|
|
political
science 404 Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics
Tuesday evenings, 6-9 pm, Fall term – 2009-10
Office: 11‑28 Tory Phone: (780) - 492‑5390 Office Hours: Mondays, 4-5:30 and
by appointment . |
|
|
Course Outline This course will be a seminar on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, with particular attention to the account of justice, human excellence, practical wisdom, and the importance of certain social goods (love, friendship, political participation) in human well‑being. Aristotle's views on these topics will be contrasted with Plato's very different account in Republic. But the focus will be on Aristotle's work and the issues it raises The course will be
taught as an undergraduate-only seminar. A separate seminar (Pol S 515) will be conducted for
graduate and advanced students.
For this course however, only Pol S 210 is required: students are not
expected to have any further background in Aristotle or political theory
beyond this. The seminar will
have two stages. In effect, we
will work through Aristotle's account twice. The first time, the focus will be on understanding what
Aristotle means. Having done
this, we will work through his account again; this time, aided by some recent
essays, the aim will be to assess Aristotle's account critically. Students will be expected to
participate in both aims. The course will be
conducted as a seminar. Students
will be expected to contribute actively in discussions and the seminar will
be organized around the presentation of student papers. Pre-requisite: Pol
S 210 (or equivalent). Students are not expected to have any background in
political theory other than this.
Two short papers (5‑7 pp) will be required during the term, plus a somewhat longer paper (7-10 pp) at the end of the term. One of the short papers will be distributed and discussed as a seminar paper in the class. There will be considerable choice of topics for all three papers. Students will also be expected (1) to open the discussion on one of the student seminar papers with a brief oral commentary and also (2) to prepare brief digests (1‑2 pp) of the readings each week as an aid to critical reading and mastery of the text. These will be due each week before the class; (though everyone will get 2 weeks off of their own choosing) Essay Requirements All essays should be terse, analytical, and "positional" -- arguing a definite thesis in relation to some aspect of the readings. Students are encouraged to develop their own views in these essays -- eg, by contesting a specific claim made by Aristotle, or by arguing a rival thesis on the topic, or (in certain cases) by writing a critical response to a fellow student in the seminar. The only requirement is that the essay argue a specific and explicitly stated thesis ("In this essay I will argue that... "). Grades* Essays: (3 @ equal weight)** 80% Commentary
10% contributions to the seminar*** 10% ‑‑‑‑‑ 100% * The reading digests ‑‑ which must
be submitted each week before the seminar ‑‑ will be graded only as
satisfactory/ unsatisfactory.
But they are a necessity and marks will be deducted from the final
grade (up to two letter grades) for missing digests (note again that everyone
gets two weeks off, at dates of their own choosing). ** As noted above, one of the essays will be discussed in the
class as a seminar paper. Students will be asked to make copies of their
seminar papers available one or two days in advance, by some date/time and in
a format agreed by members of the class. It is an essential course requirement that seminar
papers be available by the agreed time -- failure to do so will result in an
automatic zero. *** Seminar contributions will
ordinarily be evaluated by the quality of oral contributions,
including questions. Alternative
forms of seminar contribution are possible, and students who are
uncomfortable with speaking in the seminar are invited to explore these with
me. xts Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics (Ross
translation: Oxford University Press). All participants are asked to use this even if they
already have some other edition. Jonathan
Barnes, Aristotle: A Very Short Introduction Course pack: Supplementary Readings for Pol S
406 TOPICS
& READINGS
All
readings in this section are required (suggestions for further readings are
listed in a separate section below).
ACourse pack@
indicates that the work is in the coursepack . Other readings (apart from
Barnes and Aristotle) will be distributed to participants. Sept 8 – Introduction (2 hr working
session) Aristotle,
Nicomachean Ethics, Book 1 (chs 1-2) copies will be distributed . Sept
15– The
Nature of Ethics: Happiness, Excellence & the Good Life Aristotle,
Nicomachean Ethics, Book 1. (Digest). Barnes: Aristotle,
A Very Short Introduction (chs 1-13) Pp 613-27 of John
Wallach, “Contemporary Aristotelianism”, Political Theory 20:4, 1992 seminar
paper: Adam Ollenberger commentary Heather Liddell Sept
22 – Virtue,
Character, & The Mean Aristotle,
Nicomachean Ethics, Book 2 Everson,
APsychology@ (course
pack) Barnes:
Aristotle, A Very Short Introduction (finish) seminar paper: Andrea
Mackowetzky commentary: Stephanie Frazer Sept
29 – Responsibility / The Virtues Aristotle,
Nicomachean Ethics, Books 3-4
(Digest Book 3 with a one paragraph summary of Book 4.) seminar paper: Joseph
Milos & Gillian Wasney commentary: Paul Hillier & Patricia Payne Oct 6
– Justice Aristotle,
Nicomachean Ethics, Book 5. seminar paper: Graeme
Alm
commentary: Gillian Wasney Oct 13 – Practical
Wisdom / The Critique of
Socrates [K Essay
#1 due Fri, Oct 16] Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book 6 and Book 7 (chs 1-10). (Digest both) Note: The rest of Book 7 (chs 11-14) will be considered with Book 10 David
Bostock, “Appendix: Note on the Practical Syllogism” (course pack) Purshouse, “Neoptolemus’s Soul”, British Journal for the History of Philosophy 14:2 2006 (nb: look up ‘Neoptolemus’ on Wikipedia) Recommended: C.D.C. Reeve,
“Aristotle on the Virtues of Thought”
(course pack) seminar papers: Erin Asselin & Daniel Mosher commentary: Anthony Buchanan & Joseph Milos Oct 20 – Friendship Aristotle,
Nicomachean Ethics, Books 8‑9
(Digest both) John
Cooper, Aristotle on the Forms
of Friendship”, The Review of Metaphysics 30:4 (1977). seminar paper: Christiaan
Conradie & Paul Hillier commentary: Erin Asselin & Adam Ollenberger Oct 27 – Happiness,
Pleasure & The Best Life Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book 7
(chs 11-14) and Book 10.
(Digest both) Annas,
“Happiness as Achievement”, Daedalus
(Spring 2004). seminar paper: Anthony
Buchanan commentary: Graeme Alm Note:
Topics and readings for the remainder of the course are provisional and may
be changed to take up issues of particular interest. Please bring any interests to my
attention. Nov
3 – Overview of
Aristotelean Ethics: Character & Virtue Burnyeat,
AAristotle
on Learning to be Good@ (course
pack) Vasilou, “The Role of Good Upbringing in Aristotle’s Ethics”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 56:4 1996 Vernezze,
“Moderation or the Middle Way”: Two Approaches to Anger”, Philosophy East and
West 58:1 (2008) Review: Nicomachean Ethics, Books 2-5 (Bk 1
will be reviewed later, with Bk 10.) seminar paper: Salvo
Cucchiara commentary: Christiaan Conradie Nov 10 No Class: Mid
Term Break
Nov 17 – Friendship [K Essay
#2 due Fri, Nov 20] Sherman, “Aristotle on Friendship and the Shared Life”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 47:4 1987 Cooper, AFriendship
and the Good in Aristotle@, The
Philosophical Review 86:3 (1977), 290-315 Nussbaum,
AThe Vulnerability of The Good Human
Life@: the
first part (pp 343-54)
(course pack) Review: Nicomachean Ethics, Books
8-9. seminar paper: Patricia
Payne commentary: Daniel Mosher Nov
24 – Pleasure,
Happiness and Contemplation pp 292-98 of Annas, AAristotle on Pleasure and Goodness@ (course pack) (beginning on p 292 at AFinally, I would like to make a few comments Y@ Wilkes, AThe Good Man and the Good for Man in Aristotle=s Ethics@, Mind 87 (1978),
553-571 Nagel, AAristotle
on Eudaimionia@,
Phronesis 17 (1972), 252-59 Review:
Nicomachean Ethics, Books
1, 6 (12-13), and10 (ch
6-8) seminar paper: Heather
Liddell commentary: Salvo Cucchiara Dec
1 -- The Best Life The readings (and topic) for this session
may be changed, depending on interests of students in the seminar. Rorty,
AThe Place of Contemplation in
Aristotle=s
Nicomachean Ethics@,
Mind 87 (1978), 343-358 Lawrence,
“Aristotle and The Ideal Life”, Philosophical Review 102:1 1993 (e-journal) seminar paper: Stephanie
Frazer commentary: Andrea Mackowetzky Essay # 3 Due: Mon, Dec
14th. Topics if You’re
Stuck
These topics aren’t particularly recommended. In
fact, they aren’t very good – any topic you make up will be better than any
of these. But if you’re stuck for
a topic, these might help you get going .... The Nature of Ethics: Happiness, Excellence &
the Good Life 1.
Aristotle claims: “you cannot quite regard a man as happy if he is
very ugly to look at or of humble origin ...”? 2. Is
Aristotle right that good persons will be happy -- no matter what tragedy
befalls them or those for whom
they care? (Imagine a parent
whose child is killed ... if the parent was unhappy would this indicate that
something was wrong with him/her (or that s/he was not a good person)? Virtue, Character, & the Mean 1. Test
what Aristotle says about responsibility by considering a case of death
resulting from drunk driving: what degree of punishment (blame) would he
consider appropriate, and would he be right? 2. In the case of domestic violence (or
a death resulting from drunk driving), what should be the main concern of the
judicial system in determining guilt and punishment: the act, or the effects
of the act, or the intent and mental state of the individual doing it? The Virtues
1. Do
you agree with Aristotle’s list of the virtues? For example, why isn’t compassion (or empathy or
sensitivity) on the list?
Does he understand courage the right way? 2. If
magnificence is a virtue, doesn't this mean that an individual can be a
better person and have a better life if they are wealthy than if they are
poor? Practical Wisdom / Weakness of the Will 1.
Which is worse: cowardice, or a violent temper? 2.
Neoptolemus told a lie in order to bring the Trojan war to an
end. Surely it was justified by
the good consequences it brought about.
But Aristotle suggests (twice) that it was wrong. Why? Friendship In Plato's Republic Polemarchos defines
"justice" as "giving benefits to friends and harms to
enemies". Many philosophers
today reject this view on the grounds that one should never consider whether
another person is a friend or enemy in deciding how to treat them. But wouldn't Aristotle say that the
best person does exactly this, and isn't he right? Happiness, Pleasure & the Best Life Who has the best (or happiest) life: the person who
is (a) morally good, (b) actively involved in the community, or (c) a
scholar. |
||
|
|
||
|
|