Introductory description

PH146 - Reason, Argument and Analysis

Module aims

Outline syllabus

This is an indicative module outline only to give an indication of the sort of topics that may be covered. Actual sessions held may differ.

We rely on our ability to reason and justify our beliefs in every aspect of our lives. We don’t just want to reason well for our own sake but we also want to challenge the attitudes and thinking of others in a positive way. However, human beings are often bad at doing this; we are surrounded by examples of bad reasoning that has the power to infect our ability to think clearly and rationally. For example, the misleading advertisements promising to transform our lives that convince us to buy something we don't need, or the irrelevant personal attacks made during debates that lead us to doubt the concrete evidence presented. Through weekly exercises, you will develop the art of persuasion by practicing the necessary skills for good quality philosophical argument. By focusing on key issues in moral philosophy, we will see how these skills are applied to philosophical debate.

Learning outcomes

By the end of the module, students should be able to:

• Identify and reconstruct arguments into standard form, deploying acquired logical and interpretative skills
• Produce argument maps in assessing arguments in the literature and in preparing own work
• Accurately deploy concepts of argument evaluation
• Understand how to go about close-reading philosophical texts
• Deploy skills of argument identification reconstruction and evaluation to the understanding and assessment of arguments presented in philosophical works
• Fruitfully and efficiently utilise the library and other available research resources, e.g., e-journals, in conducting independent research
• Apply these skills to philosophical arguments in applied ethics
• Present philosophical argument and ideas in a clear and concise way, both orally and in written form, and respond to criticism of philosophical argument
• Employ research, presentation, logical, and interpretative skills gained on the course.
• Work effectively as part of a group on a joint project

Indicative reading list

Core text: Understanding Arguments: An Introduction to Informal Logic (Sinnott-Armstrong and Fogelin). In
addition, each week will introduce a new key text from moral philosophy to focus discussion and practice of
skills in the Seminars.

We will draw on some of the following in providing examples and as the focus of applying
philosophical skills:

Daniels, N. (1979) “Wide Reflective Equilibrium and Theory Acceptance in Ethics”, Journal of Philosophy 76(5): 256–82.

DePaul, M. (2005), “Intuitions and Moral Inquiry”, in D. Copp (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press: ch. 21.

Galliott, Jai (2012) ‘Uninhabited Aerial Vehicles and the Asymmetry Objection: A Response to Strawser’. Journal of Military Ethics 11, 1: 58-66.

Glover, J. (1977) Causing Death and Saving Lives. London: Pelican Books: Part I (“Problems and Methods”).

Kagan, S. (2001) “Thinking About Cases”, Social Philosophy and Policy 18(2): 44–63.

Kilmister, S. (2008) ‘Remote Weaponry: The Ethical Implications’. Journal of Applied Philosophy 25, 2: 121-133.

Philippa Foot (2002). ‘Killing and Letting Die’, in Moral Dilemmas: and Other Topics in Moral Philosophy (Oxford: Clarendon).

Liao, S. Matthew (2005). The ethics of using genetic engineering for sex selection. Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (2):116-118.

Marquis, Don (1989). Why abortion is immoral. Journal of Philosophy 86 (4):183-202

McMahan, J. (2006), Killing in War. (Oxford Scholarship Online) Chapter 1 and 2.

McMahan, J. and Bradley J. Strawser (eds.) (2013), Killing By Remote Control: The Ethics of an Unmanned Military. OUP.

McMahan, J. (2000) “Moral Intuition”, in H. LaFollette (ed.), Blackwell Guide to Ethical Theory. Oxford: Blackwell, ch. 5.

Moller, D. (2011) “Abortion and Moral Risk”, Philosophy 86: 425-443.

Rachels, James (1986). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. Monograph Collection (Matt - Pseudo)

Rachels, J (1975) “Active and Passive Euthanasia”, in P. Singer and H. Kuhse (eds.),

Bioethics (Blackwell, 1999), ch. 24. Originally appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine 292 (1975), pp. 78-80, and widely reprinted.

Rachels, James (2001). Killing and letting die. In Lawrence C. Becker Mary Becker & Charlotte Becker (eds.), Encyclopedia of Ethics, 2nd Edition. Routledge Savulescu, J. and Kahane, G. (2009) “The Moral Obligation to Create Children with the Best Chance of the Best Life”, Bioethics 23(5): 274-290.

Sparrow, R. (2011) “A Not-So-New Eugenics”, Hastings Centre Report 41(1): 32-42.

Shafer-Landau, Russ (1995). Vagueness, Borderline Cases and Moral Realism. American Philosophical Quarterly 32 (1):83 - 96.

Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter (2006). Moral Skepticisms. Oxford University Press.

Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter (1996). Moral Skepticism and Justification. In Walter Sinnott-Armstrong & Mark Timmons (eds.), Moral Knowledge? New Readings in Moral Epistemology. Oxford University Press

Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter (1999). Explanation and Justification in Moral Epistemology. The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 1:117-127.

Strawser, Bradley (2010), ‘Moral Predators: The Duty to Employ Uninhabited Aerial Vehicles’. Journal of Military Ethics 9, 4: 342-368.

Thomson, Judith Jarvis (1971). A defense of abortion. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (1):47-66

Thomson, J. J. (1985) “The Trolley Problem”, Yale Law Journal 94(6): 1395-1415.

Velleman, D.J. (1999). ‘A Right of Self-Termination?’, Ethics (109, 3), pp.606-628.

Velleman, D.J. (1992). ‘Against the right to die’, Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (17:6), pp.665-681.

View reading list on Talis Aspire

Research element

Students are provided with research training (delivered by colleagues from the library) and are required to complete a literature review and annotated bibliography.

International

We consider topics in applied ethics that are of global concern e.g. climate crisis and ethics of war.

Subject specific skills

• Researching philosophical topics
• Understanding a range of philosophical tools and methods, e.g. standard form, argument maps, argument by analogy, narratives
• Understanding the ways in which philosophers use the variety of tools and methods in applied ethics
• Close-reading of philosophical texts
• Understanding how to critically evaluate philosophical argument (including concepts of validity and soundness)

Transferable skills

• Work effectively in a group
• Effective oral presentation skills (presenting complex arguments clearly and concisely)
• Using research tools and referencing accurately
• Analysing and evaluating complex arguments
• Summarising complex texts
• Understanding the value of philosophy for other domains