Modern political philosophy

In previous years, students have given presentations but feedback suggests they dislike listening to those presentations, and usually find them overlong – despite continual exhortations on the tutor’s part for presenters to be more concise.

For this reason, and because of the unusually large number of students taking the course this year, we shall experiment with a new form of participation.

Having read the assigned “Presentation Reading”, selected students will imagine that we have all just heard a seminar presentation of the paper and will attempt to formulate a question that could be posed for the author by a member of the audience. 

Some audience members, especially in academic cultures that are uncompetitive and authoritarian, tend to make speeches rather than ask clear focused questions. Please do not imitate them!

Instead assume your audience has limited patience and try to be concise. Where you engage is some explanation of the specific question you pose please make this clear by writing the question in bold type. Where you quote a statement by someone else please clearly indicate the source of your quotation so that interested listeners can easily check it.

The question might address whether some of the author’s premises are sound or whether her conclusion follows from her premises. It might instead attempt to identify a specific unclarity in the author’s remarks and suggest some ways in which it might be resolved; or it might ask what the implications of the author’s position are for a specific practical issue.

The class will then discuss how the author might respond, and other issues raised by the question. To facilitate discussion and encourage clearly formulated questions, each question should be sent to me via email by 10.00 on Tuesday morning, and I will then pre-circulate the questions before the class.

Assessment

Completed essays should be submitted to me via andrew.williams@upf.edu by noon on December 22, 2014. All essays must include a Word Count, and be under 2,000 words; students should not count on excess words being read. Late essays and essays without a Word Count will receive a grade but no comments, and may be subject to further penalty of .5 for every 24 hours delay.

All essay titles must either come from a list of Sample Titles below or receive the written agreement of the Tutor by December 2, 2014. A one point penalty will be deducted from the grade of any submitted essay failing to satisfy this condition; i.e. if penalized, an essay that would otherwise receive a grade of 7 will receive a grade of 6.

When devising a title please ensure that it addresses a subject clearly related to the course. When you write on that subject ensure that it is clear you are drawing on the course, and some of the module readings. On no account, attempt to recycle material you have used in other courses, here or elsewhere, or write more than 2,000 words. Also, because depth is far more important than breadth, don’t feel that because you’ve read something you should refer to it in your essay.

Students may not miss over 20% of the sessions without a serious and documented justification. Class participation (attendance, initial questions, and discussions) may raise the essay mark up by half a point. When making initial question students should speak for no more than 5 minutes and should not merely summarize the reading. Instead they should pose a question or raise an objection or identify an unclarity in the reading.

Sample Essay Titles

Here are some possible titles.

1. “If Hobbes’s description of individuals in the state of nature was sound then they would be unable to institute a state.” If so, does this undermine Hobbes’s defence of political authority? If not, why not?
2. How, if at all, does game theory help us to understand and evaluate Hobbes’s political philosophy?
3. Explain and assess Locke’s justification of private property.
4. Explain and assess Locke’s argument for the conclusion that consent is necessary for political authority.
5. What was Rousseau’s biggest mistake?
6. Does Rousseau succeed in showing that democratic authority preserves freedom?
7. What are the strengths and weaknesses of Marx’s critique of capitalism?
8. Is capitalist exploitation always unjust? If so, what follows? If not, why not?
9. Should all restrictions on liberty be governed by Mill’s “one very simple principle”?
10. On what grounds is the right to freedom of expression best defended?
11. Does Mill succeed in reconciling liberalism and utilitarianism?

Grading Guidelines

When drafting your essays, here are four questions to ask yourself.

• Is my writing clear and concise and my argument well-structured?
• Does my essay demonstrate an understanding of the issues and some of the relevant literature raised by the question under consideration?
• Does my essay argue a plausible case in response to that question?
• Does my essay anticipate and attempt to rebut some of the most likely responses to that case?

These are also the types of question that will be considered when your essays are graded. It is therefore well worth considering those questions as you write, as well as the following more specific suggestions.

(1) Argue a case in response to the essay title. An essay is better to the extent that it defends a particular conclusion in some depth, explicitly setting out a supporting argument. You should avoid writing that merely surveys various positions without attempting to establish a particular conclusion. In addition, you should ensure that the essay answers the specific question under consideration. In some cases, the question will include certain technical terms, and these will need to be defined or discussed.

In supporting your conclusion you may refer to the work of particular theorists. In doing so, it is desirable to expound and assess their views. How convincing are the arguments for or against them? Are there any relevant distinctions that the authors ignore? Are their inferences valid and their premises sound? Essays are often more engaging if you take a stand on the issue yourself and argue for it as convincingly as possible. If this is not possible, because you are undecided on the issue, you should argue why neither side of the case is wholly convincing.

(2) Ensure that your essay is clearly structured. It might, for example, include: an opening section, in which the key terms are defined and, perhaps, the main features of the essay are sign-posted; a middle section, in which the arguments are developed, making the necessary distinctions, responding to possible objections, and criticizing other positions; and, if space permits, a set of conclusions which summarize the key features of the argument and re-address the original question.

(3) Express your ideas as clearly and concisely as possible. Always define any technical terminology you find in the question or yourself employ. Essay-writing requires thought about how best to communicate your ideas. It might be that the way in which you arrive at a view is not the best way to present it. It can be very worthwhile to ask someone to read a first draft of your essay in order to remedy obscurities or gaps in the argument, and take into account their comments. 

Writing Guidelines

For further guidance about philosophical writing, I strongly recommend that you read James Pryor’s excellent “Guidelines on Writing a Philosophy Paper”:

http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/guidelines/writing.html

For more general guidance on writing effectively in English, I also strongly recommend Joseph Williams’s excellent book, Toward Clarity and Grace, available here:

www.unalmed.edu.co/~poboyca/documentos/Doc.%20Seminario%20I/style.pdf.

Not merely because this a political philosophy course taught in Barcelona, I  recommend reflection on the six rules mentioned in the George Orwell’s classic essay on style, “Politics and the English Language”, which is available here:

www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_polit/.

It might also be instructive and entertaining to consult James Lenman’s advice on essay-writing, which is available at:

http://www.shef.ac.uk/content/1/c6/03/50/55/Crap%20Essay.doc

Please do not hesitate to contact me with further questions or requests for supplementary reading.