structure of our concept of self, and the closely related topic of the nature of self-reference in thought and language. Topics might include: the amenability of 'I' thoughts to a broadly Fregean semantic theory; the role of spatial representation in the self-conception; the relation between mastery of the use of linguistic expressions, such as first (and second and third) person pronouns, and the ability to think indexically about oneself; the role of memory and our notion of causality in establishing our self-conception. We may, depending on student interest, also look at some empirical literature, especially from developmental psychology, which aims to address some of these topics. This empirical literature will be assessed both for the degree to which it sheds light on the philosophical problems, as well as the degree to which it fails to do so, and why.
Readings:
There will be four books required for the course:
Cassam, Quassim, ed. (1994) Self-knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Evans, Gareth (1982) The Varieties of Reference. Clarendon Press. Oxford.
Bermudez, Jose (1997) The paradox of self-consciousness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Campbell, John (1994) Past, Space, and Self. MIT Press. Cambridge: MA.
The exact syllabus for the course is variable, depending on student and instructor interest as we proceed. Nonetheless, it is often helpful to have a working plan on the table, and so here it is: The Cassam volume contains a number of the classic articles in self-reference and self-knowledge over the past 30 years, and we will start with articles from it. From there, we will turn to Evans' The Varieties of Reference, especially chapters 6 and 7. Following that, we will tackle all or parts of the Bermudez and/or the Campbell books. Or, we might decide to persue some other philosophical articles, or possibly some empirical literature.
One possible form for the schedule for the first 10 weeks is the following (though depending on student and instructor interest, everything after the first few weeks is really up for grabs):
Week 01: Shoemaker 'Self-reference and self-awareness' (in Cassam) [Notes by Rick Grush]
Week 02: Strawson 'Sounds' (Chapter Two of
Individuals)
- Supplementary reading: 'Bodies' (Chapter One of Individuals)
Week 03: Evans 'Things without the mind' (from
The Collected Papers of Gareth Evans)
- Supplementary reading: Strawson 'Reply to Evans'
Week 04: Shoemaker 'Introspection and the self'
(in Cassam)
- Supplementary reading: Armstrong 'Introspection' (in Cassam)
Week 05: Anscombe 'The first person' (in Cassam)
Week 06: Perry 'The problem of the essential
indexical' (in Cassam)
- Supplementary reading: Perry 'Frege on Demonstratives'
Week 07: Evans 'Demonstrative Identification'
(chapter 6 of VR)
- Supplementary reading: Evans 'Understanding Demonstratives'
Week 08: Evans 'Demonstrative Identification' (chapter 6 of VR)
Week 09: Evans 'Self-Identification' (chapter 7 of VR)
Week 10: Evans 'Self-Identification' (chapter 7 of VR)
Mechanics:
I believe that the ability to produce good philosophy starts with an ability and willingness to read good philosophical texts in a careful manner. Accordingly, each session of the seminar will be focused on a discussion of at most one book chapter or article, and often we will spend more than one session on a single piece. This will work in the following way.
Each week there will be a target piece, and often one supplementary piece which is closely related to the target piece. Each seminar participant will be required to read the target piece, and email to me a 3 - 5 page summary of the piece, which describes its main argumentative structure. I should receive these summaries no later than 2 days (48 hours) prior to the seminar meeting time. [This does not include the first Shoemaker article which we will discuss on the first class meeting. For the first meeting, I will present that paper and discuss the course organization.] This will ensure that the entire class has read the material, and this helps ensure that our meeting time will be quality time.
In addition to the target piece, there will often be one supplementary piece. Only one member of the seminar will be required to read this (though I suggest that all participants do), and that person will email a 3 - 5 page summary of that article to the entire group, again, not later than 2 days before the meeting time. This duty will be handed out on a rotating basis, with individual preference playing a main role in establishing the order of rotation. (Note that if the total number of participants in the seminar is small, then this requirement will be dropped, since this duty would rotate back to the same person fairly frequently and create too much of a workload.)
In addition to the above, I will maintain an email discussion list for the seminar. Everyone taking the seminar for credit is required to participate in the email discussion, to the minimum tune of producing 2 pages of discussion material per week, and reading all the discussion that gets posted to the group. The discussion material can take many forms: questions about the week's reading(s), answers to someone else's questions, even running arguments or ideas (which might eventually find their way into a final paper) by the group.
All of this may seem like a lot of work, but in reality it is not. The summaries require very little time in addition to what is required for carefully reading an article or book chapter in the first place, and you will quickly find that the email discussion group is not a chore, but rather a very useful tool for you to get feedback on your ideas. If you haven't already, you will find the medium of email to be a very nice complement to verbal discussion, as it will give you more time to make considered responses to questions, and to formulate your ideas before committing them to group scrutiny. In many cases, you will find that your email contributions and the feedback you get will form the backbone of your final paper.
Also, each participant will be required to lead the discussion at least one week, maybe more, depending on how many participants we have.
Finally, a final paper of 15 - 20 pages is required, and is due on December 16th, one week after the last class meeting. Students should give me a 1 page outline of their paper topic by November 16. This can be very rough. I just want to make sure that everyone has settled on an appropriate and workable topic. I will return these 1 page summaries, with any comments and suggestions I have, on November 18. Students are welcome to turn in a draft of the paper for comments and feedback, but this is not required.
In summary, all of the following is required. All (14) summaries, the final paper, the email discussion, leading the discussion of one or more class sessions, and participating in the verbal discussion. The final grade is, alas, entirely subjective (there -- the cat's out of the bag...), as it will be in any seminar. In order to get a high grade, you need to convince me, over the course of the semester, and through your final paper, that you have grappled with the readings in an appropriately careful and critical way, and that you are able to articulate and defend some of your own thoughts on the topic.