One question from economics is: “What causes the prices of precious metals to increase?” A question from astronomy is: “How do planets form?” To answer these perfectly respectable questions, economists and astronomers conduct experiments, gather data, and make observations about the world. Philosophers, on the other hand, ask questions such as: “Do we have free will?” “Does God exist?” “What makes an action morally good?” Do we know anything about the world around us at all?” “Are the mind and the brain the same thing?” We will try to answer these philosophical questions in this course, but our answers will not rest on observational data as they do for economists and astronomers. Instead, we will rely on our powers of critical reasoning, imagination, and on the arguments of some of the smartest people ever to have lived. We will also highlight some philosophical themes in Hollywood movies, in particular The Matrix and Vanilla Sky.

Perry, Bratman, and Fischer, Introduction to Philosophy: Classical and Contemporary Readings, 4th Edition (Oxford, 2007) ISBN-13: 9780195169249

T.B.A.

This course will examine the philosophy of the seventeenth-century rationalist Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716). We will concentrate on understanding his metaphysical system, including his views on truth, necessity and possibility, substance, causation and freedom. We will focus primarily on reading Leibniz's original texts rather than commentaries. Our aim will be to understand his theories, to appreciate their strengths and track down their weaknesses, and to consider how some of his ideas played out (and continue to play out) in later philosophical epochs.

Note: Students should appreciate that Leibniz is one of the more difficult of early modern philosophers. It is recommended (though not required) that students have some background in other early modern philosophers such as Descartes, Spinoza, Locke, or Kant at an upper division level before approaching Leibniz.

We will study techniques for determining whether or not an argument is valid ­– i.e., whether or not it is necessarily truth preserving.  Modern symbolic logic has discovered simple but powerful methods for doing this based on the procedure of formalizing the argument by translating it into a precise symbolic language and then evaluating the resulting symbolic argument.  These techniques will enhance the clarity and rigor of your reasoning, although they will not make you “quicker” – indeed, they will make you slower (but more accurate).

Our task will be made easier by the use of a text and accompanying computer program that will take us step by step through the procedures.  If you do not have access to a personal computer, you may use one supplied by the university in the computer lab.  No knowledge of any sort of mathematics is required.  What we will be doing is very much easier than elementary mathematics and those with “math anxiety” need not be afraid to take this course.

Grading: attendance (1/8), homework (2/8), midterm (2/8), final (3/8)

Our topic will be Intension and Extension in Logic.  Throughout much of the history of logic, beginning at least with the work of Leibniz, there has been a distinction between the extensional and the intensional aspects of logical theory.  We will study the origins of this distinction and the modern debate about its proper role in logic.  This is essentially a question about the nature and scope of logic and hence is properly considered in the philosophy of logic.  In the early to mid-Twentieth Century intensional notions (e.g. necessity and possibility) were disparaged in some quarters.  For example, W. V. Quine held that modal logic rests on a confusion between object- language and meta-language.  After a long dormant period, modal logic was revived by C.I. Lewis and C.H. Langford and made respectable (to most) by the work of Rudolf Carnap and Saul Kripke.  Intensional logic in a more general sense is still struggling to find a proper basis.  We rapidly survey the history of the debate and then focus on contemporary arguments concerning, discussions of, and attempted constructions of general intensional logic.

Grading:  Students will be required to make one seminar presentation on one of the papers studied in this course.  In addition, a term paper of not more than 20 pp. will be required.  The topic must arise in connection with the central theme of the seminar and is to be approved by the instructor.