EARLY MODERN PHILOSOPHY

Autumn 1998

J. Hernandez Cruz

 

The early modern period in Western philosophy (roughly 1600-1800) is the source of many of our most powerful and seductive intellectual commitments. While we may disagree with philosophers of this period, the terms of philosophical inquiry and our standards of rational argumentation are in part derived from the work of Descartes, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, Hume and Kant. For this reason, we will pursue a rigorous and sustained introduction to this episode of human intellectual history. We will cover topics in Metaphysics, Epistemology and Philosophy of Mind.

This course is not appropriate for students who have not taken any philosophy before. It is intended primarily for concentrators and majors in philosophy.

REQUIRED TEXTS


    Cummins, R. and Owen, D. eds. (1998). Central Readings in the History of Modern Philosophy, 2nd Edition. Belmont: Wadsworth pub.

    The Cummins and Owen volume represents the most inexpensive solution to the problem of engaging multiple texts in the history of modern philosophy. It provides the full editions of many of the works that we will be reading. Still, the pieces collected in this volume are not in versions optimal for advanced scholarship. The Cummins and Owen book lacks the lengthy introductory material and scholarly apparatus common to stand-alone editions of these works. Should you wish to purchase particular texts for advanced projects, you may seek the following:

    Descartes
    The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, Vols. I & II. Translated by John Cottingham, Robert Stoothoff, and Dugald Murdoch. New York: Cambridge University Press (1985).

    Locke
    An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Edited with a Foreword by Peter H. Nidditch. New York: Oxford University Press (1979).

    Leibniz
    Philosophical Texts. Translated by Richard Francks and R. S. Woolhouse with Introduction and Notes by R. S. Woolhouse. New York: Oxford University Press (1998).

    Berkeley
    A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge. Edited by Jonathan Dancy. New York: Oxford University Press (1998).

    Hume
    A Treatise of Human Nature. Edited, with an analytical index, by L. A. Selby-Bigge. Second Edition revisions with variant readings by P. H. Nidditch (1978).

    Kant
    Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by Norman Kemp Smith. New York: St. Martin’s Press (1965).


    Supplemental readings will be handed out in seminar.

 

CLASS RESOURCES

    Philosophy Lunch – The instructor will meet informally with students over lunch on Wednesday from noon to 1:30 to discuss issues in philosophy. These may be topics that arise in class, but need not be. We may occasionally be joined by other philosophy faculty at Hampshire, and you are welcome to invite friends who are not in the class but who are interested in the history of philosophy.

 

To RECEIVE AN EVALUATION, you must:

    1. Attend - You are expected to attend every class meeting. Please contact the instructor for missed material due to an excused absence. Lectures will combine elements of the reading as well as new material.

    2. Participate - Thoughtful participation in class discussion will be one indicator that you are doing the reading.

    3. Write weekly seminar papers -- 3 pages (4 maximum). Typewritten, double spaced in a 12 point font. No title page.

      Weekly papers are due in the instructor's mailbox (in the ASH office) by NOON on the TUESDAY before the class meeting. Alternatively, students may submit their work by electronic mail by late evening that day.

      Students may be asked to read their papers during the seminar in order to frame the discussion.

      You may skip 2 weekly papers over the course of the semester in order to complete work for other courses or for personal reasons. There are 11 weeks with reading assignments.

      You may choose any element of the reading to write on. For example, you may briefly summarize the issues of the reading and critically respond by using other material from the course. Or, you may pick a direct quote from the readings and attempt to show that the ideas contained in it are misguided or fail to take into consideration important factors.

      Depending on your background in philosophy, you may wish to review the web-based dynamic tutorial on philosophical writing that I designed for introductory classes.

     

    4. Write a final paper - 12-15 pages. Typewritten, double spaced in a 12 point font. No title page.

      Final projects may be extensions of a weekly paper or may advance completely new ideas. The final paper will be an opportunity for extended discussion of any element of the course. Note that rough drafts are required and due on (see schedule).

      Papers must reflect original thoughts and ideas about the themes covered that week. Any direct quotations or paraphrased material from outside sources must be credited and footnoted in your favorite style. Violation of this constitutes plagiarism.

 

 


 

Schedule of Topics & Readings

September

9


Discussion:Reflections on Early Modern Philosophy

Readings:None

16

Discussion:Meditation on First Philosophy

Readings:Cummins and Owen, pp. 1-31

23

Discussion:Commentary on Descartes

Readings:Selections from Descartes’ correspondence and the Objections and Replies

30

No class: Yom Kippur

October

7


Discussion:An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, from Books I & II

Readings:Cummins & Owen, pp. 111-181

14

Discussion:An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, from Book IV

Readings:Cummins & Owen, pp. 217-256

21

No class:Advising/Exam Day

28

Discussion:Discourse on Metaphysics & The Monadology

Readings:Cummins & Owen, pp. 81-110

November

4


Discussion:Principles of Human Knowledge, Part I

Readings:Cummins & Owen, pp. 257-279

11

Discussion:An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding

Readings:Cummins & Owen, pp. 325-357

18

Discussion:An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding

Readings:Cummins & Owen, pp. 357-392

December

2


Discussion:from Critique of Pure Reason

Readings:Cummins & Owen, pp. 393-427

9

Discussion:from Critique of Pure Reason

Readings:Cummins & Owen, pp. 439-456