Syllabus: Course Objectives
(click here to download full PDF version)
PHIL 012
Ethics Bowl: Case–based Reasoning in Ethics
Winter 2007
Meeting Times: TBA
Instructor: Julia Pedroni
Harper House, Room 6 (annex)
Phone: 597-4584<
email: Julia.A.Pedroni@williams.edu
Much of contemporary writing and debate in philosophical ethics focuses on what is commonly regarded as ethical theory and meta–ethics, which have as their focus systematic approaches to the elaboration and justification of general ethical frameworks and analysis of the meaning of ethical concepts, etc. Interesting as this subject matter is, it can also be frustrating and incomplete as an inquiry into the whole of moral life and reasoning: theoretical approaches rarely are well suited to generating satisfactory resolutions to the moral problems people face in everyday living. Moreover, initial inquiries that conceive of different moral theories as competing, incompatible systems can leave one with the sense that there is no wholly adequate theoretical foundation for ethics and thus that one must choose arbitrarily from among the contenders or give up on the enterprise altogether.
In this course, we'll set aside – at least in part – questions of theoretical ethics and focus on a different domain of philosophical ethics, namely, practical ethics (also sometimes called "applied" ethics or "problematic" ethics), which addresses the task of finding morally acceptable or morally good resolutions to specific problems that people face, either individually or collectively.
Our primary goal in this course, then, is for students to develop and refine the capacity for reasoning and argumentation in practical ethics. To this end, we'll begin with a brief introduction to theory and methodology within practical ethics, and follow this up with an in–depth analysis and intensive discussion of some 15 or so cases used in this year's Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl or Northeast Regional Ethics Bowl. Our objective is to reach a consensus position on each case, to be able to articulate and justify that position, and to defend it against potential objections. In addition, students will write a medium–length (7–10 page) case analysis on one of the cases we discuss together.
The second goal for the course is conditional: ∗if∗ Williams College qualifies for a spot in the national Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl competition, this course should provide an opportunity for those students who are also team members to prepare for that competition. Bear in mind, however, that the course is open to those not on the team, and it is not required for those who are on the team.
Our final goal for the course is both more personal in nature and more general: to foster a habit of reflecting in constructive ways on our conduct, beliefs and values, and to develop our moral imagination. The philosophical study of ethics cannot be accomplished in an entirely detached and abstract manner. It requires introspection, reflection on our life experiences, and dialogue with persons of different viewpoints.
Texts
None required. I will distribute a few handouts, as needed, but the bulk of our work will be from the set of cases to be distributed by the Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl national committee.
If you would like to do some background work on philosophical argumentation, Anthony Weston's, A Rulebook for Arguments, is a good resource. I'll leave a copy out in the Harper House classroom for you to read at your convenience. In addition, I am more than happy to provide additional readings in the theory and methodology of practical ethics, as well as resources for exploring ethical theory.
Accessibility
Please contact me as soon as possible if you have a disability, such as a hearing, speech, visual, motor, and/or learning disability, so that we can make any appropriate arrangements. Also, if you have any emergency medical information of which I should be aware, or if special arrangements need to be made in the event the building must be evacuated, please let me know.