This is a first course in logic for graduate students in philosophy. Wherever possible we will explore the relevance of logic to philosophy.

Topics to be covered include the following:

1. An introduction to elementary logic, i.e., sentence logic and predicate logic with identity.
2. A survey of topics in metalogic, e.g, basic syntactic and semantic concepts, consistency and completeness.
3. A survey of some philosophically interesting systems, e.g. modal logic, many valued logic, intuitionistic logic, free logic and classic Aristotelian logic.

Textbooks:

• Elements of Deductive Inference, Bessie and Glennon
• Godel's Proof, Nagel and Newman

N.B. Students are advised to prepare for the course by reviewing sentence logic and truth tables from some logic text.

N.N.B. Before the semester begins go to Amazon, Barnes and Noble etc. to purchase less expensive used copies of the text books. You will need the first of these from day one of the class.

Most scholars continue to consider the Republic Plato's greatest work. The dialogue, consisting of ten books (i.e., chapters), treats most major areas of philosophy: ethics, political philosophy, metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of education, and aesthetics. It is without doubt one of the most influential texts in the history of philosophy, and, in the last several years there have been new ideas about its unity, purpose, and the overall plausibility of some of its central claims. For example, recent scholars such as Jonathan Lear have argued that Plato's central analogy between the three classes of the ideal state and the three parts of a person's soul, which has struck many readers as strained and weakly supported, in fact reveals insightful and plausible claims about the psychology of the individual and the state.

We shall read the entire work, supplementing it with substantial readings from elsewhere in Plato; Apology, Crito, Euthyphro, Gorgias, Meno, Phaedo, and Symposium will be particularly important. Engagement with secondary literature will be mandatory. Several aspects of the Republic are focuses of my own current research, and I shall offer the seminar some new interpretations which run counter to certain well-established traditions. I hope that this critical engagement shows the value of a close reading of the text and promotes the idea that Plato continues to have substantial things to say to contemporary philosophy on several fronts. As always in reading Plato, we shall have to look carefully at the complex structure of the dialogue -- a structure which has led various scholars to posit that it was not originally composed as a single work -- as well as at the arguments. Although Socrates is obviously the primary speaker and produces the overwhelming share of the arguments, the responses by Glaucon, Adeimantus, and others at times supply quite important clues about how the development of the argument ought to be understood.

Required work will include at least two short take-home essay exams, an in-class presentation of 10-15 minutes, and a term paper of approximately 5000 words. Auditors are welcome, provided they attend regularly.

Aristotle's Metaphysics is the high point of his theoretical speculations, though not necessarily the high point of his philosophy (which might perhaps be his practical philosophy). It was the first writing to be so called, and in content as well as in name it has set the pattern ever since. Aristotle himself did not call it metaphysics but wisdom or first philosophy or theology, but seemed to identify it in the end with the study of being qua being. As such it covers an astonishing array of topics, from Egyptian history to a critique of platonizing mathematics. Much of it is preparatory, as the philosophical dictionary, or aporetic, as the review of problems, but it plunges with a passion into unraveling the being of substance (partisans of empiricism please note), and ascends like an Indian guru (the famed gymnosophists whom Alexander and his men encountered) into the essence of deity.

This course will aim to penetrate into many of these mysteries, exploiting, as it goes and as it can, some of the 2,300+ years of metaphysicalizing imitation that have intervened.

By way of preliminary reading, students may look at Ross' fine introduction in the first volume of his edition of the Greek text of the Metaphysics with commentary thereon (Oxford 1924, republished 1997). Suarez' commentary (or Index Locupletissimus), available in an English translation by John P. Doyle from Marquette University Press, is a sane and sensitive review of the philosophical issues.

In 1950, Quine woke up the analytic establishment with an argument that no individual statement can be confirmed or refuted by experience. In 1953, Wittgenstein warned us from the grave against the error of attempting to define concepts in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions. In 1956, Sellars repudiated the "myth of the given," a basic presumption of empiricism. In the late 1950's, Michael Dummett wrote a series of penetrating essays that related the semantical interpretation of the law of excluded middle to one version of metaphysical realism. In 1962, Thomas Kuhn wrote a best-selling book which argued that science proceeds through a series of revolutionary paradigm shifts that alter the meanings of concepts embedded in theories. During the 1960s, Toulmin, Hanson, Feyerabend, and Wartofsky changed the sub-discipline of philosophy of science by persuading many that science cannot be considered independently of its history. In 1973 Nelson Goodman changed the direction of aesthetics with arguments that works of art are symbols that carry cognitive content qua works of art. In the 1980's Hilary Putnam abandoned the metaphysical realism he had defended for decades, Gilbert Harman argued that ethical claims have no truth independently of the cultural systems in which they are embedded, and Michael Sandel and other communitarians claimed that contractarians and Kantians err by presuming that moral agents exist outside space and time and a particular culture.

Question. What do all these hard wrought theses produced by eminent contemporary philosophers have in common?

Answer. They are all clearly maintained and defended in works of Hegel written between 1806 and 1830.

As the French philosopher Andre Lecrivain wrote in a recent issue of The Philosophical Forum, "We strive to develop new ideas in philosophy that lead us down strange and unexplored paths. We come to the end of the path, and there always is Hegel, waiting for us." This course is an introduction to Hegel's basic ideas—in metaphysics, ethics, aesthetics, and the philosophy of culture and religion, for students whose background is primarily in non-Continental philosophy. Every attempt will be made to explain Hegel's ideas in intelligible language, even at some risk of simplifying the subject. Texts: Phenomenology of Spirit; Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences; Philosophy of Right.

This seminar is devoted to topics discussed in its title. The first topic is Russell's theory of descriptions and denoting phrases in general. I have just written a paper on the topic, which will be the basis of this discussion.

Afterwards, we will talk about Russell's theory of logic as developed in Principia Mathematica and elsewhere. Some philosophical and logical sophistication is desirable.

Prof. Orenstein will be responsible for grading in this course.

It is usual to think that referential relations hold between language and thoughts on the one hand, and the world on the other. The most striking example of such a relation is the naming relation, the sort that holds between 'Socrates' and the famous philosopher Socrates. Other sorts of words are best seen as having other sorts of referential relations to the world for which various terms are used; for example, 'denotation' and 'application'. Usually, philosophers are interested in reference because they take it to be the core of meaning. Thus, the fact that 'Socrates' refers to that philosopher is the core of the name's meaning and hence of its contribution to the meaning of any sentence - for example, 'Socrates is wise' - that contains the name.

The central question about reference is: In virtue of what does a term have its reference? Answering this requires a theory that explains the term's relation to its referent. There has been a great surge of interest in theories of reference in recent years.

This course will be concerned primarily with theories of reference for singular terms: for proper names like 'Socrates', demonstratives like 'this cat', pronouns like 'she', definite descriptions like 'the last great philosopher of antiquity', and indefinite descriptions like 'a lion'. Anaphoric reference will not be considered. Figures to be discussed include Frege, Russell, Kripke, Donnellan, Searle, Evans, Putnam, Grice, Kaplan, Wilson, Neale, Bach, Reimer.

This is an advanced course in the philosophy of language and not an introduction. Anyone wishing to take it who has not already taken a graduate course in the philosophy of language should consult with me before enrolling.

Requirements

1. A brief weekly email raising questions about, making criticisms of, or developing points concerning, matters discussed in the class and reading for that week. 50% of grade.
2. A class presentation based on a draft for a paper (topic chosen in consultation with me). The draft to be submitted before Tuesday of the week of presentation. 20% of grade.
3. A 2,500 word paper probably arising from the draft in (ii). 30% of grade.

TEXTS

• Devitt, M., and K. Sterelny: Language and Reality (2nd. edn. MIT)
• Martinich, A. P., ed. The Philosophy of Language (Oxford)
• Ostertag, G. ed. Definite Descriptions: A Reader (MIT)
• Reimer, M. and A. Bezuidenhout, eds. Descriptions and Beyond (Oxford)

This course focuses on key topics in contemporary philosophy of science, particularly in the areas of scientific explanation, inter and intra theoretical relationships, validation of scientific knowledge, conceptual change, ontology in science, and the realism/anti-realism debate. No special scientific knowledge is presupposed, only elementary (undergraduate) logic and philosophy. We will discuss essays representing the central contemporary positions and approaches, with special emphasis on the current GC-Philosophy reading list for philosophy of science.

COURSE PROGRAM: We will concentrate on the following selection of readings, which is meant to be varied enough both to embody relevant dialogue among key authors and to encourage critical discussion, in particular the following (references to "CC" are to Curd & Cover (eds.), Philosophy of Science):

EXPLANATION

• C. Hempel, "Deductive-Nomological vs. Statistical Explanation." In H. Feigl and G. Maxwell, eds., Minnesota Studies in Philosophy of Science, vol. III, 98-169 . "Two Basic Types of Explanation"; in CC: 685-694. "The Thesis of Structural Identity"; in CC: 695-705.
• W. Salmon, "Why Ask 'Why'?", in Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, Vol. 51, pp 683-705. Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World, ch. 2
• P. Railton, "A Deductive-Nomological Model of Statistical Explanation," Philosophy of Science 45 (1978): 206-226.
• P. Kitcher, "Explanatory Unification," in R. Boyd, P. Gasper and J. Trout, The Philosophy of Science (BGT), 329-247.

REDUCTION

• E. Nagel, The Structure of Science, ch. 11.
• P. Feyerabend, "How to be a Good Empiricist," CC, 922-949.
• P. Kitcher, "1953 and All That" in M. Curd and J. Cover, Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues (CC), 971-1003; BGT, 553-570.

INDUCTION AND CONFIRMATION

• K. Popper, "Science: Conjectures and Refutations" in Popper, Conjectures and Refutations, 33-65.
• C. Hempel, "Criteria of Confirmation and Acceptability"; in CC: 445-459. "Studies in the Logic of Confirmation." in Aspects of Scientific Explanation, 3-51; also in B. Brody and R. Grandy, Readings in the Philosophy of Science (BG), 258-278.

SCIENTIFIC CHANGE

• T. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, chapters 9 and 10; alternatively, selections from Kuhn in CC, 86-101, or BGT, 148-157.
• D. Shapere, "Meaning and Scientific Change," in E. Colodny, ed., Mind and Cosmos.
• Lakatos, "Falsification and The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes," in Lakatos and A. Musgrave, eds., Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, 91-196.

SCIENTIFIC REALISM

• B van Fraassen, The Scientific Image, chs 1-2.
• E. McMullin, "A Case for Scientific Realism," in Leplin, ed. Scientific Realism.
• L. Laudan, "A Confutation of Convergent Realism," in CC, 1114-1135.
• J. Leplin, A Novel Defense of Scientific Realism, chapters 3 and 5.

We will concentrate on Frege's philosophy of language, mainly on the issues that are raised in "On Sense and Reference" and "The Thought," including, but not limited to, the function/argument analysis of language, the substitution principles for sense and for reference, the nature of sense, the sense and the reference of sentences, and the doctrine of indirect reference. In addition, we will look at the definition of cardinal number presented in Grundlagen, focusing, once again, on the philosophical issues raised therein, especially, on the notion of existence, on the central role of identity for objecthood, on the distinction between concept and object, and on the proper analysis of statements of number. We will, in the end, spend some time on the formal construction in Grundgesetze.

Required Texts

1. The Frege Reader, Michael Beaney, Blackwell
2. The Philosophy of Gottlob Frege, Richard Mendelsohn, Cambridge University Press.

This course constitutes a survey of a number of important historical and contemporary works in political and social philosophy. Among the philosophers who may be read are Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Spinoza, Locke, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, Mill, Marx, Rawls, and Nozick. Texts will be available in a reading packet and/or in commonly available collections (a list of these, along with a handout of the texts for the first class, will be provided before the beginning of the term). Grades will be based on a final examination, plus a short paper.

The course aims to acquaint students with issues that have concerned epistemologists for the last century, particularly those currently under discussion. The student should come away from the course at home with "externalism," "contextualism," "truth-tracking," "Bayesian update," "Gettier perplex" and other terms of art. The student should also come away with some idea of how these issues connect with topics in the philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, philosophy of mathematics and philosophy of language.

Some students taking a core course will already have done in-depth work in the topic, and others will not, so achieving a proper balance is always a problem. I have not yet decided on a definite syllabus. There are several excellent anthologies available, particularly Bernecker and Dretske's, but also interesting material elsewhere. We will certainly be reading Nozick's treatment of skepticism, Lewis' "Elusive Knowledge," Moore on certainty, several back-and-forths on reliabilism and its critics, take a hard look at necessary truths and analyticity (reports of whose death have been exaggerated), and, as mentioned, Bayesian epistemology, particularly some recent treatments of the alleged incorrigible irrationality of human decision-making. It would be very helpful for all students thinking of taking this course to contact me at meglev@nyc.rr.com to tell me what he has done in epistemology and his general philosophical interest.

Like some ghastly Hollywood vampire, the argument from design refuses to die, no matter how many stakes are driven through its heart. This course will look at the design argument (aka the teleological, or physico-theological argument) both historically and analytically. Though earlier versions of the argument will be looked at briefly, the focus will be on teleological thinking in and after the seventeenth century. This in turn will divide into pre- and post-Darwinian periods.

Richard Dawkins says that it was impossible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist before Darwin. If this is right then there is no purely philosophical refutation or response to the design argument. But is it right? The central text to study here is Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. Excerpts from Hume's Dialogues are the standard choice in anthologies for a rebuttal of William Paley's 'watchmaker' argument, as presented in the opening chapter of his Natural Theology. But by the time Paley wrote, Hume had been dead for twenty-five years. So who was Hume arguing against? We shall look at a number of presentations of the design argument from the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries (e.g. those of John Ray, William Derham, Cotton Mather).

Another interesting aspect of teleological thinking in the eighteenth century is the decline in astronomical and cosmological versions of the design argument and the increasing dominance of versions of the argument that appealed mainly or entirely to biological adaptation. This of course made the argument peculiarly vulnerable to loss of evidence once Darwin provided an alternative explanation for the fit between organisms and their environments. Post-Darwin, there have been attempts to revive cosmological and astronomical versions of the argument from design, so it may be helpful, in judging the prospects for this revival, to look back at the eighteenth century to see what happened then.

Design arguments since Darwin fall into three main camps: versions that appeal to causal order and law-governedness in general (e.g. Richard Swinburne); arguments from the fine-tuning of the universe; and arguments that exploit gaps or weaknesses in the Darwinian explanation of biological adaptation (the contemporary intelligent design arguments are mainly of this sort). We shall look at all three types.

As usual, I shall try to make students do most of the work of presenting material after the first few weeks. One book we shall certainly use is:

• Debating Design: From Darwin to DNA ed. William A. Dembski & Michael Ruse (Cambridge University Press, 2004)

Contact: sgrover@qc1.qc.edu

As a core course, the seminar is designed to prepare you for advanced work. With that in mind, we shall begin with a historical tour to understand the problems that have defined the field and how such concerns stand in relation to those in other areas, including ethics, metaphysics, and epistemology. Toward the end of the semester, we shall read two contemporary works that explicitly address the relation of aesthetics to other areas of philosophy.

The precise reading list will be available soon. In lieu of a reasonably priced anthology that makes sense for our class, I shall make materials available in a copy packet and via library electronic and paper reserves. The two contemporary texts will be available in paper editions.

Requirements: a seminar paper (5-8 pages), a final paper (15-20 pages), and informed participation in class discussion.

Inquiries welcomed. Please use: christa.acampora@hunter.cuny.edu

vheld@gc.cuny.edu

The course will consider the concept of collective responsibility and arguments for and against its use. Among the questions to be addressed will be: Can states be responsible for their foreign policies? Can corporations be responsible for harms they cause? Can ethnic groups be responsible for violent conflict? How should responsibility in such cases be understood?

We will consider whether social groups can have rights, and some rights they may have. For instance, does a state have a right to self-defense? Do indigenous groups have rights to self-determination? Do oppressed groups have rights to use violence in pursuit of liberation? How should claims of this kind be justified?

We will consider how we should understand such social groups as states, corporations, ethnic or religious groups, families, etc. What are distinctive features of human social groups? How should kinds of groups be distinguished? Should all claims about groups be understood as claims about individual persons, or not?

Readings will be selected largely from the following paperback collections:

• Collective Responsibility: Five Decades of Debate..., ed. L. May and S. Hoffman (Rowman & Littlefield, 1991).
• The Rights of Minority Cultures, ed. Will Kymlicka (Oxford Univ. Press, 1995).
• Socializing Metaphysics: The Nature of Social Reality, ed. Frederick Schmitt (Rowman & Littlefield, 2003).

Students can begin by reading the Introduction, and Chapters 1-7 of May & Hoffman

According to Steven Pinker, "The new sciences of human nature can help lead the way to a realistic, biologically informed humanism....They promise a naturalness in human relationships, encouraging us to treat people in terms of how they do feel rather than how some theory says they ought to feel. They offer a touchstone by which we can identify suffering and oppression wherever they occur.... They renew our appreciation for the achievements of democracy and of the rule of law. And they enhance the insights of artists and philosophers who have reflected on the human condition for millenia."

Could this possibly be true?

The aim of this course will be to convince the skeptic, who suspects that mixing biology with ethics invites philosophically irresponsible speculation and entanglement in a web of confusions, and gives firm ideological support to racism and sexism, that it is somewhat true. Along the way, we will take a brief look at the evolutionary origins of intelligence, empathy, altruism and co-operation, examine the relationship between selfish genes and selfish organisms, consider the significance of evolutionary phenomena such as parasitism and the extended phenotype for our ordinary social experience, and ponder the significance of human variation and male-female dimorphism for moral theory and specifically for egalitarianism.

Requirements: Each student should present in class a clear and discussable expository + critical paper of no more than 10 minutes reading time (1500 words) related to the week's topic and write a final essay (5,000-6,000 words) on a different subject. Both short and long papers, suitably revised, should be turned in at the end of the course.

Reading List:

To Purchase:

• Richard Dawkins, The Extended Phenotype
• Leonard Katz, ed., Evolutionary Origins of Morality: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives

Excepts will be provided from at least some of (but buy them if you wish):

• Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man
• Sarah Hrdy, The Woman that Never Evolved; Mother Nature
• Matt Ridley, The Red Queen
• Brian Skyrms, The Stag Hunt and the Evolution of Social Structure
• John Maynard Smith, Evolution and the Theory of Games
• Catherine Wilson, Moral Animals: Ideals and Constraints in Moral Theory

This is the CUNY/Mt. Sinai Medical School preclinical seminar in medical ethics for M.D. and Ph.D. candidates. Extended discussions of the theoretical issues involved in the human genome project, issues in genetics, birth defect policy, humane care, life termination policies, transplants, controlled clinical trials, epidemics, incompetence, and justice in health care distribution. Several critical topics in the philosophy of science (scientific explanation, prediction, proof, controlled clinical trials, and scientific revolutions) and ethical theory will be discussed as they relate to individual topics and cases. Ph.D. students will also have the opportunity to attend Medical Center case conferences. The works to be read are:

1. Contemporary Issues in Bio-Ethics, 6th Ed., Beauchamp & Walters, Wadsworth
2. Philosophy of Natural Science, Hempel, Prentice-Hall

Plus handouts.

Prerequisite to consideration for medical ethics clinical fellowships at Mt. Sinai.

Instructors:

• Bernard Baumrin, Ph.D., J.D., Professor of Philosophy (CUNY), (212) 787-5638
• Daniel Moros, M.D., Assoc. Professor of Neurology (MSMC), (212) 241-8134

See the course web page for more information.

W. V. Quine is well-known for arguing extensively against understanding the semantic aspects of speech in terms of analyticity and cognate notions, and for espousing "the baselessness of intentional idioms and the emptiness of a science of intention" (Word and Object 221). Wilfrid Sellars, in apparent contrast, is known for his view that thoughts, sensations, and other mental states are theoretical entities that have acquired a reporting role, and he espoused a broadly functionalist view intentional content and the semantic properties of speech.

We will study Quine's reasons for rejecting traditional views about intentionality and semantics, with an eye to seeing whether his views are well-founded. And we will examine Sellars' views about these same matters, both with an eye to evaluating those views and in order to see how they measure up against Quine's concerns about the groundlessness of traditional views of intentionality and semantics. Also crucial to our study will be the examination and evaluation of the views of both about the relationship between language and thought and, in particular, the connection between the intentionality of thought and the semantic properties of speech acts.

Readings will be from:

This course is intended to enhance each student's skills in teaching philosophy. Among the matters to be discussed and practiced in class are motivating students, choosing texts, organizing courses, making presentations, constructing examinations, and providing grades.

We shall review all the steps in teaching an introductory philosophy course, using as our introductory anthology Exploring Philosophy, 2/e (2005), ed. Cahn (Oxford University Press paperback). The book will be provided at no cost.

Grades will be based on the performance of numerous pedagogical assignments. The course is not open to auditors.

Class size is limited. Preference will be given to those who have taught philosophy or are planning to teach philosophy this year or next.