Summer Session II: August 3 - September 4

Course Descrption:

What makes an argument good? How can you know whether someone’s reasoning is sound? How can you tell whether a conclusion really follows from its premises? This course is an introduction to formal logic, which will help us answer questions like these.

Logic provides a foundation for all other disciplines. We will approach it as the study of valid arguments, which are an essential part of correct reasoning. Regardless of what you study, logic will sharpen your ability to analyze arguments and think clearly. At its core, thinking clearly requires investigating the consequences of our assumptions—and that’s often harder than it sounds. Logic provides systematic methods for uncovering hidden consequences and thereby evaluating our assumptions.

In this course, we will learn a formal language—truth-functional logic—that allows us to be precise enough to eliminate ambiguity from our descriptions. We will learn how to construct proofs to rigorously derive conclusions that are not immediately obvious, prove arguments, distinguish valid from fallacious arguments, and construct counterexamples to bad arguments. By the end of the course, you will have a powerful set of tools for thinking clearly, arguing rigorously, and navigating complex reasoning in most disciplines. 

Instructor: 
TuTh 2:00p-4:50p
In Person

Instructor: Bosco Garcia
MW 2:00p-4:50p
In Person

Course Description: 

Why do some people believe in Bigfoot, crystal healing, or rosemary oil, and others in miracle cures and miracle diets? What distinguishes science from pseudoscience? This course begins with classic cases of pseudoscientific belief, from homeopathy to conspiracy theories, and moves on to more consequential issues like climate change denial, vaccine misinformation, and sham cures.

But our goal isn't just to laugh at bad ideas. We'll ask deeper questions: Should science be trusted? What does the reproducibility crisis reveal about the scientific method? How do corporate interests — like those of pharmaceutical or fossil fuel companies — shape what gets published, funded, or believed? And how should non-experts evaluate scientific claims in a world of information overload?

In this course, you’ll learn that the answer doesn’t come from a 'science or non-science' choice. Instead, we will consider how to distribute our confidence along a spectrum of more and less trustworthy claims. Studying pseudoscience is a great way to understand the generation of trustworthy knowledge. 

Along the way, we'll explore philosophical tools for evaluating evidence, identifying cognitive biases, and distinguishing reliable authority from manufactured doubt. Many assignments will ask you to investigate real-world claims independently, on the theory that if you make the work your own, the lessons will stick longer.

Instructor: 
TuTh 2:00p-3:50p
In Person

Course Description:

Instructor: A. Lamey
MW 9:00a-10:50a
Remote

Course Description: 

Should social media be regulated to prevent the spread of hate speech? Or should hate speech in general be subject to legal punishment, regardless of where it appears? What concerns does pornography give rise to, and might they also justify a legal response? What should we do with the work of artists who are revealed to be racists or sexual harassers? These are some of the contemporary issues and debates we will investigate in this class, which is about free speech. The proper boundary of free expression is a perennial topic of controversy. For this reason, in addition to examining 21st-century debates, we will also devote sustained attention to a major statement on free expression from the 19^th century, John Stuart Mill’s famous work On Liberty. Mill’s text has had an enormous impact on how people in the United States and elsewhere think about free speech, yet its central ideas also raise important questions about how they should be interpreted. We will come to grips with Mill by reading On Liberty in its entirety alongside an influential contemporary interpretation of his text. In addition to Mill’s view, we will expose ourselves to what contemporary thinkers have said for and against the idea of free speech as a principle of justice. The class assumes no particular conclusion on the issues we will examine and students of diverse political views who make an effort can do well. 

Instructor: 
TuTh 11:00a-1:50p
In Person

Course Description:

Instructor: 
MW 11:00a-1:50p
In Person

Course Description:

Instructor: R. Rudolph
TuTh 2:00p-4:50p
In Person

Course Description: 

Instructor: 
TuTh 11:00a-1:50p
In Person

Course Description: 

Instructor: 
MW 11:00a-1:50p
In Person

Course Description:

Instructor: D. Baird
TuTh 11:00a-1:50p
In Person

Course Description:

What can a philosopher do with film? As one might expect they can start by simply watching a film, to see if it raises philosophical problems of any sort. They can also make use of a film by considering the thought experiments the film depicts, if any (the first season of Star Trek seems to be full of those!). More generally, a philosopher can think about film as art or a certain medium and ask philosophical questions about the medium itself (e.g., what is film? Is film a form of art? What is a good film? What makes a film beautiful? What is its nature?…).

These are all worthwhile activities; but in this class we will do something different: we will focus on film as a ‘philosophical toy.’ We will ask first of all whether film as film can philosophize. This question can be broken into several: Can we make philosophy with film? Can a film propose a philosophical argument? Can we philosophize using film language only? What stories can be told through film without using natural language and narrative?

To answer these questions we will refrain from watching films that depict or mimic reality, but will turn instead to those that focus on the interiority of human life. How does thinking work? How are we affected? How does memory work? How do we fear?