Alan Reynolds
Department of Philosophy, University of Oregon
alanr@uoregon.edu
Teaching Dossier
Please find attached the following materials demonstrating my teaching abilities:

Statement of Teaching Philosophy

Description of Courses Taught

Sample Syllabi (both for courses already taught and courses under development)

Student Evaluations Synopsis
Please also find letters of reference from:

Colin Koopman (Chair, Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy, University of
Oregon)

Mark Johnson (Philip H. Knight Professor of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Department of
Philosophy, University of Oregon)

Rocío Zambrana (Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy, University of Oregon)

Cheyney Ryan (Emeritus Professor, Conflict and Dispute Resolution Program,
University of Oregon School of Law)
Alan Reynolds
Department of Philosophy, University of Oregon
alanr@uoregon.edu
Statement of Teaching Philosophy
I believe that philosophy has the capacity to be self-transformative. My first encounter with
philosophy was reading the work of Friedrich Nietzsche as a young, devout, but skeptical
religious believer. My reading of Nietzsche was directly relevant to my situation and my
identity, and because of this, I took the texts seriously and opened myself up to the possibility
that they might transform my very identity in unexpected ways. And they did. And they
continue to do so.
My belief in the transformative power of philosophy deeply informs the way that I teach
philosophy. My first experience solo teaching was teaching a class on Existentialism to thirty
undergraduate students, mostly non-philosophy majors. The course was framed around
Nietzsche’s idea of the “death of God,” and the ways in which we struggle to give meaning to
our lives. My goal, in this course and every course that I teach, is to show the students how the
texts we read are capable of speaking to their particular situations. So I suggested that the
existentialists could be helpful for the undergraduate student who is away from home for the first
time, and is experiencing the need to genuinely create her own identity and meaning. That is, the
“death of God” is not merely a world-historical event, but also a personal experience for many
people when they lose their faith, or leave home, or begin resisting parental authority. By
framing the class in this way, the texts were able to speak to the situations of different students.
This reflects my conviction that philosophy is for everybody.
This conviction leads me to spend a great deal of time developing lectures and discussion
questions that reveal the relevant and exciting elements of the texts. Additionally, I try to be
responsive to as many different learning styles as I can. In my Existentialism class, we not only
read philosophy texts, but we also read novels, plays, and interviews, and watched relevant clips
from films together. On the day that we read “The Look” from Jean Paul Sartre’s Being and
Nothingness, I had the students do an exercise where they stared at a partner in silence for five
minutes, so as to dramatize Sartre’s point that the “gaze of the Other” can be a disturbing
experience. In all of my classes I draw on a range of pedagogical tools: I use PowerPoint, I draw
diagrams on the blackboard, I make handouts, I ask tough questions, I foster discussion, and I
offer brief lectures. As my students and I progress through a course, I periodically ask them to
reflect on how the texts and themes of the course have addressed or challenged their own ideas,
behaviors, and choices. It is important to me that class discussions do not drift away from the
text to detached reflections on one’s subjective experiences, but it is equally important to me that
the text speaks to students in transformative ways. As a result, a number of students in my
classes have confessed to being challenged and moved in significant ways by certain texts and
discussions.
In my experience both solo teaching and assistant teaching, many of my classes have been filled
with a majority of non-philosophy majors. For many of these students, my class is their only
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 1
exposure to philosophy in their entire educational experience. I have to ask myself: how can I
benefit a student who will never take philosophy again, and who will forget many of the figures
and details of this course shortly after it ends? Since I believe that, again, philosophy is for
everybody, non-majors included, it is important to me that I teach for them as well. When I
teach, I aim to relate philosophical debates and ideas to problems and concerns that we all face
outside the classroom. For example, when assistant teaching a course on 19th Century
Philosophy, we read some of the early sections of Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant,
which many students found quite difficult. On our first day of discussing the Kant readings, I
started by focusing on one of the motivations behind Kant’s work: the concern that the
Newtonian natural sciences (which presuppose determinism) would crowd out morality and
personal responsibility (which presuppose freedom). This concern is one we can all relate to,
and we all recognize the urgency and importance of responding to it. This exemplifies the way
in which I always try to connect up the ideas in philosophical texts with problems and concerns
that we all encounter. One of my students wrote in his or her evaluation, “Without Alan as a
GTF [graduate teaching fellow] to explain the material in ‘non-philosophical’ terms, we nonphilosophy majors would have had a difficult time,” while another wrote, “he has a knack to
break down difficult texts in ways that are comprehensible.”
Finally, because philosophy has been a vehicle for my own self-transformation, I convey to my
students my passion for reading and discussing philosophy. I often relate to my students the
ways in which the texts affect me personally, and I invite them to do the same. One of my
students wrote in his or her student evaluation, “He has a true passion for the subject of
philosophy,” and another wrote, “Alan knew the material very well and was great at teaching
with passion.” When I explain philosophical questions in lecture, I try to show that our answers
to these questions will have consequences for how we live, if we take them seriously. I do not
always succeed in this, but I am committed to a pedagogical practice of always improving my
attempts.
My teaching experience has only confirmed for me my early intuition that philosophy is for
everybody, and that it is capable of catalyzing self-transformation, if taught correctly. In my
experience teaching, I have received positive feedback both from philosophy majors who care
about the tradition, as well as from non-philosophy majors who are not predisposed to care about
the texts. I would like to think that I have achieved this by teaching with both clarity and
passion.
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 2
Alan Reynolds
Department of Philosophy, University of Oregon
alanr@uoregon.edu
Descriptions of Courses Taught
Existentialism (Solo taught; Fall 2011)
This course presented the existentialists as responding to Nietzsche’s contention that “God is
dead.” We looked at personal, social, and political responses to this loss of transcendent
meaning. The course included philosophical texts, novels, plays, and films. Enrolled were thirty
undergraduate students. (See syllabus below)
Ethics (Solo taught; Spring 2012)
This course surveyed the four major moral theories in western philosophy: virtue ethics,
deontology, utilitarianism, and care ethics. The course was divided into three units: (1)
Governance theories of morality: discovering moral first principles; (2) Morality as worldnavigation: creating an ethical character; and (3) Moral pluralism and the tragic: reconciling
ourselves to moral disorder. Enrolled were thirty undergraduate students. (See syllabus below)
I have assistant taught the following courses in the Philosophy department:
 Philosophy and Cultural Diversity
 History of Philosophy: Modern
 Human Nature
 Social and Political Philosophy
 Philosophy of Love and Sex
 Internet, Society, and Philosophy
 Introduction to Philosophy
 History of Philosophy: 19th
Century
 Existentialism
I have assistant taught the follow course in the Religious Studies department:
 World Religions: Asian Traditions.
In addition to the above courses that I have taught, I have prepared syllabi for the following
courses:
 Intro to Philosophy (See syllabus below)
 Political Philosophy (See syllabus below)
I am also interested in developing syllabi for the following courses:
 American Pragmatism
 Business Ethics
 Human Nature
 Global Justice
 Modern Philosophy
 Philosophy of Religion
 19th Century Philosophy
 History of Liberalism
 Bioethics
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 3
Alan Reynolds
Department of Philosophy, University of Oregon
alanr@uoregon.edu
Sample Syllabus #1: Ethics
Course Description:
This course is an overview of the history of ethical theory. It is broken up into three main
sections: (1) Governance theories of morality, (2) Morality as world-navigation, and (3) Moral
pluralism and the tragic. The first unit explores the various attempts in the history of western
philosophy to discover some set of moral first principles that will allow us to confront and solve
any moral choice that comes our way. This sounds like a great solution, but coming to find these
principles and justifying them to each other has proven to be a difficult project. The second unit
explores attempts to shift the conversation away from ethics as first principles towards ethics as a
particular mode of existence, one capable of navigating through our challenging world. What
should this mode of existence look like, and how should we cultivate it? In the last unit, we will
confront the possibility that there is no escape from our condition of moral pluralism. Perhaps
we need to learn to accept and deal with one another while recognizing that reasonable people
will forever disagree about the good life. What would this recognition entail? How could we
recognize this without lapsing into quietism or relativism?
Course Requirements and Expectations
Two essays: 15% of final grade each = 30% final grade
Final Paper: 30% of final grade
Reading quizzes: 20% of final grade
Participation: 20% of final grade
Course Reading Schedule
Unit 1: Governance theories of morality: discovering moral first principles
*Key Concepts: moral realism, universalism, objectivity, rationalism, rules
Week 1 (Theme: Moral norms from God Himself)
M: Course introduction
T: Excerpts from Old Testament, New Testament, Qur’an
Old Testament – The Ten Commandments – Exodus 20:1-17
New Testament – The Sermon on the Mount – Matthew 5:1-48
Qur’an – The Five Pillars of Islam
W: Kierkegaard – Fear and Trembling – “Problema I: Is there a teleological suspension of the
ethical?” (pp. 83-95)
Genesis 22 – Abraham and Isaac
Th: Plato – Euthyphro
Louise M. Antony – “Good Minus God”
Week 2 (Theme: The authority of pure practical reason)
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 4
M: Kant – Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals – Preface and First Section
T: Kant – Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals – Second Section (pp. 19-32)
W: Kant – Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals – Second Section (pp. 32-44)
Th: Rawls – A Theory of Justice – “The Main Idea of the Theory of Justice” (pp. 11-17)
Week 3 (Theme: Wielding the utilitarian calculator)
M: Mill - Utilitarianism – Chapter 2, “What Utilitarianism is”
T: Mill - Utilitarianism – Chapter 3, “Of the Ultimate Sanction of the Principle of Utility”
W: Mill - Utilitarianism – Chapter 5, “Of the Connection between Justice and Utility” (pp. 6379)
Th: Singer – “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”
Ursula Le Guin – “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas”
Unit 2: Morality as world-navigation: creating an ethical character
*Key Concepts: self-development, moral character, anti-universalism, relationality,
care
Week 4 (Theme: Cultivating a virtuous character)
M: Aristotle – Nicomachean Ethics – Book 1, “Happiness”
*Essay 1 due Monday beginning of class (see below for essay assignment #1)
T: Aristotle – Nicomachean Ethics – Book 2, “Virtue of Character”
W: Aristotle – Nicomachean Ethics – Book 8, “Friendship”
Th: MacIntyre – After Virtue – “Aristotle’s Account of the Virtues”
Week 5 (Theme: Cultivating a flexible, inquisitive character)
M: Dewey – Human Nature and Conduct – “Habits and Will,” “Character and Conduct” (pp. 2142)
T: Dewey – Human Nature and Conduct – “Custom and Habit,” “Custom and Morality” (pp. 4359)
W: Dewey – Human Nature and Conduct – “Impulses and Change of Habits,” “Plasticity of
Impulse,” “Changing Human Nature” (pp. 65-87)
Th: Foucault – “The ethics of the concern for the self as a practice of freedom”
Week 6 (Theme: Ethics of/as care, capability, dependency)
M: Virginia Held – The Ethics of Care – “The Ethics of Care as Moral Theory”
T: Eva Feder Kittay – Love’s Labor – “Introduction”
W: Martha Nussbaum – “Human Capabilities, Female Human Beings”
Th: Sandra Lee Bartkey – “Feeding Egos and Tending Wounds”
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 5
Unit 3: Moral pluralism and the tragic: reconciling ourselves to moral
disorder
*Key Concepts: moral agnosticism, anti-realism, anti-rationalism, ambiguity,
pluralism, tolerance
Week 7 (Theme: Our condition of tragic pluralism)
M: Isaiah Berlin – “Pursuit of the Ideal”
*Essay 2 due Monday beginning of class
T: James – “The Moral Philosopher and the Moral Life”
W: James – “The Moral Philosopher and the Moral Life”
Th: James – “On a Certain Blindness in Human Beings”
Week 8 (Theme: Morality and ambiguity)
M: Sartre – “Existentialism is a Humanism”
T: Sartre – “Existentialism is a Humanism”
W: Beauvoir – Ethics of Ambiguity – “Ambiguity and Freedom”
Th: Beauvoir – Ethics of Ambiguity – “Ambiguity and Freedom”
Week 9 (Theme: The primacy of power and conflict)
M: NO CLASS
T: Nietzsche – Genealogy of Morals – “‘Good and Evil,’ ‘Good and Bad’” (aphorism 1-12)
W: Nietzsche – Genealogy of Morals – “‘Good and Evil,’ ‘Good and Bad’” (aphorism 12-17)
Th: Nietzsche – Twilight of the Idols – “Morality as Anti-Nature”
Joel Marks – “Confessions of an Ex-Moralist”
Week 10 (Theme: Ethics after philosophy)
M: Stanley Fish – “Does Philosophy Matter?”
T: Bernard Williams – “Pluralism, Community and Left Wittgensteinianism”
W: Richard Rorty – “Ethics without Absolutes”
Th: Course wrap-up discussion
*Final essay due on **
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 6
PHIL 102: Ethics
Essay Assignment #1
Due Monday, April 23rd, beginning of class
5-6 pages, Times New Roman, 1 inch margins, double spaced
Topic: We have read about and discussed three different theories of morality in this first unit:
divine command theory, deontology (Kantianism), and utilitarianism. This paper is a way to
think through two of these theories practically and critically.
First, pick out a moral quandary that you have experienced at some point in your life (or
simply make one up if you don’t feel like sharing something personal). Be sure that it is
complex enough such that the morally right solution is not immediately evident. Select two of
the moral theories that we have discussed so far in this class. Given the moral quandary that you
have constructed, discuss what each of the two moral theories would demand of you. Explain
why they would make such a demand. Then explain what action you did take (or would take, if
you invented your scenario). How does your action match up with the demands of the two moral
theories? Explain why you acted as you did, and how that highlights your agreement or
disagreement with the moral theories. Which theory proves more adequate in your situation?
Which one fails? Why do you think so?
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 7
Alan Reynolds
Department of Philosophy, University of Oregon
alanr@uoregon.edu
Sample Syllabus #2: Existentialism
Course Description:
This course will be an introduction to the philosophical tradition of existentialism, starting with
Nietzsche and Kierkegaard and coming up through the existentialists of post-WWII France. The
existentialist tradition contains some of the most moving and profound texts in all of philosophy.
Writers in this tradition deal with issues of personal freedom, responsibility, the end of religious
certainty, the ambiguities of political oppression, and more. The readings will include
philosophical texts, novels, and plays. The course will be reading intensive and discussion
oriented.
Course Requirements and Expectations
Two essays: 15% of final grade each = 30% final grade
Final Paper: 30% of final grade
Reading quizzes: 20% of final grade
Attendance and participation: 20% of final grade
Course Reading Schedule
Unit 1: “God is Dead”
With this famous declaration by Nietzsche, a new era began in the West – an era in which
religious authority began its slow crumble. With the end of religious belief, all other forms of
authority lost their power to dictate norms and provide meaning to human lives. In the
immediate wake of God’s death, life appeared to be robbed of meaning and purpose.
Week 1
M: Introduce the course
T: Historically situate existentialism
Nietzsche – The Gay Science – “The madman” (pp. 181-82)
Nietzsche – The Gay Science – “Believers and their need to believe” (pp. 287-290)
W: Kierkegaard – Fear and Trembling – “Problema I: Is there a teleological suspension of the
ethical?” (pp. 83-95)
Recommended background reading: Genesis 22:1-19
Th: Kierkegaard – Fear and Trembling – “Problema II: Is there an absolute duty to God?” (pp.
96-108)
Week 2
M: Dostoyevski – Brothers Karamazov – “Rebellion” (pp. 281-292)
T: Dostoyevski – Brothers Karamazov – “Grand Inquisitor” (pp. 292-314)
W: Beckett – Waiting for Godot – Act I (pp. 1-59)
Th: Beckett – Waiting for Godot – Act II (pp. 61-109)
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 8
Week 3
M: Nietzsche – Anti-Christ (forward – aphorism 19)
T: Nietzsche – Anti-Christ (aphorism 20-49)
W: Nietzsche – Anti-Christ (aphorism 50-62)
Th: Nietzsche – Twilight of the Idols
“How the ‘Real World’ at last Became a Myth” (pp. 50-51)
“The Four Great Errors” – Aphorism 8 (p. 65)
“The Problem of Socrates” (pp. 39-44)
“Reason in Philosophy” (pp. 45-49)
SUN: MOVIE! Ingmar Bergman – Seventh Seal
Week 4
M: Sartre – Nausea (pp. 126-135, 156-160)
T: Dostoyevski – Notes from the Underground – Section VII – IX (pp. 20-35)
W: Camus – The Stranger – Part 1 (pp. 3-59)
Th: Camus – The Stranger – Part 2 (pp. 63-123)
*Essay 1 due Thursday beginning of class
Unit 2: Existentialism and Ethics
Once religious authority is undermined, everything that was previously tied up in God is also
undermined – such as timeless moral truths, an externally-imposed meaning and purpose to
human life, a purpose to human history, etc. In the wake of this collapse, norms must be rebuilt
from the ground up – staring with one’s relationship with oneself, and expanding outward to our
relationships with others.
Week 5
M: Sartre – Being and Nothingness – “Patterns of Bad Faith” (pp. 96-112)
*Extra credit movie write-up due Monday beginning of class
T: Sartre – Being and Nothingness – “The Look” (pp. 340-365)
W: Sartre – Being and Nothingness – “The Look” (pp. 365-400)
Th: Sartre – No Exit (all)
Week 6
M: Sartre – “Existentialism is a Humanism” (all)
T: Beauvoir – Ethics of Ambiguity – “Ambiguity and Freedom” (pp. 7-34)
W: Nietzsche – Genealogy of Morals – “‘Good and Evil,’ ‘Good and Bad’” (aphorism 1-12)
Th: Nietzsche – Genealogy of Morals – “‘Good and Evil,’ ‘Good and Bad’” (aphorism 12-17)
Twilight of the Idols – “Morality as Anti-Nature” (pp. 52-57)
SUN: MOVIE! Woody Allen – Crimes and Misdemeanors
Unit 3: Existentialism and Politics
Once our political structures are not grounded in any divine or ultimate foundation, then we must
reconsider how we understand political freedom, oppression, and resistance.
Week 7
M: Sartre – Search for a Method – “Existentialism and Marxism” (pp. 3-34)
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 9
T: Sartre – Search for a Method – “Existentialism and Marxism” (pp. 3-34)
W: Beauvoir – Ethics of Ambiguity “However, politics is right…” (pp. 136-159)
Th: Kafka – The Trial – “Block, The Merchant; Dismissal of the Lawyer” (pp. 166-198)
*Essay 2 due Thursday beginning of class
Week 8
M: Sartre – Anti-Semite and Jew – Section 1 (pp. 7-54)
*Extra credit movie write-up due Monday beginning of class
T: Beauvoir – Second Sex – “Introduction” (pp. 3-17)
W: Ellison – Invisible Man – “Prologue” (pp. 3-14)
Th: Fanon – The Wretched of the Earth – “Concerning Violence” (pp. 35-55)
Recommended background viewing: “The Battle of Algiers”
Unit 4: Life and Death
At the end of the course, we explore a possible response to the death of God, one that Nietzsche
himself offered – not despair, but joy. With Nietzsche’s Zarathustra, we are offered a figure that
celebrates our finitude, without remorse or nostalgia for our lost deities, lost authorities, lost
sources of meaning. Is this new existence one that we can, in fact, affirm and celebrate?
Week 9
M: Camus – Myth of Sisyphus – “An Absurd Reasoning” (selections from anthology)
T: Sartre – Being and Nothingness – “My Death” (pp. 680-707)
W: Heidegger – Being and Time – “Dasein’s Possibility of Being-a-whole, and Being-towardsdeath”
Th: Heidegger – Being and Time – “Dasein’s Possibility of Being-a-whole, and Being-towardsdeath”
Week 10
M: Nietzsche – The Gay Science – “The meaning of our cheerfulness” (pp. 279-80)
Nietzsche – The Gay Science – “The greatest weight” (pp. 273-74)
Nietzsche – The Will to Power – “And do you know what ‘the world’ is to me? …”
(aphorism 1067)
T: Nietzsche – Thus Spoke Zarathustra – “Zarathustra’s prologue” (pp. 41-47)
Nietzsche – Thus Spoke Zarathustra – “Of the way of the creator” (pp. 88-91)
Nietzsche – Thus Spoke Zarathustra – “Of the blissful islands” (pp. 109-112)
Nietzsche – Thus Spoke Zarathustra – “Of the tarantula” (pp. 123-126)
W: Nietzsche – Thus Spoke Zarathustra – “Of self-overcoming” (pp. 136-139)
Nietzsche – Thus Spoke Zarathustra – “Of the higher man” (pp. 296-306)
Th: No required readings – wrap up week’s discussion, reflect on course themes
Recommended reading: Rorty – “Pragmatism, Pluralism and Postmodernism” (pp. 262277)
*Final essay due on ** (See below for final essay assignment)
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 10
PHIL 211: Existentialism
Final Essay Assignment


Due Friday, December 9th, by 2pm, in Philosophy Department Office PLC 338
8-10 pages, Times New Roman, 1 inch margins, double spaced
This final essay is intended to allow you to engage in personal reflection with some of the
themes we have read about and discussed together in this course. It is my contention that
existentialism cannot properly be understood by studying its figures and traditions from a
detached standpoint – serious and sustained self-reflection is required to fully understand this
philosophical tradition.
In this course, we have explored Nietzsche’s contention that God is dead, meaning that religion
has ceased (1) to give meaning to peoples’ lives on a personal level, (2) provide us with common
moral values, and (3) offer foundations for our political structures. In the rest of the course, we
explored various possible existentialist responses to these problems.
Another way to organize the course themes is the following:
Problems
 The emptiness of social norms and ethics (Kierkegaard)
 The death of God (Nietzsche)
 The reality of overwhelming suffering (Dostoevsky)
 The meaninglessness of life (Beckett)
 Living inauthentically (Sartre)
 Interpersonal hostility and alienation (Sartre)
 Institutional, bureaucratic alienation (Kafka)
 Social marginalization and oppression (Beauvoir, Ellison, Fanon)
 Life as absurd (Camus)
 Death and mortality (Sartre, Heidegger)
Solutions
 Nietzsche – self-creation
 Kierkegaard – absolute commitment
 Dostoevsky – radical responsibility for all
 Beckett – waiting for salvation
 Sartre – self-creation and/as norm-creation
 Beauvoir – assume ambiguity
 Ellison / Fanon – Violent self-assertion
 Camus – revolt
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 11
In this paper, I want you to give a detailed and concrete picture of how you would live, as an
existentialist, in your life and world. How would your life change if you were to fully embrace
some of the existentialist themes that we’ve discussed? In what ways does your life already
operate under existentialist commitments; in what ways does your life violate existentialist
commitments? What would your life, personally, look like as an existentialist? Give specific,
concrete examples.
More specifically, address what your life would look like on the three registers mentioned above:
(1) the personal level, (2) the interpersonal, social level, and (3) the structural-political level.
Feel free to address these in any way that seems appropriate. For example: What personal
practices would you engage in so as to live a rich and meaningful life? What kinds of activities
do you / would you do in order to engage in self-creation? How exactly would you participate in
norm-creation, so as to help build a shared moral world? What kinds of norms, structures,
institutions, etc, are hindering your projects of self-creation, and how should you respond to
them? What will your political action look like, in the US today? Be as concrete and anecdotal
as possible: How will you, as an existentialist, think about the upcoming 2012 presidential
election? Be as personal or impersonal as you want to be, but use your own voice throughout the
essay. Draw on (at least) three philosophers that we have read and discussed together, but do not
recite their positions and arguments, but instead incorporate them into your own personal
response and explain how you personally want to take them up. Your paper should show a firm
understanding of the themes and figures that we have studied, and should show a serious, selfreflective engagement.
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 12
Alan Reynolds
Department of Philosophy, University of Oregon
alanr@uoregon.edu
Sample Syllabus #3: Intro to Philosophy
Course Description:
This course is an introduction to the history of Western philosophy. We will encounter this
tradition through the question, “What gives life meaning?” There are many answers to this
question. For some people, human reason is what sets us free and unlocks human possibility.
For many others, faith in some transcendent power gives life its meaning and purpose. Still for
others, creativity and choice are the important features of our lives. Finally, we will look at the
effects that our identity has on the meaningfulness of life. The class will be reading intensive and
involve a great deal of class discussion.
Course Requirements and Expectations
Three short essays: 10% of final grade each = 30% final grade
Final Paper: 30% of final grade
Reading quizzes: 20% of final grade
Participation: 20% of final grade
Course Reading Schedule
Unit 1: Philosophy and the examined life
Week 1
M: Introduction to course
T: Plato, Apology
W: Plato, Apology
Th: Plato, Crito
Week 2
M: Descartes, Meditations
T: Descartes, Meditations
W: Kant, “What is Enlightenment?”
Th: Kant, “What is Enlightenment?”
Unit 2: Religion and meaning
Week 3
M: Schopenhauer, “On the Suffering of the World”
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 13
T: Schopenhauer, “On the Suffering of the World”
W: Tolstoy, “My Confession”
Th: Tolstoy, “My Confession”
Week 4
M: Kierkegaard, “Teleological Suspension of the Ethical”
T: Kierkegaard, “Teleological Suspension of the Ethical”
W: Buber, I and Thou
Th: Buber, I and Thou
Week 5
M: James, “The Will to Believe”
T: Dewey, A Common Faith, “Religion vs. The Religious”
W: Nietzsche, Antichrist
Th: Nietzsche, Antichrist
Unit 3: Freedom, choice, and the absurd
Week 6
M: Sartre, “Existentialism is a Humanism”
T: Sartre, “Existentialism is a Humanism”
W: Beauvoir, Ethics of Ambiguity
Th: Beauvoir, Ethics of Ambiguity
Week 7
M: Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, “The Free Spirit”
T: Camus, The Stranger
W: Camus, The Stranger
Th: Camus, The Stranger
Week 8
M: Beckett, Waiting for Godot
T: Beckett, Waiting for Godot
W: Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning
Th: Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning
Unite 4: Meaning and identity
Week 9
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 14
M: Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the Rights of Women
T: Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the Rights of Women
W: Beauvoir, Second Sex
Th: Young, “Throwing Life a Girl”
M: Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folk
T: Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folk
W: Du Bois, “The Conservation of Races”
Th: Du Bois, “The Conservation of Races”
Week 10
M: Ellison, Invisible Man
T: Ellison, Invisible Man
W: TBA
Th: TBA
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 15
Alan Reynolds
Department of Philosophy, University of Oregon
alanr@uoregon.edu
Sample Syllabus #4: Political Philosophy
Course Description:
This course is an overview of the history of political philosophy, with a focus on the liberal
political tradition. We will explore three dominant strands of the liberal tradition: libertarianism,
with its focus on the importance of self-ownership; classical liberalism, with its focus on
spontaneous order and the limits of knowledge; and modern liberalism, with its focus on the
device of the social contract for securing consent about justice. We will then explore the
troubled relationship between liberalism and community, as well as the troubled relationship
between liberalism and capitalism. This course will help you grasp the normative frameworks
that animate much of our political culture and discourse, allowing you to more clearly
understand and critically appraise them. The class will be reading intensive and involve a great
deal of class discussion.
Course Requirements and Expectations
Three short essays: 10% of final grade each = 30% final grade
Final Paper: 30% of final grade
Reading quizzes: 20% of final grade
Participation: 20% of final grade
Course Reading Schedule
Unit 1: The “Liberty” of Liberalism
Week 1
M: Introduction to the course
T: Constant, “The Liberty of the Ancients Compared with that of the Moderns”
W: Isaiah Berlin, Two Concepts of Liberty, Parts 1-3
Th: Isaiah Berlin, Two Concepts of Liberty, Parts 4-6
Week 2
M: J.S. Mill, On Liberty, Ch. 1-2
T: J.S. Mill, On Liberty, Ch. 4
W: Judith Shklar, “The Liberalism of Fear”
Th: Judith Shklar, “The Liberalism of Fear”
Unit 2: Libertarianism and Self-ownership
Week 3
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 16
M: John Locke, Second Treatise of Government, Ch. 2-5
T: John Locke, Second Treatise of Government, Ch. 7-9
W: Mack, “Self-ownership and the Right of Property”
Th: Mack, “The Natural Right of Property”
Week 4
M: Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia
T: Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia
W: Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia
Th: C.B. MacPherson, Possessive Individualism, “The Theory of Property Right”
Unit 3: Classical Liberalism and Spontaneous Order
Week 5
M: Hume, “Of the Original Contract”
T: Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations
W: Hayek, “The Use of Knowledge in Society”
Th: Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty
Week 6
M: Hayek, Law, Legislation, and Liberty vol. 1
T: Hayek, Law, Legislation, and Liberty vol. 1
W: Hayek, “Liberalism”
Th: Hayek, “Liberalism”
Unit 4: Modern Liberalism and Social Contract
Week 7
M: Immanuel Kant, “On the Relationship of Theory to Practice in Political Right”
T: Immanuel Kant, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Section II
W: Larmore, “Political Liberalism”
Th: Waldron, “The Theoretical Foundations of Liberalism”
Week 8
M: Rawls, Justice as Fairness, a Restatement, “Part II: Principles of Justice”
T: Rawls, Justice as Fairness, a Restatement, “Part III: The Argument from the Original
Position,”
W: Rawls, Justice as Fairness, a Restatement, “Part V: The Question of Stability”
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 17
Th: Habermas, The Inclusion of the Other, Ch. 9-10
Unit 5: Liberalism and Community
Week 9
M: Charles Taylor, “Atomism”
T: Michael Sandel, “The Procedural Republic and the Unencumbered Self”
W: Marx, “On the Jewish Question”
Th: Marx, “On the Jewish Question”
Unit 6: Liberalism and Capitalism
Week 10
M: Karl Marx, “Alienated Labor” and “Private Property and Communism” from Economic and
Philosophic Manuscripts
T: Samuel Freeman, “Capitalism in the Classical and High Liberal Traditions”
W: Gerald Gaus, “The Property Equilibrium in a Liberal Social Order”
Th: TBA
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 18
Alan Reynolds
Department of Philosophy, University of Oregon
alanr@uoregon.edu
Course Evaluations Synopsis
Course evaluations at the University of Oregon include quantitative measures as well as
qualitative comments. From the quantitative measures, I present my average scores for two
questions (the set of questions is different for solo taught classes and discussion sections). The
responses range from 1 (worst) to 5 (best). Below the quantitative data you will find selected
qualitative comments from selected courses. Complete PDF copies are available upon request.
Solo taught courses
Question 1: What was the quality of the instructor’s teaching?
Question 2: Student contributions were encouraged and respected (agree=5; disagree=1).
Course term
Fall 2011
Spring 2012
Question 1
4.71
4.42
Question 2
4.95
4.63
Assistant taught courses
Question 1: What was the quality of the lab or discussion leader’s teaching?
Question 2: How well did the GTF facilitate discussion?
Course term
Fall 2009
Winter 2010
Spring 2010
Fall 2010
Winter 2011
Spring 2011
Winter 2012
Fall 2012
Winter 2013
Spring 2013
Question 1
3.72
4.14
3.82
4.06
4.09
4.18
3.79
4.40
4.06
4.96
Question 2
3.41
3.74
3.36
3.64
3.87
3.71
3.64
4.22
4.09
4.81
Winter 2010
 “[V]ery passionate about philosophy.”
 “I found Alan Reynolds’ discussion section to be vital to my comprehension of the material
presented throughout the course. He asked appropriate questions of us. This gave rise to
intellectual discussions in which we dissected the many theories in question. It is clear to me
that Alan cared about our comprehension of the material. He intently listened to questions
asked of him and answered them in detail. I felt no hesitation to go over the material with
him when there was something that I did not understand because he genuinely wanted us to
understand the material.”
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 19
Winter 2011
 “Alan was the best GTF I have had so far at the university. He has a true passion for the
subject of philosophy and was able to create a great learning environment. I don’t think any
student felt uncomfortable about talking in Alan's discussion because he was so
accommodating. Alan made discussion periods very productive, and was very helpful at
reinforcing topics from lecture as well as introducing new ones. For a GTF, I believe Alan is
as good as an undergraduate could hope for. I really don’t have much to say about
improvement - Alan really did a great job!”
Fall 2011 (solo taught)
 “Maybe the best course I’ve ever taken here at the U of O, because of the way you explained
everything. If taught by someone else, this class could very well have been exceedingly
tedious. I felt like I got my moneys worth for once. The essays were awesome. Class was run
efficiently. You are good at stimulating discussion and helping us relate our ideas.”
 “I really enjoyed this class. Alan gave out the perfect amount of reading and subsequent
relevant lectures. The lectures were always very interesting. He also connected with the text
on a personal level and was not afraid to share that with us. I felt very comfortable in that
class and was always surprised when the time was up. He did a very good job at making
seemingly unapproachable philosophical texts understandable.”
 “Upon discovering this course was taught by a Graduate student rather than a Professor I was
initially skeptical. HOWEVER, Alan Reynolds impressed me. Especially after the second or
third week his confidence changed and he held a strong presence in front of the class just as
strong as any professor. Philosophy is a difficult subject to instruct and Alan did an amazing
job regardless of the fact that it was his first time instructing a course on his own. Each class
was well planned, and structured. He was very open to changing his approach to different
aspects of the course when someone voiced confusion.”
 “This class was awesome. Great content organized and presented in a great way. Stimulated
great interest in the topic. Never told anyone they were wrong and listened when people
raised their hand. As a result, discussion was encouraged and comfortable.”
 “Loved the course. Favorite class I've ever had. Learned way more than I ever expected, and
wish to learn more because of it. Wish I could take it again!”
Winter 2012
 “Alan is a great teacher. He is very knowledgeable, which is evident. However, he gives a
tremendous amount of respect to students’ views, and constantly challenges us on them. He
is one of the best GTFs I have had at the UO.”
Spring 2012 (solo taught)
 “Mr. Reynolds is not only one of the best GTFs I've had, he may be one of the most effective
teachers I've had at the university. His teaching was fantastic and well thought out.”
 “He was very receptive to students’ questions and different comprehension levels of the
course material. I felt that the way that the material was presented was effective and helped
me to understand the concepts… Alan is really enthusiastic about philosophy, and very
approachable, which is great for a someone who has never taken philosophy.”
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 20
Winter 2013
 “Alan is a great discussion leader and knows how to keep his students focused and on topic,
but still lets them have some fun debating topics and ideas when it is appropriate… Overall,
Alan is a fantastic discussion leader I thought he was very friendly, helpful, and all around
good discussion leader. I could not have asked for a better one.”
Spring 2013 (most recent assistant taught philosophy course)
 “He went above and beyond, in and outside class. The best thing about Alan was not only
was he very knowledgeable, he has a knack to break down difficult texts into ways that are
comprehensible. Excellent moderator for discussions as well. Great job on communicating
concepts and general enthusiasm for the material.”
 “Alan should be a professor. He is extremely concise and clear. I feel like I learned more
from his discussion section than the actual class! The few times he taught the class his
lectures were great and I was actually able to comprehend his slides.”
 “I believe that running a fairly open discussion section is a massive positive that other
discussion sections could take a cue from, by far Alan was the best discussion leader that I
have had at UO in 5 terms of attendance.”
 “Alan provided a structured approach to understand the authors’ writings. I am able to better
articulate my arguments with the support and feedback Alan provided. Alan was generously
available for coaching and discussion… I hope someday to refer to Alan as Professor.”
Reynolds – Teaching Dossier – p. 21