Professor Talbott                                                                                                                 Autumn 2008

Office:  Savery 252                                                                                                             Philosophy 550A:  

Phone:  543-5095                                                                                                                                Seminar in Epistemology

Email:  wtalbott@                                                                                                               Wed.:  3:30-6:00

Office Hours:  Thurs. 3:30-4:30 and by appointment                                                                 Condon 511E.     

URL:  http://faculty.washington.edu/wtalbott/                                                            

 

SYLLABUS

PHILOSOPHY 550A.  Seminar in Social Epistemology

 

                Disability Resources For Students.  If you would like to request academic accommodations due to a disability, please contact Disability Resources for Students (DRS), 448 Schmitz, (206) 543-8924 (V/TTY).  If you have a letter from DRS indicating you have a disability that requires academic accommodations, please present the letter to me so we can discuss the accommodations you might need for the class. 

 

                I. Course Goals:  Epistemology is often approached solipsistically.  For example, I know that I exist, but what reason do I have to believe that anyone else exists or even that an external world exists?  The usual presumption of this question is that whatever those reasons might be, they cannot presuppose that others exist or that an external world exists.  Especially since Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations, these solipsistic presuppositions of epistemology have been challenged by developments in what is called social epistemology.  The seminar will focus on various different challenges to solipsistic epistemology that have been raised by social epistemologists, including:  

                Are at least some fundamental reasons themselves social?  For example, it has been argued that testimony is a source of fundamental reasons—that is, reasons that don't have to be validated by any other source (where testimony is understood broadly to include all communication).  Even more radically, could the lack of testimony itself be a reason for belief?  For example, belief in the validity of Wiles's second proof of Fermat's Last Theorem seems to be supported, at least in part, by the fact that it was published several years ago and no mathematician has claimed to find a flaw with it (unlike what happened when he published his first "proof").

                Is some knowledge social rather than individual?  We will explore various senses in which it can be said that a group has knowledge and explore many different arenas in which it seems that the group's opinion is more reliable than opinions of any of the members of the group.  For example, in the 2004 presidential election, the most established political prediction market predicted the final vote more accurately than any pre-election poll and correctly predicted the winner of the popular vote in all 50 states. 

                Finally, we will consider whether evolutionary and cultural selection might favor group rationality and whether group rationality might be enhanced by individual irrationality.  Perhaps the social process of growth in knowledge benefits from diversity of opinion, so that what seem to be irrational epistemic practices, such as jumping to conclusions, generalizing on the basis of small samples, or continuing to defend a view even when it seems hopeless turn out to play a positive role in the growth of knowledge.  Combining all three of these challenges, it might be claimed that most of our knowledge is not due to our individualistic epistemic virtues, but to the way that our epistemic vices play a role in the social generation of knowledge, which then comes to us via testimony.  These are the kinds of issues that the seminar will address. 

                This course will help you to develop the ability to read and explain difficult philosophical texts and to construct, explain, and defend your own positions on difficult philosophical issues, both orally and in writing.

 

II. Course Readings.  The required readings include two texts and lots of articles.  Only one text (James Surowiecki, The Wisdom of Crowds) must be purchased.  It is available for purchase at the University Book Store.  The other text (Jennifer Lackey, Learning from Words:  Testimony as a Source of Knowledge) is available at the University Book Store and also online from Oxford Scholarship Online (to which the UW Library has a subscription), so you are not required to purchase it.  All of the articles for the course are available online.

 

                III. Course Requirements:

 

                1. EMAIL ACCOUNT.  You are required to check your U.W. email account regularly.  I will use email to broadcast general course announcements.  You can use email to ask me questions about the course, including questions about the readings or the discussion in class.  You can usually count on receiving a reply to messages to me within 24 hours.  My email address appears above. 

                2. CLASS PREPARATION AND ATTENDANCE.  The class meets each Wednesday, 3:30-6:00 (except Wed., Nov. 26 (the day before Thanksgiving Day).  Everyone is expected to do the assigned readings in advance and to attend and to participate in the discussion.  Class participation can improve your grade but cannot lower it. 

3. SHORT (2-PAGE) RESPONSE PAPERS.  Each week, except the first and last, you will send me a written discussion of some important issue raised by the readings.  The response paper should be grounded in the readings, but it should not be purely expository.  It should explain one or more important ideas in the readings and then critically discuss the ideas.  Submit your papers to the PHIL 550 electronic dropbox by noon on the day they are due (URL:  https://catalysttools.washington.edu/collectit/dropbox/wtalbott/3427).  To receive full credit for your response paper, you must be in class on the day it is due, unless your absence is excused.  Unexcused, late work can earn up to one-half credit.

                4.  DISCUSSION LEADER.  Students will sign up to lead a one-hour discussion during one of the seminar sessions.  Each student must sign up to lead a discussion session by the end of class on Wednesday, October 1.  Sign-ups will be on a first-come, first-served basis, so the earlier you sign up, the greater your choice of topics.  Discussion leaders should talk to me about their discussion topic at least 24 hours before their discussion session.  Your grade will be based, in part, on the quality of the discussion you generate.

                5. TERM PAPER (12-20 PAGES).  Each student is required to prepare a term paper. Any of the issues discussed in the course could be the basis for a term paper.  I will provide many suggestions for term paper topics during the course.  All term paper topics must be discussed with me and approved on or before the end of class on Wednesday, Nov. 19 (though you are encouraged to talk to me about your term paper before that date).  

                TERM PAPER DRAFTS ARE DUE IN THE PHIL 550 ELECTRONIC DROPBOX BY MIDNIGHT ON TUESDAY, DEC. 2.  To get full credit for your draft, you must be in class on Wed., Dec. 3, unless your absence is excused. 

                FINAL TERM PAPERS ARE DUE AT IN THE PHIL 550 ELECTRONIC DROPBOX BY MIDNIGHT ON WEDNESDAY, DEC. 10.  Reasonable extensions of time for any of the deadlines may be requested.  See below for more information on extensions of time.

 

                IV. Extensions Of Time.  Extensions of time should be requested in advance of the deadline.  Unexcused, late work will be penalized.  However, late work still earns partial credit.  I DO NOT INTEND TO GRANT ANY INCOMPLETES, EXCEPT IN CASES OF GENUINE EMERGENCIES. 

 

                V. Course Web Site.  All handouts and transparencies will be available on the course Web site (see URL above). 

 

                VI. Academic Integrity. Whenever you turn in any assignment in this course, the understanding is that what you are turning in is your own original work, except to the extent that you explicitly credit others for their contributions. You have an obligation to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, by always attributing any argument or idea that you have borrowed, even if you have modified it, to its source.  The source may be written or oral.  For example, if an argument was suggested by a fellow student, include that information in a footnote.  If it is determined that there has been cheating that involves one student copying another's work on an assignment or exam, if both students were aware of the copying, both will receive zero credit for the assignment or exam, in addition to any other sanctions that might be imposed.

 

                VII. Grades.  Grades will be based on total points (out of a total possible of 380 points) as follows:  Response papers (80 points—10 Points Each); discussion leader (50 points); draft term paper (50 points) and term paper (200 points). Grades are based on total points earned, as follows:  96% = 4.0; 95% = 3.9; 90% = 3.5; 80% = 3.0; 65% = 2.0; 50% = 1.0.  Your contribution to discussion in class can improve your grade, but cannot lower it.

 

                VIII. Course Evaluation.  Wed., Dec. 3, in class.  The course evaluation is your opportunity to evaluate my performance and to provide suggestions for improving the course.