PHILOSOPHY 680G
The Philosophy of Simone de Beauvoir
Professor: Dr. Christy Landry
Lecture: Fridays 11:30 am - 2:30 pm in DAWB 3-108
Office Hours: Wednesdays 12:00-2:00 pm (or by apt.)
Office Location: S002 Office Phone Extension: 3083
E-mail: clandry@wlu.ca or via My Learning Space
Course Description:
Hailed by feminist philosophers as 'The Mother of Us All,' Simone de Beauvoir is undoubtedly the most
famous female philosopher in Western history. Although her reputation as Jean-Paul Sartre's partner
often eclipses her own work, she is a brilliant existentialist, ethicist, phenomenologist, and feminist
philosopher in her own right. This course will study Beauvoir’s two key philosophical works. We will
begin the course with Beauvoir's short ethical treatise, The Ethics of Ambiguity. This text turns the
traditional ethical project on its head by focusing on nurturing and defending the freedom of others.
After an investigation of Beauvoir's ethics we will critically analyze The Second Sex, the so-called Bible
of Second Wave Feminism. In The Second Sex Beauvoir rethinks her original ethical project by
performing a systematic analysis of gender and sexual difference. Her phenomenological-existentialist
standpoint problematizes nurturing and defending the freedom of others. In order to bring Beauvoir's
thinking on freedom, gender, and sexual difference into focus, we will consider some contemporary
assessments of Beauvoir’s philosophy primarily from The Cambridge Companion to Simone de
Beauvoir.
Required Texts:
de Beauvoir, Simone. 2011. The Second Sex, translated by Constance Borde and Sheila MalovanyChevallier. New York: Alfred Knopf.
---. 1976. The Ethics of Ambiguity, translated by Bernard Frechtman. New York: Citadel Press.
Card, Claudia. (ed.). 2003. The Cambridge Companion to Simone de Beauvoir. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Note: Supplementary readings will be available through ARES
Course Evaluation:
Participation
Oral Presentation
Reflective Essay
Peer Review
Term Paper
10%
20%
20%
10%
40%
1
Schedule of Readings (subject to revision):
Week 1:
Background and Philosophical Context
Barbara S. Andrew, "Beauvoir's Place in Philosophical Thought" (Card)
~The Ethics of Ambiguity: A Question of Freedom~
Week 2:
The Ethics of Ambiguity, Part I
Monica Langer, "Beauvoir and Merleau-Ponty on Ambiguity" (Card)
Jean-Paul Sartre, excerpts from Existentialism is a Humanism and Being and Nothingness
(ARES): excerpts may be referred to throughout the course
Week 3:
The Ethics of Ambiguity, Part II
Robin May Schott, "Beauvoir on the Ambiguity of Evil" (Card)
Week 4:
The Ethics of Ambiguity, Part III: 4-5 & Conclusion
Nancy Bauer, "Why Must We Read Simone de Beauvoir?" in Legacy of Simone de
Beauvoir, edited by Emily Grosholz (available online through the library)
~The Second Sex, Volume I: Facts and Myths~
Week 5:
Translation and Significance of The Second Sex
The Second Sex, "Introduction"
Toril Moi, "The Adulteress Wife" http://www.lrb.co.uk/v32/n03/toril-moi/the-adulteresswife
Penelope Deutscher, "The Notorious Contradictions of Simone de Beauvoir" in Yielding
Gender: Feminism, Deconstruction, and the History of Philosophy (available online
through the library)
Week 6:
Men's Point of View: Biology
The Second Sex, "Biological Data"
Moira Gatens, "Beauvoir and Biology: A Second Look" (Card)
Elizabeth Fallaize, "A Saraband of Imagery: The Uses of Biological Science in Le
deuxieme sexe" (ARES)
Week 7:
Men's Point of View: Myths
The Second Sex, Chapter 1 & 3
G. W. F. Hegel, "Lordship and Bondage" from Phenomenology of Spirit (ARES)
Susan James, “Complicity and Slavery in The Second Sex” (Card)
~The Second Sex, Volume II: Lived Experience~
Week 8:
Women's Point of View: Formative Years
The Second Sex, Volume II "Introduction," "Childhood," & "Sexual Initiation"
2
Emily Grosholtz, "The House We Never Leave: Childhood, Shelter and Freedom in the
Writings of Beavuoir and Colette" in Legacy of Simone de Beauvoir (available online
through the library)
Week 9:
Women's Point of View: Situation
The Second Sex, "The Married Woman"
Eva Gothlin, "Reading Simone de Beauvoir with Martin Heidegger" (Card)
Debra B. Bergoffen, "Marriage, Autonomy, and the Feminine Protest" (ARES)
Week 10:
Women's Point of View: Justification
The Second Sex, "The Woman in Love"
Nancy Bauer, "The Struggle for Self in The Second Sex" (ARES)
Debra B. Bergoffen, "Simone de Beauvoir: (Re)counting the Sexual Difference" (Card)
Bonnie Mann, "Beauvoir and the Question of a Woman's Point of View" Philosophy
Today 52(2): (Summer 2008), 136-149. (ARES)
Week 11:
Toward Liberation
The Second Sex, "The Independent Woman" & "Conclusion"
Toril Moi, "'Independent Women' and 'Narratives of Liberation'" (ARES)
Reflective Essay Due by Monday, December 1st
~Beauvoir and Contemporary Feminist Philosophies~
Week 12:



Susan Brison, “Beauvoir and Feminism: Interview and Reflections” (Card)
Sonia Kruks, "Beauvoir's Time/Our Time: The Renaissance in Simone de Beauvoir
Studies" Feminist Studies 31(2): (Summer 2005), 286-309. (ARES)
Judith Butler, “Sex and Gender in Simone de Beauvoir’s Second Sex" Yale French
Studies 72: (Winter 1986), 35-49. (ARES)
Final Paper Due for Peer-Review Friday, December 5 by 11:59 pm in MLS drop box
Peer-Review Due Tuesday, December 9th by 11:59 pm in the MLS drop box
Final Paper Due Friday, December 12th by 11:59 pm in the MLS drop box
Course Evaluation
Participation: Raising questions, expressing confusions, as well as voicing opinions, answering
questions, and responding to others, are all valid forms of participation. It is especially in your interest to
respond well to other people’s comments; good listening will be rewarded as much as good speaking.
One of the best things you can do to ensure a good participation standing is to put forward questions or
concerns that arose from your readings.
Attendance is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for a good participation grade. Participation is
not judged in terms of a completely correct understanding of the texts and issues; it is an opportunity to
develop that understanding. Nevertheless I expect comments generally to be about the text and informed
by a thoughtful consideration of the text. Coming to a class unprepared, without having read and thought
3
about the material, is unacceptable (as well as being glaringly obvious when it happens).
Oral Presentation:1 A primary goal of the presentation is to stimulate class discussion. This may only
be achieved through a combination of clear and accurate presentation of the material, the situating of
that material in a broader context, and the raising of interesting issues/questions/criticisms for your
colleagues, in a manner that is concise and comprehensible. An additional purpose of the presentation is
to hone your public presentation and planning skills. Remember, this is an exercise in oral
communication, and audiences process information differently aurally than in writing.
Format:
You will have approximately one hour of class time, some of which may be taken up with
questions/discussion, but aim to be doing much of the talking yourself, and plan and monitor your time
accordingly. Presentation style and resources are up to you, though I recommend you try to avoid
reading fully-formed sentences from an essay-style document. Technology, printing of handouts, etc.
can all be arranged if you consult me in advance. Whatever format you choose, be sure, in one way or
another, to cover each of the following three areas:
(1) Content: What are the main claims or arguments in the readings? What are the basis for those
claims? What new thing(s) do the authors contribute to the debate (e.g. why are we reading this/these
author(s)? What do they have to say to us?)
(2) Context: How do the authors' views relate to any of the preceding work we discussed? It may
respond directly to some. It may simply have implications for some, which is something you will have
to draw out yourself.
(3) Questions: What problems, criticisms, concerns, and confusions do this week’s reading(s) raise? This
is more open-ended. You should definitely come up with some very specific items (possibly though not
necessarily in question form) that you present to your classmates for their answers or opinions.
Generally speaking, the more clear and specific you make these problems, criticisms, concerns, and
confusions, the more likely you are to elicit a response.
Reflective Essay: You may take up any issue, idea, concept, or passage from one of Beauvoir's works
and discuss it. You may also opt to confront an argument presented in the secondary literature. The
essay is a reflective piece and you do not need to engage with secondary literature. It is not a draft of
your final paper but a stand-alone piece. The paper must be 2,500-3,000 words. You decide when to
submit the paper, but it must be submitted by December 1, 2014.
Peer Review: The first time you hand in your paper (December 5th by 11:59 pm), it will be handed to
a fellow student. You will also receive one of your colleague's papers. You will then read and critically
evaluate the paper. You will be provided with guidelines (resembling those used by journals for
evaluation of papers) to follow in your appreciation of the paper. You will then constructively annotate
the paper and indicate how it may be improved. You will return your evaluation and annotation to me by
December 9th. I will email the annotated papers back to the authors immediately. The author (you)
must then revise your paper accordingly and submit it to me by December 12th, along with the
evaluation. For this assignment, you are evaluated on the quality of your critique. Given the nature of
this process it is integral that you hand in your paper and peer review on time.
1
I'd like to thank Prof. K. Behrendt for granting me permission to use her Oral Presentation guideline.
4
Term Paper: The final paper must present a critical assessment of one aspect of Beauvoir's philosophy
not taken up in your reflection paper or in your presentation (though reference is permissible). You must
meet with me during office hours to discuss your paper topic. Excluding your title page and reference
page, your paper must be 13-15 pages (double-spaced, Times New Roman 12-point font, 2.5 cm
margins, MLA notation). It is expected that you include secondary sources (at least 5) in order to better
situate the problem you have chosen to investigate. No essays will be accepted beyond the due date
without documented reasons. Plagiarism detection software will be used.
Course Policies and Resources
Mobile Devices:
Mobile devices of any kind are permitted in this course provided they are not taking way from the
instruction of the course and the learning of other students (e.g., noise level, disturbing/distracting
content). Both the instructor and the students are responsible for administering this rule. Students who
do not feel comfortable approaching another student can email or talk to me in person. Students who fail
to comply with this policy will receive a verbal warning before being asked to leave the classroom for
all or part of the course.
Grade Appeal Policy:
See My Learning Space for the grade appeal procedure.
Academic Misconduct (as per university guidelines):
"Academic misconduct is an act by a student, or by students working on a team project, which may
result in a false evaluation of the student(s), or which represents an attempt to unfairly gain an academic
advantage, where the student either knew or ought reasonably to have known that it was
misconduct. Whether or not a student intended to commit academic misconduct is not relevant for a
finding of academic misconduct. Hurried or careless submission of assignments does not excuse students
from responsibility for verifying the academic integrity of their work before submitting it.
Academic misconduct includes, but is not limited to, the following acts which are presented as examples
or a guide since not every possible circumstance can be anticipated:
1. Plagiarism, which is the unacknowledged presentation, in whole or in part, of the work of others as
one's own, whether in written, oral or other form, in an examination, report, assignment, thesis or
dissertation;
2. Cheating, which involves the using, giving, receiving, or the attempt to use, give or receive
unauthorized information during an examination in oral, written or other form; or, copying an essay,
examination or report, or allowing someone else to copy one's essay, examination or report;
3. Submitting the same piece of work, or a significant part thereof, for the same course or for more than
one course without the permission of the instructors involved in each course; or, submitting an essay or
other work which has been submitted elsewhere, previously or at the same time, without the written
permission of all academic units or institutions involved in the submissions;
4. Impersonating another person in an examination or test;
5. Buying or otherwise obtaining term papers or assignments for submission of another person's work as
one's own for evaluation;
6. Falsifying, misrepresenting or forging an academic record or supporting document."2
2
Wilfrid Laurier University's Student Code of Conduct and Discipline (12.2). Retrieved from:
http://www.wlu.ca/page.php?grp_id=2505&p=11452. For information on penalties and procedures see the Laurier website.
5
Faculty of Arts Policy on Academic Responsibility
6