PLEASE NOTE this is a sample reading list for the 2015-16 academic year – precise seminar content
may change from year to year.
Weeks 1-2: Introduction to critical reasoning
Bowell, Tracy & Kemp, Gary, Critical Thinking, 2nd or 3rd Edition, Routledge. [There is a companion
website for this book, which has practice exercises (and the answers).]
Lecture 1: chapters 1, 2 and 3.
Lecture 2: chapters 1 and 5.
Lecture 3: chapters 2, 5 and 7.
Week 3: Torture
Questions:

What, if anything, does the ticking bomb scenario show?

Is torture lite really lite? And if so, is it justifiable?

Is torture always prohibited?

Should torture be legalised?
Core reading:
Miller, Seumas. (2011) ‘Torture’, Stanford Encylopedia of Philosophy.
Shue, Henry. 1978. ‘Torture’, Philosophy & Public Affairs.7:2, pp. 124-143.
Further Reading:
Matthews, R. (2012). 'An Empirical Critique of “Interrogational” Torture'. Journal of Social
Philosophy. 43, pp.457–470.
McMahan, J. (2006). 'Torture, Morality, and Law'. Case Western Reserve Journal of International
Law. 37, pp. 241-48.
McMahan, Jeff. (2008). 'Torture in Principle and in Practice'. Public Affairs Quarterly. 22:2, pp.111128.
Sussman, David. (2005). ‘What’s Wrong with Torture?’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 33:1, pp. 1-33.
Sussman, David. (2009). ‘“Torture Lite”: A Response’. Ethics & International Affairs. 23:1, pp. 63-67.
Wolfendale, Jessica. (2009). ‘The Myth of “Torture Lite”' Ethics & International Affairs 23:1 pp. 47-61
Week 4: World poverty
Guest lecturers: David Rowthorn and Joe Cunningham
Questions:

Are we all morally required to give much of our income away to mitigate world hunger?

Are we required to give almost all of our income away to do this?

What is moral demandingness?

Does distance make a difference to our moral obligations?
Core reading:
Singer, P. (1972) 'Famine, Affluence, and Morality', Philosophy and Public Affairs 1, pp. 229-243.
Murphy, L. (1993) 'The Demands of Beneficence', Philosophy and Public Affairs 22:4, pp. 267-292.
Further reading:
Arneson, R. (2004) “Moral Limits and the Demands of Beneficence”, in D. K. Chatterjee (ed.), The
Ethics of Assistance: Morality and the Distant Needy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp.
33-58.
Arneson, R. (2009) “What do we owe to distant needy strangers?”, in J. A. Schaler (ed.), Singer under
Fire(Chicago: Open Court, 2009), pp. 267-293.
Cohen, L. Jonathan (1981) 'Who is starving whom?', Theoria 47:2, pp. 65-81.
Cottingham, J. (1983) 'Ethics and Impartiality', Philosophical Studies 43, pp. 83-99.
Horton, K. (2004) 'International Aid: The Fair Shares Factor', Social Theory and Practice 30, pp. 161174.
Kamm, Frances M. (1999) “Famine Ethics: The Problem of Distance in Morality and Singer’s Ethical
Theory,” in D. Jamieson (ed.), Singer and His Critics (Oxford: Basil Blackwell), pp. 162-208.
Miller, Richard W. (2004) 'Beneficence, Duty, and Distance' Philosophy and Public Affairs 32, pp. 357383.
Narveson, J. (2003) “We Don’t Owe Them a Thing!” The Monist 86(3), pp. 419-433.
Pogge, T. (2002) World Poverty and Human Rights (Cambridge: Blackwell) [Introduction]
Scheffler, S. (2003) “Families, Nations and Strangers”, in his Boundaries and Allegiances (Oxford:
Oxford University Press).
Unger, P. (1996) Living High and Letting Die (New York: Oxford University Press)
Week 5: Abortion
Questions:

Is abortion always justified, never justified, or sometimes justified? Why?

What does Thomson’s thought experiment show?

Are there some reasons for which it is (particularly) impermissible to have an abortion?
Core reading:
Marquis, Don. (1989) ‘Why Abortion is Immoral’, The Journal of Philosophy 86,4: pp. 183 -202.
Thomson, Judith Jarvis. (1971). ‘A Defense of Abortion’, Philosophy and Public Affairs. 36:4, pp. 359374.
Further Reading:
Cudd, Ann E. (1990) ‘Sensationalized Philosophy: A Reply to Marquis’s “Why Abortion is
Immoral”’, The Journal of Philosophy 87,5: pp. 268-277.
Davis, Nancy. (1984) ‘Abortion and Self-Defense’, Philosophy & Public Affairs 13,3: pp. 175-107.
Little, Margaret. ‘The Moral Permissibility of Abortion’ in Andrew Cohen and Christopher Wellman
(eds.)Contemporary Debates in Applied Ethics.
Norcross, Alastair (1990) ‘Killing, Abortion, and Contraception: A Reply to Marquis’, The Journal of
Philosophy87,5: pp. 268-277.
Tooley, Michael. (1972) ‘Abortion and Infanticide’, Philosophy & Public Affairs 2,1: pp.37-65.
Week 6: reading week
No lectures or seminars
Week 7: Philosophy in Practice workshop
The workshops are not compulsory, but are an opportunity for you to discuss your précis, oral
presentation and report. You may also wish to discuss how to approach the material, general
questions about reading articles and also questions about how to write on these topics.
David Rowthorn, L5, 10am-11am (Monday)
Joe Cunningham, L4, 1pm-2pm (Wednesday)
Week 8: Philosophy in Practic workshop
David Rowthorn, L5, 10am-11am (Monday)
Joe Cunningham, L4, 1pm-2pm (Wednesday)