7/28/2019 447S12-Syllabus

1/8

Theory of Knowledge:

Epistemology, Epistemic Virtues, and the Disciplines

Philosophy 447/502 Syllabus

TR 11:00-12:15Spring 2012

Professor:

Michael O'Rourke, Morrill 411, 885-5997 or 885-7107, morourke@uidaho.edu,http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~morourke

Office hours: 12:30-1:30 WR, or by appointment

Room:

We will meet in Albertson 112.

Texts:

Required:

On Epistemology, Linda Zagzebski, Wadsworth

Knowing Full Well, Ernest Sosa, Oxford

These books are on sale at the UI Bookstore. Additional readings will be made available via e-

reservethese will be especially important during the second half of the class. I encourage youto look at these, especially when it comes time for you to give your presentation. I will put a linkto e-reserve on the webpage, located at http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~morourke. The

syllabus, handouts, my lecture notes, and pointers to relevant philosophy sites will also beavailable there. If you miss class, you will need to print copies of the lecture notes and what

handouts you missed off the website.

Something about the Course:

I don't hunt, but I have friends who do. One day, one of these friends approached me and beganasking me about what I did for a living. During our conversation he said, Why do we need to

worry about those things? Why do we need an account of knowledge, for instance? I grant thatknowledge is important to a successful life, but consider this. When I'm out in the field hunting

pheasant, I don't need a theory of pheasants to succeedall I need is the ability to recognizeone when I see it. The same thing is true of knowledge and life: we don't need a theory of

knowledge in order to succeed at life; all we need is the ability to recognize knowledge whenwe have it.

My friend was right that the ability to distinguish knowledge from opinion helps one get along in

7/28/2019 447S12-Syllabus

2/8

life, but I disagree with his dismissive attitude toward a theory of knowledge. Think abouthunting for a moment. The ability to succeed as a pheasant hunter certainly requires the ability to

recognize a pheasant when you see it, but this ability is not sufficient for success. You must alsoknow where to go to find pheasants; that is, you must know something about the pheasant's

habitat. Furthermore, you must know something about what to do when you recognize the bird;

in other words, you need to know how the recognitional ability fits into the larger context. Wemight also be led to wonder about the nature of this ability; in particular, how can we be sure thatit works? What justifies us in relying on it when we are out in the field? You may not need a full-

blown theory of pheasants, but some understanding of pheasants and hunting seems like amust for consistently successful hunting. I think the same is true of more abstract quarry such as

knowledge. Sure, we could get by without a theory of knowledge, but our chances of consistentlysuccessful knowledge acquisition are enhanced by increased understanding, and this is gained

through our attempts to characterize and explain itthat is, our attempts to develop a theory ofit. Given the centrality of knowledge in our lives, it is all the more incumbent on us to pursue this

sort of understanding. Pheasant tastes good, but knowledge tastes better.

Our attempt to acquire understanding of this type will proceed in three nested stages. First, wewill begin by examining the traditional, analytic framework for epistemology. This is connected

to three general questions: What is knowledge? What are its sources? Do we have any? This partof the course will be supported by a couple of historical readings and by e-reserve. Second, we

will work through the Zagzebski and Sosa books. As we do this, we will retrace a few of thesteps we took in the first stage, although both books are written from the perspective ofvirtue

epistemology, and so their take on some of the more traditional concerns is somewhat different.The balance of the course will be devoted to contrasting Epistemology, understood as a

subdiscipline within philosophy, with various disciplinary epistemologies, understood as ways ofknowing appropriate to particular research worldviews. We will read essays that detail a variety

of different disciplinary epistemologies with a view to making sense out ofinterdisciplinaryepistemology, that is, the epistemology of interdisciplinary inquiry. Near the end of the semester,

I will argue for a particular view of the epistemic landscape that draws on the virtueepistemology presented in the second stage and focuses on interdisciplinary epistemology in

particular.

Goals & Objectives:

I have several goals for this course:

Reflect on the thing that brought you to the university in the first place: knowledge.Over the course of the semester, you will wonder how it is related to and different

from right opinion. In addition, you will ask questions like: what sort of justificationis required for knowledge? Can this justification be achieved for beliefs about facts

and events in the world? What is the logical character of knowledge? In whatrelationship does it stand to our consciousness and our psychological life more

generally? While it is certainly legitimate to be skeptical from time to time, should webe more generally skeptical about claims to knowledge? Do investigators use the term

knowledge differently, and if so, what does this tell us about that concept and aboutthe project of epistemology more generally?

7/28/2019 447S12-Syllabus

3/8

Begin developing sustainable views of your own about knowledge and belief. To this

end, I have sacrificed breadth in favor of depth to give you the opportunity to engagein a sophisticated way with two research trends that are of great contemporary

significance to epistemology. We will carefully work through two texts that explore

the issues mentioned above, along with articles that supply various perspectives ondisciplinary epistemologies, and in so doing we will develop our own intuitions aboutepistemological issues. Philosophy isnt about memorizing the positions of others or

about mastering a vernacular. Philosophy isnt about memorizationits aboutintellectual growth.

Develop critical reading, listening, and writing skills. Good philosophers arecharitable readers and listeners, and they are also cogent writers. Philosophicalwriting is difficult, but clear thinking and clear writing go hand in hand. You will be

given the opportunity to exercise these skills in this class.

Do work at the cutting edge work in epistemology. We will talk about the broaddiscipline of epistemology, but we will also have a chance to learn about what is

happening in the discipline as we speak. Both of these books are new and are writtenby top-flight epistemologists. Further, I am currently working on an epistemology

research project that concerns interdisciplinary epistemology, which must beunderstood in connection with what well study in the second half of the semester. I

hope to advance this through the work I do in here, and I will look to you for aid.

Class Structure:

I will begin with a couple of weeks of lectures and discussion designed to provide you with ageneral framework for thinking about epistemology as a philosophical sub-discipline. We will

then read Zagzebski and Sosa in turn. All of this will be supplemented by e-reserve papers. Weshould have these in hand around Spring Break, at which point we will turn our attention

exclusively to e-reserve when we begin discussing disciplinary epistemologies.

I plan to lecture on the readings before I turn things over to discussion. The lectures will beinformal and you are encouraged to interrupt me with questions, challenges, jokes, etc. I am

thinking about conducting a few Socratic method sections, where I come in and guide the classthrough the material with questions. (Think law school.) If I decide to do this, you will be

warned in advance, and you need to come to class prepared. During the week, my hope is tolecture on the readings on Tuesday and have student presentations followed by discussion on

Thursday for those enrolled in 447. This presentation requirement is described below. For thoseenrolled in Phil 502, the second meeting will have a different structuresee below. Requirements:

Class Participation: You will not be required to contribute to the discussions, but you will be

expected to prepare by doing the readings and attending class, remaining attentive and engagedwhile there. I will take attendance daily. You will be allowed two unexcused absences, and every

7/28/2019 447S12-Syllabus

4/8

unexcused absence after that will result in the loss of one of your ten class participationpercentage points (see below). Furthermore, you will be expected to turn your assignments in

regularly and on time. The topics we will consider are complex and challengingif we hope toacquire understanding of them, we must work together. In some classes you are encouraged to

contribute only if you have knowledge; here you are asked to contribute so that we can figure out

what knowledge is.

Papers: Aside from thinking so hard that you develop headaches and lose all track of time, your

principal responsibility in this class is to write, and the most substantial piece of writing will be aresearch paper on a topic in the theory of knowledge. You will be responsible for selecting the

topic. The paper should be no less than 10 pages and no more than 15 pages in length. It will be aresearchpaper, and I will require you to use at least five recent sources (i.e., within the last two

years). This will mean that you will spend time in the library and on article databases exploringcurrent discussions of your topic. You will submit two drafts of this essay to me for evaluation.

The first draft is due in class on March 29 and the final draft is due in my box by 5 pm onThursday, May 10. There will be no final exam. Depending on the number of people we have

enrolled in 447, there may be a 30-minute oral exam on your final paper during finals week.Students enrolled in 502 will be expected to schedule a 30 to 45-minute defense of their paper

during finals week.IMPORTANT: the first paper you submit should not be your first androughest draft. I would encourage you to think "paper topic" from the get go in this class. I am

happy to look at and comment on rough notes, outlines, or early drafts prior to March 29. Lateresearch papers will be docked a letter grade for each class period they are late, unless you

contact me on or before March 28 and give me a compelling reason for your late submission.

In addition to the research paper, you will produce 9 or 10 weekly reading essays over the courseof the semester. These essays will be two pages in length, and they will concern some argument

or issue in the assigned reading for each topic. I will give you topic ideas for the first two essays,but then you will need to select the subject of each essay. (An important part of your

philosophical development is learning how to get puzzled by what you read.) You should devotethe first half of the essay to reconstruction of the argument or issue you focus on and the second

half to your comment. This comment can be critical in nature, but it need not be. For example, ifyou focus on an argument that you find compelling, you could devote the comment to

consideration of the arguments implications. The first of these is due in class on Thursday,January 26. I will not accept late reading essays, where late means submitted after class is over

on the day the assignment is due. If you know you will have a conflict, you need to speak withme in advance and get the paper to me in advance.

One of the writings that will count as a reading essay will be a discussion summary. This will be

assigned at the same time that presentations are assigned. Each time there is a presentation, oneor two people will be asked to prepare a 2-page summary of the discussion that follows the

presentation. The point here is not to submit a transcript; rather, you are to think about thearguments put forward in the discussion and supply your take on their nature and quality. You

should submit a hard copy of this to me, as well as an electronic copy in html format as anattachment. I will publish it on the web for the rest of the class.

The first written assignment is due by midnight next Thursday, January 19. You will need to

7/28/2019 447S12-Syllabus

5/8

compose an e-mail message on the email account that you check most regularly and send it to meat morourke@uidaho.edu. In this message, I want you to explain to me why you took this class

and what you hope to get from it. Also, I would like a paragraph in which you tell me what youthink knowledge is. This is worth two points and will be considered a part of your reading essay

grade. Please put the course number (Phil 447 or Phil 502) in the subject line.

There will also be some in-class writing that will not be graded. This writing will be done inadvance of some discussions as well as after some discussions. You learn philosophy by thinking

about it, and you learn to think about it through writing.

Presentation Requirement in Phil 447: You will be responsible for kicking off discussion of oneof the topics this semester. This presentation should be at least 10 minutes in length and no more

than 15. You may select any aspect of the assigned reading as your focus, and you can approachthat focus from any angle (e.g., analytical, critical, rhetorical, etc.). You will need to write these

presentations out (they should be 4 to 5 pages in length) and meet with me no later than theTuesday before you are scheduled to give your presentation.If you do not contact me before the

presentation with drafts of your work, I will deduct a letter grade from the final evaluation.When you arrive for class on the day of your scheduled presentation, you will need to submit a

draft of the presentation to me and a handout to the class; you will have until Tuesday of the nextweek to submit the final draft. The presentation write-up will count as your reading essay for the

week in which you give the presentation. The grade you receive for your presentation will bebased primarily on the written piece you present, although I will also evaluate the effectiveness

of the presentation itself and your ability to direct the discussion that you kick up. (Together, thequality of the presentation and the facilitated discussion count as much as the essay.) Please

begin thinking about what you would like to present; I will distribute a sign-up sheet nextTuesday and take volunteers for presentations on 1/26; all others will be asked to provide

alternatives by the 1/24.

Graduate Students in Phil 502. If you are enrolled in Phil 502, you will be expected to (a) attendclass on Tuesdays at the scheduled time, (b) do the reading essays and research paper, and (c) do

the reading assigned below. You will not be required to attend the scheduled Thursday session;instead, we will work out an alternate meeting time during the week. During this alternate time,

you will each provide a one-minute presentation of the main argument of your paper, and thentake turns presenting the material for the week in seminar-style. These presentations will be

evaluated as your presentation grade, although you will not be expected to produce a lengthieressay for the weeks you present. In addition, you will be required to defend your revised research

paper in an oral exam during finals week. The point of these additional requirements is toprovide graduate students with an experience that enables them to exercise their research skills

beyond what would be expected of them in an undergraduate course.

Grading:

The research paper and presentation will be assigned letter grades. The reading essays will beevaluated on a scale of 0 to 3, with 0 indicating no credit, 1 adequacy, 2 high quality, and

3 excellence. At the end of the semester, I will drop your lowest score and add the pointsyouve received on the remaining essays, and then curve these totals to determine what grade

7/28/2019 447S12-Syllabus

6/8

you will earn for the reading essay component of this course. You should expect to average a 2on these to earn an A, with a B coming in at around 1.75, a C at 1.5, etc. There is a

handout that describes my grading style available on the web page.

The final grade will be determined as follows:

Research Paper Rough DraftFinal Draft

15%35%

Reading Essays 25%

Presentation 15%

Class Participation 10%

100%

Students in 502 will be graded according to the following schedule:

Research Paper Rough DraftFinal Draft + Oral Defense

10%40%

Reading Essays 25%

Presentations 15%

Class Participation 10%

100%

Incompletes:

I do not give incompletes, except in the event of an emergency. If you believe that youremergency qualifies you for an incomplete, you will need to discuss it with me, probably at

length.

Accommodation for the Disabled:

The Department of Philosophy and my office are located on the 4th

floor of Morrill Hall, whichis accessible by elevator. If you have a disability that you believe might come into play in this

class, please let me know.

Academic Honesty:

It is the policy of the Department of Philosophy to refer all instances of suspected academic

dishonesty to the Student Judicial Council. For more about academic integrity, visit and

review the University of Idaho Academic Integrity website, located at

http://www.students.uidaho.edu/default.aspx?pid=45708. Do your own work! Dont

7/28/2019 447S12-Syllabus

7/8

plagiarize!

Tentative Schedule:

Here is a tentative schedule, which will likely be modified as we go. I will announce all

modifications.

Topic Reading

Syllabus NA

Introduction

The Historical Context

Plato, The Meno

Descartes,Meditations

Hume,Enquiry (Sects. 1-5, 12)

The Traditional Theory of Knowledge

The Analysis Knowledge Campbell, ORourke, and Silverstein

The Sources of Knowledge TBA

The Extent of Knowledge TBA

Epistemology and Virtues, Part 1

Epistemic Value Zagzebski, Ch. 1

Skepticism Zagzebski, Chs. 2, 3

Epistemic Virtues Zagzebski, Ch. 4

Knowledge Analyzed Zagzebski, Ch. 5

Epistemic Good and the Good Life Zagzebski, Ch. 6

Epistemology and Virtues, Part 2

Knowledge and Agency Sosa, Chs. 1, 2

The Value of Knowledge Sosa, Ch. 3

Four Views of Human Knowledge Sosa, Ch. 4, 5

Knowledge and Experience Sosa, Ch. 6

7/28/2019 447S12-Syllabus

8/8

Instruments and Testimony Sosa, Ch. 7

The Problem of Circularity Sosa, Ch. 8

Interdisciplinary Epistemology

What are Epistemologies? TBA on e-reserve

Knowledge and Ways of Knowing TBA on e-reserve

Disciplinary Epistemologies TBA on e-reserve

Interdisciplinary Epistemology TBA on e-reserve

Epistemic Integration TBA on e-reserve

Disagreement and Compromise TBA on e-reserve