Topics in ontology
In recent years, some philosophers have been contending that, besides traditional debates in ontology concerning the existence and reality of candidate entities of various kinds, crucial issues in metaphysics concern claims about grounding. To illustrate: questions about numbers, say, even if perhaps originally framed as questions about whether numbers exist or are real, may turn out to be more about whether numbers essentially depend, for instance, on certain concepts by subjects like us, or whether they are constituted completely independently of them.
After some general preliminary sessions about grounding itself, the seminar will visit some basic traditional issues in metaphysics, with such a conjecture in the background, in a way that will provide also a relative introduction to some of the core topics in the field—including the nature of properties, physicalism, truthmaking, values, social reality, and the metaphysics of gender, race, and sexuality.
The purpose is to open the discussion by submitting thoughts, questions, and objections. The total slot for this is up to 10 minutes per person as maximum (less may well be completely appropriate), although people are free to coordinate in the form of joint presentations. If you would like to use a handout and/or beamer, please coordinate with the instructor the week prior to your session. NB: The purpose is not to summarize the paper, that everybody will have read, but to open the discussion, by providing original contributions in the forms envisaged.
Everybody is expected to have read the papers in detail in advance, and to come to each of the ten sessions with thoughts, questions, and objections. We will do our best efforts to comply with the guidelines for respectful, constructive, and inclusive philosophical discussion: http://consc.net/norms.html
Short research papers (absolute maximum length, including footnotes and references: 2500 words) are expected on topics to be agreed with the instructor. Proposals should take the form of title and short abstract (<100 words), stating the main claim/conjecture/working hypothesis, as well as a skeleton of the structure of the argument or line of thought. (Tentatively, as the purpose is to coordinate regarding topic and kind of paper.) All materials are to be sent as attached .pdf files to email@example.com.
(Guidelines on evaluation and marking, including a note on originality and plagiarism, available at http://www.ub.edu/aphil/?q=en/content/guidelines-evaluation-and-marking.)
There will be ten regular three-hour sessions. The format will be that of a research seminar, structured around presentations by students and general discussion, led by the instructor.
Evaluation will be based on the quality of the presentation (20%), of the contribution to discussions (20%), and of a short research paper (60%), on a topic related to the seminar, to be agreed with the instructor in due time.
Intended Learning Outcomes:
CB6 – Students should be able to critically understand central texts in metaphysics in a way that puts them in a position to develop and apply original ideas.
CB9 - Students should be able to communicate their knowledge and their arguments to specialized audiences in a clear and articulate way.
CG1 – Students should be able to formulate and critically assess arguments in metaphysics.
CG2. Students should be able to design, create, develop and undertake new and innovative projects in their area of expertise.
CG3. Students should be able to engage both in general and specific discussions in metaphysics. They should be able to conduct a philosophical discussion (orally and in written form), by putting forward, for example, general arguments or specific examples, in support of one’s position.
CG4. Students should be able to work both independently and in a team, in an international environment.
CG5. Students should be able to identify methodological errors, rhetorical, conventional and uncritical assumptions, vagueness and superficiality.
CE1. Students should be able to critically engage with the concepts and methods of analtyic metaphysics.
CE2. Students shoulld be able to identify the core arguments and theories of metaphysics concerning theoretical issues.
CE3. Students shoulld be able to identify the core arguments and theories of metaphysics concerning practical issues.
CE4. Students should be able to assess the writings of leading contemporary philosophers in metaphysics.
CE5. Students should be able to identify and critically engage with the current state of debates in metaphysics.
CE7. Students should be able to critically use specialized terminology in metaphysics.
Oct 7: Intro
Oct 14: Schaffer, Jonathan (2009): “On What Grounds What,” in Chalmers, D., D. Manley, & R. Wasserman (eds.): Metametaphysics. Oxford University Press, 347-77
Oct 21: Jenkins, Carrie (2011): “Is Metaphysical Dependence Irreflexive?” The Monist 94: 267–76
Oct 28: Lewis, David (1983): “New Work For a Theory of Universals,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 61: 343–377.
Nov 4: Jackson, Frank (1998): From Metaphysics to Ethics: A Defense of Conceptual Analysis, Oxford University Press, ch 1, 1-27
Nov 11: Armstrong, David (2004): Truths and Truthmakers, Cambridge University Press, ch. 1 & 2, 1-25
Nov 25: Lewis, David (1989): “Dispositional Theories of Value,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume 63: 113–137.
Dec 2: Thomasson, Amie (2014): "Public Artifacts, Intentions and Norms", in Pieter Vermaas et. al., eds. Artefact Kinds. Springer: Synthese Library, Forthcoming.
Dec 9: Glasgow, Joshua & J. Ortega (forthcoming): 'Catchall Realism about Race'
Dec 16: Wilson, Jessica (2014): “No Work for a Theory of Grounding”, Inquiry 57: 535–79