Introductory description

It is difficult to overstate the importance of the ability to reason about arguments in our lives. We rely on this ability to justify our beliefs, challenge the views of others, make informed decisions, and persuade one another. We are more or less constantly confronted with claims, reasons, and efforts to persuade, from everyday conversations and social media to political debates and advertising campaigns. Arguments—both good and bad—shape how we think, how we act, and how we live together. Beyond our personal lives, they determine guilt or innocence in courts of law, drive political debates, influence public opinion, inform policymaking, and advance research in universities. Reasoning and argumentation skills make us critical thinkers and can help us navigate and, potentially, have an impact on a complex world marked by diverse perspectives and deep disagreements. By giving our reasons, we can persuade others or, at least, make our views better understood. By listening and trying to understand others' reasons, we can better understand their views and even be persuaded by them. This exchange of reasons—provided it remains civil—can be a powerful tool for increasing mutual understanding and even fostering cooperation.

The ability to reason about arguments is also central to philosophy. As a philosophy student, you will wrestle with arguments throughout your degree. Indeed, reason, argument, and analysis are key components of the philosophy essays you will write. This module is designed to equip you with core philosophical skills that will set you on the pathway to thrive in your course—and beyond. Each week, you will engage in a one-hour lecture and a two-hour workshop, in which you will develop and practice reasoning and argumentation skills through exercises, teamwork, and discussion. You will learn how to analyse, evaluate, and construct philosophical arguments with real-world applications. You will also develop and practice research and essay writing skills, including how to utilise the library and other resources in your assignments. Moreover, these are transferable skills that, as mentioned, will prove useful not only in your academic studies but also in everyday life and a wide range of professional contexts. Focusing on the practice and enhancement of these skills, this module embodies the Warwick Values and counts toward the Warwick Award, supporting your personal, academic, and professional growth throughout your degree.

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.

Unlike the majority of philosophy modules, this module consists of one-hour lectures and two-hour workshops. This split reflects its emphasis on developing and practicing philosophical skills.

In the first part of the module (weeks 1-3), we will start by thinking about what philosophy is and about its value as a discipline. Having established the central role of argument in philosophy as well as in our lives, we will cover the fundamentals of informal logic (i.e. the study of reasoning and argumentation in everyday natural language). In particular, we will focus on what arguments are and on how to identify, reconstruct, analyse, evaluate and construct them.

In the second part of the module (weeks 4-5, weeks 7-10), we will then consider arguments in the philosophical debate on a variety of topics with ‘real-world’ applications. These may include euthanasia, abortion, genetic engineering, and climate change, among other topics that are both philosophically interesting and relevant to our lives. In exploring these topics, we will also look at argumentative strategies and methods that are instrumental in learning how to do philosophy.

We will discuss and practice research and essay writing skills, including how to utilise the library and other resources in your assignments (esp. in the workshops in weeks 5 and 10).

Learning outcomes

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

• Identify and reconstruct arguments into standard form and argument maps
• Evaluate arguments
• Close-read and interpret philosophical texts
• Identify, reconstruct and evaluate arguments in philosophical works
• Utilise the library and other research resources in conducting independent research
• Reference appropriately
• Present philosophical arguments and ideas in a clear and concise way
• Demonstrate written communication skills through the completion of assignments
• Demonstrate oral communication skills through active participation in learning sessions and presentations
• Work effectively as part of a group on a joint project

Indicative reading list

The first part of the module draws on argument textbooks such as
Fogelin, R. & Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2015). Understanding Arguments: An Introduction to Informal Logic (9th edition).

The second part of the module engages with philosophy papers on varying topics. These may include the following:

Bourget, D. & Chalmers, D. J. (2014). What do philosophers believe? Philosophical Studies 170 (3): 465-500.

Chalmers, D. J. (2015). Why Isn't There More Progress in Philosophy? Philosophy 90 (1): 3-31.

Cooper, R. (2005). Thought experiments. Metaphilosophy 36 (3):328-347.

Crane, T. (2012). What is the Problem of Non-Existence? Philosophia 40 (3):417-434.

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.

Gendler, T. S. (2000). Thought Experiment: On the Powers and Limits of Imaginary Cases. Routledge.

Grice, H. P. (1989). Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

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

Mill, J. S. (1868). 'Speech in Favour of Capital Punishment'.

Nozick, R. (1981). Philosophical Explanations. Harvard University Press.

Rachels, J. (1975). Active and passive euthanasia. In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Exploring Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology. Oxford University Press.

Savulescu, J. & Kahane, G. (2009) 'The Moral Obligation to Create Children with the Best Chance of the Best Life'. Bioethics 23 (5): 274-290.

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

Singer, P. (2011) Practical Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

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

Smilansky, S. (1990) 'Utilitarianism and the "Punishment" of the Innocent.' The Analysis Oxford University Press: 256-261.

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

Wiland, E. (2000) 'Unconscious violinists and the use of analogies in moral argument'. Journal of Medical Ethics 26 (6):466-468.

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

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 group research project culminating in a group oral presentation.

Subject specific skills

• Reasoning and argumentation skills (analysis, evaluation, and construction of arguments)
• Researching philosophical topics
• Close-reading and interpretation of philosophical texts
• Understanding and utilising a range of philosophical methods and techniques
• Understanding how to critically evaluate philosophical argument

Transferable skills

• Critical thinking
• Teamwork
• Oral presentation skills (presenting complex arguments clearly and concisely)
• Research skills
• Time management
• Understanding the value of philosophy for other domains