EASTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY
DIVISION OF ACADEMIC AFFAIRS
REQUEST FOR NEW COURSE
DEPARTMENT/SCHOOL: __HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY____________________COLLEGE: ARTS & SCIENCES
CONTACT PERSON: _____J. MICHAEL
SCOVILLE_________________________________________________________________________
CONTACT PHONE:
206-818-8763
CONTACT EMAIL:___JSCOVIL1@EMICH.EDU
REQUESTED START DATE: TERM____WINTER_________YEAR__2013_________
A. Rationale/Justification for the Course
EMU currently does not offer an advanced course in philosophy that systematically explores
different approaches to ethical theorizing. PHIL 420W will contribute specifically to the Philosophy
major and minor, but it will also be of general interest to students seeking a context for in-depth
study of ethical theories (and their critics) from a philosophical perspective.
B. Course Information
1. Subject Code and Course Number:
2. Course Title:
Ethical Theory
3. Credit Hours:
3
4. Repeatable for Credit? Yes_______
PHIL 420W
No___X___
If “Yes”, how many total credits may be earned?____
5. Catalog Description (Limit to approximately 50 words.):
A systematic study of different approaches to ethical theorizing focused primarily on the Western
philosophical tradition. Specific topics may include: the objectivity, rationality, and authority of
ethical norms; theories of what is good and why; accounts of moral standing; varieties of
consequentialism and deontology; neo-Kantian and contractualist views; virtue theory; feminist
ethics; existentialist ethics.
6. Method of Delivery (Check all that apply.)
a. Standard (lecture/lab)
On Campus
X
X
Off Campus
b. Fully Online
c. Hybrid/ Web Enhanced
1
7. Grading Mode:
Normal (A-E)
X
Credit/No Credit
8. Prerequisites: Courses that MUST be completed before a student can take this course. (List by Subject Code,
Number and Title.)
Two courses in philosophy other than PHIL 120 or PHIL 130
9. Concurrent Prerequisites: Courses listed in #5 that MAY also be taken at the same time as a student is taking
this course. (List by Subject Code, Number and Title.)
10. Corequisites: Courses that MUST be taken at the same time as a student in taking this course.
(List by
Subject Code, Number and Title.)
11. Equivalent Courses. A student may not earn credit for both a course and its equivalent. A course will count as a
repeat if an equivalent course has already been taken. (List by Subject Code, Number and Title)
12. Course Restrictions:
a. Restriction by College. Is admission to a specific College Required?
College of Business
Yes
No
College of Education
Yes
X
No
X
b. Restriction by Major/Program. Will only students in certain majors/programs be allowed to take this
course?
Yes
No
X
If “Yes”, list the majors/programs
c. Restriction by Class Level Check all those who will be allowed to take the course:
2
Undergraduate
Graduate
All undergraduates___X____
All graduate students____
Freshperson
Certificate
Sophomore
Masters
Junior
Specialist
Senior
Doctoral
Second Bachelor________
UG Degree Pending_____
Post-Bac. Tchr. Cert._____
Low GPA Admit_______
Note: If this is a 400-level course to be offered for graduate credit, attach Approval Form for 400level Course for Graduate
Credit. Only “Approved for Graduate Credit” undergraduate courses may be included on
graduate programs of study.
Note: Only 500-level graduate courses can be taken by undergraduate students. Undergraduate
students may not register for
600-level courses
d. Restriction by Permission. Will Departmental Permission be required?
Yes
No
X
(Note: Department permission requires the department to enter authorization for every student registering.)
13. Will the course be offered as part of the General Education Program?
Yes
X
No
If “Yes”, attach Request for Inclusion of a Course in the General Education Program: Education for Participation in
the Global Community form. Note: All new courses proposed for inclusion in this program will be reviewed by the
General Education Advisory Committee. If this course is NOT approved for inclusion in the General Education
program, will it still be offered?
Yes
X
No
C. Relationship to Existing Courses
Within the Department:
14. Will this course will be a requirement or restricted elective in any existing program(s)? Yes x
No
If “Yes”, list the programs and attach a copy of the programs that clearly shows the place the new course will have
in the curriculum.
Program
Elective_x__
Philosophy major and minor
Required
Program
Restricted Elective
Restricted
Required
15. Will this course replace an existing course? Yes
No
16. (Complete only if the answer to #15 is “Yes.”)
a. Subject Code, Number and Title of course to be replaced:
3
X
b. Will the course to be replaced be deleted?
No
Yes
17. (Complete only if the answer #16b is “Yes.”) If the replaced course is to be deleted, it is not necessary to
submit a Request for Graduate and Undergraduate Course Deletion.
a. When is the last time it will be offered?
Term
b. Is the course to be deleted required by programs in other departments?
Contact the Course and Program Development Office if necessary.
No
Yes
Year
c. If “Yes”, do the affected departments support this change?
Yes
No
If “Yes”, attach letters of support. If “No”, attach letters from the affected department explaining the lack
of support, if available.
Outside the Department: The following information must be provided. Contact the Course and Program
Development office for assistance if necessary.
18. Are there similar courses offered in other University Departments?
X
If “Yes”, list courses by Subject Code, Number and Title
Yes
No
19. If similar courses exist, do the departments in which they are offered support the proposed course?
Yes
No
If “Yes”, attach letters of support from the affected departments. If “No”, attach letters from the affected department
explaining the lack of support, if available.
D. Course Requirements
20. Attach a detailed Sample Course Syllabus including:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
Course goals, objectives and/or student learning outcomes
Outline of the content to be covered
Student assignments including presentations, research papers, exams, etc.
Method of evaluation
Grading scale (if a graduate course, include graduate grading scale)
Special requirements
Bibliography, supplemental reading list
Other pertinent information.
4
NOTE: COURSES BEING PROPOSED FOR INCLUSION IN THE EDUCATION FOR PARTICIPATION
IN THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY PROGRAM MUST USE THE SYLLABUS TEMPLATE PROVIDED BY
THE GENERAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE. THE TEMPLATE IS ATTACHED TO THE
REQUEST FOR INCLUSION OF A COURSE IN THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROGRAM:
EDUCATION FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY FORM.
E. Cost Analysis (Complete only if the course will require additional University resources.
Fill in
Estimated Resources for the sponsoring department(s). Attach separate estimates for other affected departments.)
Estimated Resources:
Year One
Year Two
Year Three
Faculty / Staff
$_________
$_________
$_________
SS&M
$_________
$_________
$_________
Equipment
$_________
$_________
$_________
Total
$________
$________
$________
F. Action of the Department/School and College
1. Department/School
Vote of faculty: For ___7_______
Against _____0_____
Abstentions ____0______
(Enter the number of votes cast in each category.)
Richard Nation
Department Head/School Director Signature
10 Sept. 2012
Date
2. College/Graduate School
A. College
College Dean Signature
Date
B. Graduate School (if Graduate Course)
Graduate Dean Signature
Date
G. Approval
Associate Vice-President for Academic Programming Signature
5
Date
PHIL 420W will fulfill the Area III Values requirement in both the Philosophy
Major and Philosophy Minor:
Philosophy Major Requirements: 33 hours
The Philosophy major consists of 33 credit hours, 24 of which must be at the 200 level or above.
Majors must satisfactorily complete at least one course in each of the following five core areas, with a
minimum of twelve credit hours at the 300 or 400 level.
Students must select a minimum of three hours from each of the five core areas:
I. Logic and Reasoning: 3-9 hours
At least one course from the following:
* PHIL 120 - Introduction to Critical Reasoning (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
* PHIL 130 - Introduction to Logic 3 hrs
PHIL 181 - Logic and Model Theory (Gen Ed Area III) 3 hrs
PHIL 281 - Symbolic Logic 3 hrs
II. History of Philosophy: 3-9 hours
At least one course from the following:
Program Revision Guidelines
Miller, Program Revision Guidelines
Sept. 09
PHIL 330W - History of Philosophy: Ancient (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 331W - History of Philosophy: Modern (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 332W - History of Philosophy: 19th Century (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
III. Values: 3-24 hours
At least one course from the following:
PHIL 212 - Philosophy of Art (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 220 - Ethics (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 221 - Business Ethics (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 223 - Medical Ethics (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 224 - Ethics and Food (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 225 - Political Philosophy (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 229 - Environmental Ethics (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 260 - Existentialism (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 310W - Aesthetics (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 355W - Philosophy of Law (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 370W - Philosophy and Narrative (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 420W – Ethical Theory
** PHIL 426W - Topics in Gender and Philosophy (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 470W - Twentieth Century European Philosophy (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
IV. Epistemology and Metaphysics: 3-27 hours
At least one course from the following:
PHIL 215 - Philosophy of Religion (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 325W - Theory of Knowledge (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 375W - Metaphysics (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 480W - Philosophy of Science (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 390W - Phenomenology (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
** PHIL 426W - Topics in Gender and Philosophy (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
6
PHIL
PHIL
PHIL
PHIL
442W
460W
471W
475W
-
Philosophy of Mind (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
Philosophy of Language (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
Early Analytic Philosophy (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
Philosophy of Mathematics (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
V. Eastern/Global: 3-9 hours
At least one course from the following:
PHIL 226 - Feminist Theory (Gen Ed Area III, IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 228 - Global Ethics (Gen Ed Area III, IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 291 - Introduction to Asian Philosophy (Gen Ed Area III) 3 hrs
PHIL 391W - Early Chinese Philosophy (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
Restricted Elective Courses: 18 hours
Special topic courses, independent study courses, or other courses listed above and not already taken
to complete
the required 33 hours.
Only one of PHIL 100 - Introduction to Philosophy or PHIL 110 - Philosophies of Life may be counted
toward the
major.
* Only one of PHIL 120 - Introduction to Critical Reasoning or PHIL 130 - Introduction to Logic may be
counted
toward the major.
** This course satisfies either area III or IV, depending on its specific content. It may only be used to
satisfy one
area requirement.
Philosophy Minor Requirements: 24 hours
The philosophy minor consists of 24 credit hours. 15 of those hours must be at the 200-level or above.
Minors must satisfactorily complete at least one course in each of the following five core areas, with a
minimum of ninecredit hours at the 300- or 400-level.
Students must select a minimum of three hours from each of the five core areas:
I. Logic and Reasoning: 3-6 hours
At least one course from the following:
* PHIL 120 - Introduction to Critical Reasoning (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
* PHIL 130 - Introduction to Logic 3 hrs
PHIL 181 - Logic and Model Theory (Gen Ed Area III) 3 hrs
PHIL 281 - Symbolic Logic 3 hrs
II. History of Philosophy: 3-9 hours
At least one course from the following:
PHIL 330W - History of Philosophy: Ancient (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 331W - History of Philosophy: Modern (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 332W - History of Philosophy: 19th Century (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
III. Values: 3-12 hours
At least one course from the following:
PHIL 212 - Philosophy of Art (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 220 - Ethics (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 221 - Business Ethics (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 223 - Medical Ethics (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 224 - Ethics and Food (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 225 - Political Philosophy (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 229 - Environmental Ethics (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 260 - Existentialism (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 310W - Aesthetics (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 355W - Philosophy of Law (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
7
PHIL 370W - Philosophy and Narrative (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 420W – Ethical Theory
** PHIL 426W - Topics in Gender and Philosophy (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 470W - Twentieth Century European Philosophy (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
IV. Epistemology and Metaphysics: 3-12 hours
At least one course from the following:
PHIL 215 - Philosophy of Religion (Gen Ed Area IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 325W - Theory of Knowledge (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 375W - Metaphysics (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 480W - Philosophy of Science (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 390W - Phenomenology (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
** PHIL 426W - Topics in Gender and Philosophy (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 442W - Philosophy of Mind (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 460W - Philosophy of Language (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 471W - Early Analytic Philosophy (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
PHIL 475W - Philosophy of Mathematics (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
V. Eastern/Global: 3-9 hours
At least one course from the following:
PHIL 226 - Feminist Theory (Gen Ed Area III, IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 228 - Global Ethics (Gen Ed Area III, IV) 3 hrs
PHIL 291 - Introduction to Asian Philosophy (Gen Ed Area III) 3 hrs
PHIL 391W - Early Chinese Philosophy (Gen Ed Area I, W) 3 hrs
Restricted Elective Courses: 9 hours
Special Topic courses, Independent Study courses, or other courses approved by the Philosophy
Section Chair.
All minors must have at least six hours of course work at the 300-level or above.
Only one of PHIL 100 - Introduction to Philosophy or PHIL 110 - Philosophies of Life may be counted
toward the
major.
* Only one of PHIL 120 - Introduction to Critical Reasoning or PHIL 130 - Introduction to Logic may be
counted
toward the major.
** This course satisfies either area III or area IV, depending on its specific content. It may only be
used to satisfy
one area requirement.
8
[Note: this syllabus represents one possible version of PHIL 420W]
PHIL 420W: Ethical Theory
Eastern Michigan University
Prof. J. Michael Scoville
Course description
This course offers an in-depth exploration of three influential types of ethical theory: utilitarianism
(act- and rule-utilitarianism), neo-Kantianism (realist and constructivist varieties), and a neoAristotelian flourishing view. We will focus discussion on three important texts in ethical theory—J.
J. C. Smart and Bernard Williams’ Utilitarianism: For and Against, Christine Korsgaard’s Sources of
Normativity, and Richard Kraut’s What Is Good and Why: The Ethics of Well-Being. In addition, we will
read a number of essays from contemporary philosophers who interpret, defend, and/or critique the
views expressed in these primary works.
The course aims to enable students to appreciate, and to become participants in, debates about some
influential ethical theories and about some fundamental issues at play in contemporary ethical
philosophy. Exams, papers, presentations, and class participation are designed to achieve this aim.
Catalog description
A systematic study of different approaches to ethical theorizing focused primarily on the Western
philosophical tradition. Specific topics covered will vary by term, but may include: the objectivity,
rationality, and authority of ethical norms; theories of what is good and why; accounts of moral
standing; varieties of consequentialism and deontology; neo-Kantian and contractualist views; virtue
theory; feminist ethics; existentialist ethics.
General education writing intensive rationale
This course is a writing intensive course in the philosophy program. Students will write two essay
exams and a substantial philosophical essay. The exams will be devoted to understanding and
critiquing arguments put forward by the authors studied in class. The substantial paper is an
exploration and reasoned defense of a thesis. To fulfill the requirements of the paper, students will
choose an issue with clear philosophical significance related to the content of the course, formulate a
thesis with respect to the issue, and defend that thesis.
Required texts
9
Korsgaard, Christine M. 1996. The Sources of Normativity. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Kraut, Richard. 2007. What Is Good and Why: The Ethics of Well-Being. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press.
Smart, J. J. C., and Bernard Williams. 1973. Utilitarianism: For and Against. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
* Other course readings will be made available on e-reserves.
10
Student assessment
Grades for this course will be determined by student performance in the following areas:
(1) Two essay exams (worth 20% each, or 40% of overall grade).
(2) Final paper (=35% of overall grade). Your final paper is intended to be a substantial
philosophical essay on a topic clearly related to the class. The paper should address a topic that
has not already been thoroughly discussed in class. Papers should be 10-12 pages in length
(double-spaced, including bibliography). You will compose your paper in stages: proposal,
outline with list of intended sources, partial draft, oral presentation, final draft. At certain
stages (i.e. proposal, outline), you will hand in a relevant assignment for comment. At other
stages (i.e. partial draft, oral presentation), you will be required to share your work with the
class, or with part of the class, in order to receive feedback. As appropriate, you will revise
your paper based on the feedback you receive from me and from your peers.
(3) Being prepared for class, paying attention, contributing to class discussions, etc. (=20% of
overall grade). Note: there may be occasional “pop” quizzes and/or in-class assignments
throughout the term. These quizzes and/or assignments will count toward your participation
grade. Except in special circumstances (which must be documented), you cannot make up
missed in-class quizzes/assignments.
(4) Two in-class presentations (2.5% each, 5% of overall grade). You will be expected to (1)
summarize the main point(s) of the reading assigned for that day, and (2) raise some questions
for discussion. Presentations should be limited to about 10 minutes, and you will be expected
to take an active role in facilitating class discussion following the presentation.
(5) A minimum of two short responses for in-class presentation. These will be counted as part of
your participation grade. On assigned days, you will be asked to write out a serious exegetical
question, objection, or a creative application in response to the reading assigned for that day.
The statement of your question, objection, or creative application should be typed, and no
more than one page in length. You will be expected to send this to me as an email attachment
the night before the reading will be discussed in class. In class you will present your question,
objection, or creative application, and we will discuss this as a group.
Final Paper Assignment
1. General remarks about grading
I will assess your papers by considering whether you have a clear and interesting thesis, whether you
make a plausible case for your view, and whether you take relevant matters into account (including
reasonable objections to your position). Further, failure to complete any of the stages of the paper
assignment (proposal, outline with list of intended sources, partial draft for peer workshop, oral
presentation) will result in the lowering of your paper assignment grade by at least one third of a
grade (e.g. an A will drop to an A- if you failed to hand in a proposal).
2. Final paper format & style
Your final papers should be typed, double-spaced, with at least 1” margins. Please choose a readable,
12-point, font. Number your pages and make sure your name is on the paper. Footnotes or
endnotes are acceptable, but not required. A bibliography of sources used (or referred to) is
required. The paper should be formatted according to a professional standard, such as that provided
11
by the Modern Languages Association, the American Psychological Association, or the Chicago
Manual of Style.
Your papers should be written in clear English. Unclear expression, confusing presentation of your
own or others’ view(s), omission of important considerations, and/or dogmatism will negatively
affect your grade.
3. Grading paradigms
A typical “A” paper: The paper offers a particularly focused and thoughtful response to the topic. A
clear and interesting thesis, cogent argument, skillful use of relevant texts/ideas, and sensitivity
to relevant objections are all characteristic of an “A” paper. Unusually creative or insightful
arguments or interpretations may put a paper in the “A” range, even if the paper has certain
other shortcomings.
A typical “B” paper: The treatment of the topic is competent and mostly accurate, and the position
presented is reasonable. However, the paper lacks precision and fails to adequately explain or
address relevant texts, ideas, or objections. In general, “B” range papers are good, but less
sophisticated and impressive than those in the “A” range.
A typical “C” paper: The paper shows some understanding of the relevant issues, but is marred by a
lack of clarity, mediocre exposition and argument, and a failure to attend to relevant matters
(including relevant objections to the position presented).
A typical “D” paper: The treatment of the topic is seriously deficient. For example, the thesis and
supporting discussion are confusing and unmotivated, and relevant texts/ideas/objections are
not explained or addressed.
A typical “E” paper (failure): The discussion is totally out of focus, confused, and irrelevant.
In general, papers will receive higher grades if they exemplify clear exposition and argument, and
show good sense for what is relevant to the topic. Papers reliant on sprawling summaries, excessive
quoting, and inept exposition and argument will receive lower grades. Papers that display vagueness,
awkward phrasing, wordiness, poor organization, and/or serious errors in word choice will also
likely receive lower grades. Pluses and minuses will be used for papers that fall in between the above
paradigms.
Grading scale for the course
A
AB+
B
(93-100)
(90-92.99)
(88-89.99)
(83-87.99)
BC+
C
C-
(80-82.99)
(78-79.99)
(73-77.99)
(70-72.99)
12
D+
D
DE
(68-69.99)
(63-67.99)
(60-62.99)
(below 60)
Request for New Course
Other policies & expectations
Note on academic dishonesty. You should familiarize yourself with the University’s definitions and policies concerning
academic dishonesty (see the Student Conduct Code, available at: www.emich.edu/ studentconduct/conductcode.php). Any
form of academic dishonesty—cheating, falsification, and/or plagiarism—will result, at minimum, in a failing grade (“F,”
earning 0 points) for the relevant assignment, with no possibility of making it up. You may also receive a failing grade (E)
for the course. There may be other penalties as well, such as referral to the Office of Student Conduct and Community
Standards for disciplinary action. If you are unsure about whether something you are doing would be considered academic
dishonesty, please consult with me.
Attendance and participation. I expect you to attend class regularly, and to be an active presence in class discussions. If
you miss class, it is your responsibility to get in touch with me concerning any announcements or handouts you may have
missed.
Late papers. Late papers will be accepted but will be diminished one third of a grade per day late (e.g. an A will drop to an
A-). Except under extraordinary circumstances (which must be documented), I will not accept papers turned in later than
one week following the original due date.
Missed exams. Make-up exams will only be given in extraordinary circumstances (which must be documented), and must
take place as soon as possible after the date of the missed exam. If you miss or cancel a scheduled make-up exam, you will
not be given another opportunity to take the exam.
Having difficulty with the course? If you find the material in this class difficult, I would be glad to assist you in your effort
to understand. You may meet with me during office hours without appointment, or by appointment outside of office hours.
You should also feel free to seek help via email. When students fail or receive a low grade in my courses, it is usually
because they do not seek help when they need it. If you are struggling, I strongly urge you to get in touch with me sooner
rather than later.
Classroom conduct. Free discussion, rational inquiry, and thoughtful expression are encouraged in this class. Classroom
behavior that interferes either with my ability to conduct the class, or with the ability of students to participate in class, is
not acceptable. Examples of inappropriate classroom behavior include: routinely entering class late or departing early;
texting, using cell phones, or listening to headphones during class; talking in class without first raising your hand to be
called on; talking while others are speaking; expressing your views in ways that are disrespectful to others in the class. If you
legitimately need to carry a pager/cell phone for use in class, prior notice and instructor approval is required.
Religious holidays. It is the policy of EMU to recognize the rights of students to observe religious holidays without penalty
to the student. Students are expected to provide advance notice to their instructors to make up work, including
examinations that they miss as a result of their absence from class due to observance of religious holidays.
Students with disabilities. If you wish to be accommodated for a disability, EMU Board of Regents Policy 8.3 requires
that you first register with the Disability Resource Center in 240 EMU Student Center. You may contact the Center by
telephone (734.487.2470). Students with disabilities are encouraged to register with the Center promptly as you will only be
accommodated starting from the date you register with them. No retroactive accommodations are possible.
F and J International Students. The Student Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) requires F and J students to
report the following to the Office of International Students (OIS), 229 King Hall within ten (10) days of the event:
• Changes in your name, local address, major field of study, or source of funding
• Changes in your degree-completion date
• Changes in your degree-level (ex. Bachelors to Masters)
• Intent to transfer to another school
Prior permission from OIS is needed for the following:
•
Dropping ALL courses as well as carrying or dropping BELOW minimum credit hours
Miller, New Course
Sept. 09
New Course Form
• Employment on or off-campus
• Registering for more than one ONLINE course per term (F-visa only)
• Endorsing I-20 or DS-2019 for re-entry into the USA
Failure to report may result in the termination of your SEVIS record and even arrest and deportation. If you have questions
or concerns, contact the OIS (at 734.487.3116), not the course instructor.
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). “The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) is a
Federal law designated to protect the privacy of a student’s education records and academic work. The law applies to all
schools and universities which receive funds under an applicable program of the U.S. Department of Education and is
applicable to students at EMU. All files, records, and academic work completed within this course are considered
educational records and are protected under FERPA. It is your right, as a student in this course, to expect that any materials
you submit in this course, as well as your name and other identifying information, will not be viewable by guests or other
individuals permitted access to the course. The exception will be only when you have given explicit, written, signed consent.
Verbal consent or email is insufficient.”
Reading Schedule
Week 1
Introduction
J. J. C. Smart, “An outline of a system of utilitarian ethics” (in Utilitarianism: For and Against), pp. 3-42
Week 2
J. J. C. Smart, “An outline of a system of utilitarian ethics,” pp. 42-75
Bernard Williams, “A critique of utilitarianism” (in Utilitarianism: For and Against), pp. 77-118
Week 3
Bernard Williams, “A critique of utilitarianism,” pp. 118-150
Peter Railton, “Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality,” Philosophy & Public Affairs 13(2): 134-171
(Spring, 1984)
Week 4
Brad Hooker, “Rule-consequentialism and Doing Good for the World” (Ch. 8 in Ideal Code, Real World [Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 2000)
Michael Slote and Philip Pettit, “Satisficing Consequentialism,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, supp. vol. 58 (1984), pp.
139-163, 165-176
Week 5
Thomas Nagel, “Value” (Ch. 8 in The View from Nowhere [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986])
Thomas Nagel, “Ethics” (Ch. 9 in The View from Nowhere)
Week 6
Samuel Scheffler, “The Defence of Agent-Centred Restrictions: Intuitions in Search of a Foundation” (Ch. 4 in The Rejection
of Consequentialism [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988])
Christine Korsgaard, “The Reasons We Can Share: An Attack on the Distinction between Agent-Relative and AgentNeutral Reasons” (Ch. 10 in Creating the Kingdom of Ends [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986])
Week 7
Christine Korsgaard, Ch. 1 (in Sources of Normativity)
Korsgaard, Ch. 2 (in Sources of Normativity)
Miller, New Course
Sept. ‘09
Page 14 of 20
New Course Form
Week 8
Korsgaard, Ch. 3 (in Sources of Normativity)
Korsgaard, Ch. 4 (in Sources of Normativity)
Week 9
G. A. Cohen, “Reason, humanity, and the moral law” (Ch. 5 in Sources of Normativity)
Raymond Geuss, “Morality and identity” (Ch. 6 in Sources of Normativity)
Thomas Nagel, “Universality and the reflective self” (Ch. 7 in Sources of Normativity)
Week 10
Christine Korsgaard, “Reply” (Ch. 9 in Sources of Normativity)
Richard Kraut, Ch. 1 (in What Is Good and Why)
Week 11
Kraut, Ch. 2 (in What Is Good and Why)
Kraut, Ch. 3 (in What Is Good and Why)
Week 12
Kraut, Ch. 4 (in What Is Good and Why)
Concluding thoughts
Week 13
In-class peer review workshops
Week 14
In-class final paper presentations
PHIL 420W: Ethical Theory
Bibliography
Alexander, Larry. 1985. “Pursuing the Good – Indirectly.” Ethics 95(2): 315-332.
Anderson, Elizabeth. 1993. Value in Ethics and Economics. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.
Andrew, Barbara S., Jean Keller, and Lisa H. Schwartzman, eds. 2005. Feminist Interventions in Ethics and Politics: Feminist Ethics
and Social Theory. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Anscombe, G. E. M. 1958. “Modern Moral Philosophy.” Philosophy 33(124): 1-19.
Appiah, Kwame Anthony. 2006. Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers. New York and London: W. W. Norton &
Company.
Aristotle. 1956. On the Soul. Tr. J. A. Smith. In The Complete Works of Aristotle (The Revised Oxford Translation), Volume One. Ed.
Jonathan Barnes. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
——. 1999. Nicomachean Ethics (second edition). Ed. and Tr. Terence Irwin. Indianapolis and Cambridge: Hackett
Publishing Company, Inc.
Attfield, Robin. 1987. A Theory of Value and Obligation. London and New York: Croom Helm Ltd.
Ayer, A. J. 1952. “A Critique of Ethics.” In Language, Truth and Logic. New York: Dover.
Baier, Annette C. 1995. Moral Prejudices: Essays on Ethics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Brambrough, Renford. 1979. Moral Skepticism and Moral Knowledge. London: Routledge.
Miller, New Course
Sept. ‘09
Page 15 of 20
New Course Form
Copp, David, ed. 2006. The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Crisp, Roger, ed. 1996. How Should One Live? Essays on the Virtues. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
——. 2006. “Hedonism Reconsidered.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73(3): 619–645.
Darwall, Stephen. 1998. Philosophical Ethics. Boulder: Westview Press.
——. 2002. Welfare and Rational Care. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
——. Ed. 2003. Virtue Ethics. Malden and Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
——. 2006. The Second-Person Standpoint: Morality, Respect, and Accountability. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
De Beauvoir, Simone. 2000. The Ethics of Ambiguity. Tr. Bernard Frechtman. New York: Citadel Press/Kensington
Publishing Corp.
Dewey, John. 1988. Human Nature and Conduct 1922: The Middle Works of John Dewey 1899-1924, Volume 14. Ed. Jo Ann
Boydston. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.
Dorsey, Dale. 2010. “Three Arguments for Perfectionism.” Noûs 44(1): 59-79.
Dreier, James, ed. 2005. Contemporary Debates in Moral Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
Driver, Julia. 2001. Uneasy Virtue. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
——. 2005. “Virtue Theory.” In Dreier 2005.
——. 2012. Consequentialism (New Problems of Philosophy). New York: Routledge.
Dworkin, Gerald. 1995. “Unprincipled Ethics.” In Midwest Studies in Philosophy 20.
Foot, Philippa, ed. 1967. Theories of Ethics. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
——. 2001. Natural Goodness. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
——. 2002. Virtues and Vices and Other Essays in Moral Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Frankfurt, Harry. 1988. The Importance of What We Care About. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
——. 2004. The Reasons of Love. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Fraser, Nancy, and Axel Honneth. 2003. Redistribution or Recognition? A Political-Philosophical Exchange. Tr. Joel Golb, James
Ingram, and Christiane Wilke. London and New York: Verso.
Griffin, James. 1986. Well-Being: Its Meaning, Measurement and Moral Importance. Oxford and New York: Clarendon Press.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1990. Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Tr. Christian Lenhardt and Shierry Weber Nicholsen.
Cambridge: MIT Press.
Harmon, Gilbert. 1977. The Nature of Morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Held, Virginia. 1990. “Reason, Gender, and Moral Theory.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research: 321-344.
——. 1993. Feminist Morality: Transforming Culture, Society, and Politics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
——. 2006. The Ethics of Care: Personal, Political, and Global. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hooker, Brad. 2000. Ideal Code, Real World. Oxford and New York: Clarendon Press.
Hume, David. 1978. A Treatise of Human Nature (second edition with text revised and notes by P. H. Nidditch). Ed. L. A.
Selby-Bigge. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Miller, New Course
Sept. ‘09
Page 16 of 20
New Course Form
——. 1983. An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. Ed. J. B. Schneewind. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing
Company, Inc.
Hursthouse, Rosalind. 1999. On Virtue Ethics. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
——. 2005. “Are Virtues the Proper Starting Point for Morality?” In Dreier 2005.
Hursthouse, R., G. Lawrence, and W. Quinn, eds. 1995. Virtues and Reasons. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Kagan, Shelly. 1998. Normative Ethics. Boulder: Westview Press.
Kant, Immanuel. 1930/1963. Lectures on Ethics. Tr. Louis Infield. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company,
Inc.
——. 1993a. Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals (third edition). Tr. James W. Ellington. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett
Publishing Company, Inc.
——. 1993b. Critique of Practical Reason (third edition). Tr. Lewis White Beck. New York: Macmillan Publishing
Company/Library of Liberal Arts.
——. 1996. The Metaphysics of Morals. Tr. and ed. Mary Gregor. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
——. 2000. Critique of the Power of Judgment. Ed. Paul Guyer. Tr. Paul Guyer and Eric Matthews. Cambridge and New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Kazez, Jean. 2007. The Weight of Things: Philosophy and the Good Life. Malden and Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Koehn, Daryl. 1998. Rethinking Feminist Ethics: Care, trust and empathy. London and New York: Routledge.
Korsgaard, Christine M. 1996a. The Sources of Normativity. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
——. 1996b. Creating the Kingdom of Ends. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
——. 2004. “Fellow Creatures: Kantian Ethics and Our Duties to Animals.” The Tanner Lectures on Human Values,
Delivered at the University of Michigan, February 6. (Available online at:
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~korsgaar/Essays.htm.)
——. 2008. “Interacting with Animals: A Kantian Account.” (This is a revised version of Korsgaard’s Dewey Lecture given
at the University of Chicago Law School in 2008. Available online at:
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~korsgaar/Essays.htm.)
Kraut, Richard. 2007. What Is Good and Why: The Ethics of Well-Being. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
LaFollette, Hugh, ed. 1999. The Blackwell Guide to Ethical Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
Lear, Jonathan. 2000. Happiness, Death, and the Remainder of Life. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.
——. 2006. Radical Hope: Ethics in the Face of Cultural Devastation. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Little, Margaret Olivia. 2001. “On Knowing the ‘Why’: Particularism and Moral Theory.” Hastings Center Report 31(4).
MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1984. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory (second edition). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame
Press.
——. 1999. Dependent Rational Animals: Why Human Beings Need the Virtues. Chicago and La Salle: Carus Publishing Company.
Mackie, J. L. 1977. Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong. New York: Penguin.
McNaughton, David. 1996. “An Unconnected Heap of Duties?” Philosophical Quarterly 46.
McNaughton, David, and Piers Rawling. 2007. “Deontology.” In Ethics in Practice (third edition). Ed. Hugh LaFollette.
Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Miller, New Course
Sept. ‘09
Page 17 of 20
New Course Form
Mill, John Stuart. 2001. Utilitarianism (second edition). Ed. George Sher. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing
Company, Inc.
Moore, G. E. 1922. “The conception of intrinsic value.” In Philosophical Studies. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
——. 1993. Principia Ethica (Revised Edition). Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Murdoch, Iris. 1971. The Sovereignty of Good. London and New York: Routledge.
Nagel, Thomas. 1970. The Possibility of Altruism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
——. 1979. Mortal Questions. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
——. 1986. The View From Nowhere. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Norcross, Alastair. 2005. “Reasons Without Demands: Rethinking Rightness.” In Dreier 2005.
Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Basic Books, Inc.
Nussbaum, Martha C. 2000. Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge
University Press.
——. 2006. Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Cambridge and London: The Belknap Press of
Harvard University Press.
Nussbaum, Martha, and Amartya Sen, eds. 1993. The Quality of Life. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
O’Neill, Onora. 1989. Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Parfit, Derek. 1984. Reasons and Persons. Oxford and New York: Clarendon Press.
——. 2011. On What Matters: Volume One. Ed. Samuel Scheffler. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
——. 2011. On What Matters: Volume Two. Ed. Samuel Scheffler. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Putnam, Hilary. 2004. Ethics Without Ontology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Railton, Peter. 1984. “Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 13(2): 134171.
Rawls, John. 1955. “Two Concepts of Rules.” Philosophical Review 64: 3-32.
——. 1993. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
——. 1999. A Theory of Justice (revised edition). Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
——. 2001. Justice As Fairness: A Restatement. Ed. Erin Kelly. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Reader, Soran, ed. 2005. The Philosophy of Need (Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement: 57). Cambridge and New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Rorty, Richard. 1989. Contingency, irony, and solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
——. 1999. Philosophy and Social Hope. London and New York: Penguin Books.
Ross, W. D. 1930. The Right and the Good. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sartre, Jean-Paul. 1957/1985. Existentialism and Human Emotions. New York: Citadel Press/ Kensington Publishing Corp.
Scanlon, T. M. 1975. “Preference and Urgency.” The Journal of Philosophy LXXII(19): 655-669.
——. 1998. What We Owe To Each Other. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.
Miller, New Course
Sept. ‘09
Page 18 of 20
New Course Form
Scheffler, Samuel, ed. 1988. Consequentialism and its Critics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
——. 1994. The Rejection of Consequentialism: A Philosophical Investigation of the Considerations Underlying Rival Moral Conceptions
(revised edition). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
——. 2012. Equality and Tradition: Questions of Value in Moral and Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sen, Amartya. 1992. Inequality Reexamined. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
——. 2000. Development As Freedom. New York: Anchor Books.
Sen, Amartya, and Bernard Williams, eds. 1982. Utilitarianism and Beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shafer-Landau, Russ. 2003. Moral Realism: A Defence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
——. Ed. 2007. Ethical Theory: An Anthology. Malden and Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Shaw, William. 2005. “The Consequentialist Perspective.” In Dreier 2005.
Shue, Henry. 1996. Basic Rights: Subsistence, Affluence, and U. S. Foreign Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Singer, Peter, ed. 1993. A Companion to Ethics. Oxford: Blackwell.
——. 1995. Animal Liberation (second edition). London: Pimlico.
——. 2011. Practical Ethics (third edition). Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Slote, Michael. 1995. “Agent-Based Virtue Ethics.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 20.
Slote, Michael, and Philip Pettit. 1984. “Satisficing Consequentialism.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, supp. vol. 58.
Smart, J. J. C. 1956. “Extreme and Restricted Utilitarianism.” Philosophical Quarterly 6.
——. 1973. “An outline of a system of utilitarian ethics.” In Utilitarianism: For and Against. J. J. C. Smart and Bernard
Williams. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Strawson, Peter. 1962. “Freedom and Resentment.” Proceedings of the British Academy, 48.
Sumner, L. W., 1995. “The Subjectivity of Welfare” Ethics 105(4): 764-790.
——. 1996. Welfare, Happiness, and Ethics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Thompson, Michael. 1995. “The Representation of Life.” In Hursthouse et al. 1995.
Thomson, Garrett. 2005. “Fundamental Needs.” In Reader 2005.
Timmons, Mark, and Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, eds. 1996. Moral Knowledge? Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Vallentyne, Peter. 2005. “Against Maximizing Act Consequentialism.” In Dreier 2005.
Wallace, James D. 1978. Virtues and Vices. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
——. 1988. Moral Relevance and Moral Conflict. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
——. 2009. Norms and Practices. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
Walzer, Michael. 1985. Interpretation and Social Criticism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
——. 1994. Thick and Think: Moral Argument at Home and Abroad. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Williams, Bernard. 1973. “A critique of utilitarianism” In Utilitarianism: For and Against. J. J. C. Smart and Bernard Williams.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
——. 1981. Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 1973-1980. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Miller, New Course
Sept. ‘09
Page 19 of 20
New Course Form
——. 1985. Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
——. 1993. Shame and Necessity. Berkeley: University of California Press.
——. 1995. Making Sense of Humanity and other philosophical papers. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wiredu, Kwasi. 1996. Cultural Universals and Particulars: An African Perspective. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana
University Press.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1993. “A Lecture on Ethics” [1929]. In Philosophical Occasions: 1912-1951. Ed. James Klagge and
Alfred Nordmann. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.
Wolf, Susan. 1982. “Moral Saints.” The Journal of Philosophy 79(8): 419-439.
Wood, Allen. 1999. Kant’s Ethical Thought. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Zimmerman, Michael. 2001. The Nature of Intrinsic Value. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Miller, New Course
Sept. ‘09
Page 20 of 20