Ted Ammon:
Office: CC23, MW noon-1pm
Phone: #1332; home: 977-9121 (before 9pm)

PURPOSE:
This is an introductory course in the area of Philosophy called "epistemology." Epistemological questions are those that deal with the nature and origins of knowledge and with theories of truth. We will consider the relevant questions in the context of the history of philosophy, thus moving from ancient to contemporary works and examining several different "theories" of knowledge. My concern is several-fold: to introduce you to several ways of knowing, to look at the history of some philosophical positions, to examine carefully several philosophical texts, to encourage you to examine carefully beliefs you hold dearly and to have a grand old time in class.

TEXTS:handouts
Descartes, Discourse on Method
David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding
William James, Pragmatism
Quine and Ullian, The Web of Belief

CALENDAR:
We will discuss the works above in chronological order, hence in the order listed.

ASSIGNMENTS:
-Credo paper:
Part I

I will ask you to generate a list of your beliefs about various matters and group them under headings. For example, you may choose to list your political, religious and ethical beliefs. So you would begin by writing 'POLITICS' at the top of the page and then list under that heading some of your most important political beliefs. You might say: 'I believe that Democracy is the best form of government.' and 'I believe that free-market capitalism and democracy together produce the best standard of living' -- and so forth for this heading. Then repeat the process for the other headings. You should pick several different categories (at least 3) and list several beliefs in each. I'll collect these lists and return them quickly, possibly with written comments intended to provoke further thought.

Part II

You will select three of the beliefs from several different categories and write about how you came to have those beliefs. This part of the paper is not a defense of the beliefs; it is rather a history of them -- a sort of autobiography of your beliefs. For example, some people have no specific reason for believing in God -- believing in God was a belief given by their parents and later reinforced through worship. For others there are very specific events that caused them to believe in a God. Others may have had to reason it all out for themselves. I will collect these discussions and return them with more comments.

Part III

You take a few of the beliefs you discussed in Part II and turn a critical eye toward them, not with the attitude of trashing them but in the spirit of discussing strengths and weaknesses. I will collect this part also, make more comments, return it.

Part IV

You will continue to discuss the beliefs selected for Part III, but this time charged with the task of articulating the most reasonable alternative beliefs to the ones you actually believe. The alternative beliefs may not be compatible with the ones you actually hold; if so, say so. IF these other beliefs are reasonable alternatives, then how would you argue that your own ares still preferable?
Part V

You will discuss the fundamental questions of knowledge with respect to the beliefs you have chosen and analyze them still further, with an eye to the following question: what would it take for you to give up these beliefs in favor of others, perhaps the alternative ones you mentioned in Part IV?

**********

The paper has five parts and the entire thing to date should be handed in each time you hand in a part. The paper will be graded as a whole, and will not be counted as complete unless all parts are submitted finally; I will nevertheless assign a provisional grade to each part except Part I.
My concern is not that you have any specific belief rather than another but that you are willing to examine carefully the beliefs that you do have in order to see their strengths and weaknesses as well as the fundamental assumptions about knowledge that you hold and that are presupposed by those beliefs.

-Mid-Term Exam:

An in-class essay Midterm. Study questions will be handed out one week before the exam. The exam itself will be comprised of 2-3 questions from the study sheet.

-Analytical Paper:

This is an applied paper which invites you to consider carefully the assumptions that underlie some other discipline (other than philosophy, that is) with which you are familiar. For example, you may be pursuing a major in Biology or Accounting and could take the opportunity of this paper to consider the fundamental presuppositions on which these disciplines rest. Do these presuppositions constitute knowledge? If so, how are they known to be true? Could these fundamentals change -- that is, are they immune to revision? Why or why not? I want you to consider the knowledge-claims of another discipline with an eye to the philosophical positions that we consider in this course. 7-10 double-spaced typed pages.

-Final Exam

Your small group will compose the final exam which you will take in class, open-book, no notes. Your group will submit to me a typed list of at least 10 questions covering the readings for the semester and I will select the ones from that list which you will answer for the exam. The caveat is that you submit a list of answerable, non-trivial questions written in clear literate English. Any list that falls short of these minimal standards will be rejected without further ado and the group that submitted it forced to take a really killer exam composed by the learned professor.

GRADING and DUE DATES:

Midterm exam: 25% Oct 13
Credo paper: 25%
I Aug 30
II Sept 15
III Oct 6
IV/V Nov 3
Analytical paper: 25%
draft Oct 9
revision Nov 26
Final Exam: 25% Dec 6, 9am

All assignments must be complete in order to qualify for an 'A' or 'A-'. Further, an 'A' is not the result of making 'A's' on 51% of your work. You can make an 'A' in this class if 75% of your work is solid 'A' work and the rest no less than 'B'. The same reasoning applies to the other grades. If, for example, you have solid 'A' work on all of the assignments, but your groupwork is poor, thus resulting in a 'C' or lower for the group project, you will make no higher than a 'B+' in the class.

Late work, incompletes, etc.: I sometimes give incompletes to students who encounter serious difficulties during the course of a semester. But note that not all of the assignments can be made up later, no matter what problems you encounter. I am not inclined to substitute one kind of assignment for another. If you receive a poor grade for participation in your group project then you are stuck with it.

ATTENDANCE:
Come to class. If coming to class is not your thing, then go get a job and/or
drop the course as soon as possible. If you rack up excessive absences, I may
yellowcard you. "Excessive" is defined as: more than 5.

PROBLEMS:
If you encounter some problem that stands in the way of your academic progress in this or some other course, please tell somebody about it. I am aware that there are students here who are struggling with drug/alcohol addictions, perhaps unaware yet that they are addicted or who are entering treatment finally, whose parents abused them verbally or physically, who have been sexually assaulted on a "date", who are being sexually harassed, whose parents are divorced or divorcing, who are pregnant, who are having persistent thoughts of suicide, who have an eating disorder, who get really down and can't snap out of it, who feel that life holds no meaning, and etc. All of the above are normal in the sense that many people suffer in these ways. And these problems can be dealt with, but not unless you let somebody know -- somebody you trust. If you think me trustworthy, then come talk to me. I will at least listen carefully and help you find the person(s) on or off campus can best help you, if I am not that person. If you have reason to think that someone else is having a serious problem then try to help that person; chances are your concern will be appreciated.

HONOR:
You are of course bound by the Honor Code in this class. I also am bound by professional obligations and a code of honor. A statement of my own personal code of honor is as follows:

My goals as a teacher are, in no particular order, to stimulate interest in learning, to encourage you to develop the ability for making considered judgments, to impress upon you the necessity of happiness and of the inescapably social nature of our existence, to help you cultivate certain qualities of the mind such as tolerance of reasonable difference and intolerance of bigotry, irrationality and dogmatism. To these ends and others I pledge to approach the assignments of the course with seriousness of purpose (even if my demeanor frequently seems less than serious), to treat you and your concerns with respect, and to keep our private conversations in confidence when there is need to do so. I will not grant to one student a special privilege that I am not at least in principle willing to grant to all, although I will consider each student's mitigating circumstances as unique. You should expect me never to make a racial or ethnic slur, make sexual advances, knowingly humiliate or demean you, or treat you unfairly.