Metaethics
Basic Information
Description
The aim of the course is to familiarize students with the main issues and positions in contemporary metaethics and to give them the tools to begin to defend a view of their own.
More specifically, students should:
- Understand the main positions in the metaethical debates of the twentieth and twenty-first century.
- Understand most of the key notions and arguments used in this debate.
- Practice the competent application of these notions in a philosophical debate.
- Critically assess the arguments that have been deployed in these debates.
- Develop the ability to articulate one’s own position in this debate (at least provisionally) and to defend it in argument.
This contributes to the following competences promoted by the master’s degree in Analytic Philosophy:
- Use the terminology, concepts and methods in contemporary analytic philosophy in a competent manner and apply them to the argumentative defence of a position.
- Identify the current state of a particular philosophical debate and form a reasoned view, albeit provisional, about it.
- Conduct a philosophical discussion (orally and in written form) by putting forward, for example, general arguments or specific examples, in support of one’s own position.
- Work independently, as well as in a team, in an international environment.
- Apply one’s knowledge independently and creatively to new problems, i.e., employ knowledge and abilities acquired in one area in order to address new problems or problems in different areas.
- Conduct philosophical research in an independent and autonomous way (as is required, for example, in pursuing doctoral studies).
Learning outcomes
Basic competences
Knowledge forming the basis of original thinking in the development or application of ideas, typically in a research context.
Capacity to communicate conclusions, judgments and the grounds on which they have been reached to specialist and non-specialist audiences in a clear and unambiguous manner.
General competences
Capacity to design, create, develop and undertake new and innovative projects in the field of interest.
Capacity to engage both in general and specific discussions in the field of metaethics.
Capacity 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 own position.
Capacity to work, both independently as well as in a team, in an international environment.
Capacity to identify methodological errors, rhetorical, conventional and uncritical assumptions, vagueness and superficiality.
Specific competences
Capacity to critically engage with the concepts and methods of contemporary metaethics and to practice the competent application of these notions in a philosophical debate.
Capacity to identify the core arguments and theories of contemporary metaethics.
Capacity to assess the writings of leading contemporary philosophers in the field of metaethics.
Capacity to identify and critically engage with the current state of a particular philosophical debate and form a reasoned view, albeit provisional, about it.
Capacity to critically use specialized terminology in the field of metaethics.
Methodology
Estimated learning time
Total number of hours : 125 Hours
Activities Type of training Hours Observations
Face-to-face and/or online activities 38
- Lecture Face-to-face 2
- Group tutorial Face-to-face 36
Supervised project 27
Independent learning 60
Evaluation
Official assessment of learning outcomes
Seminars
The seminars take place each week starting from week 2. They involve discussion in small groups, focused on the assigned reading.
What do students need to do to prepare for the seminar?
Before each seminar, students are required to:
- Read the paper.
- Complete their micro-essay.
- Bring a copy of the paper and micro-essay to the seminar.
What is the micro-essay for the seminar?
The micro-essay needs to have three, signposted, parts:
1. A written summary of the paper. This needs to (1) be 200 words or more (it is not a problem if it is slightly shorter), (2) demonstrate that the paper has been read and understood, and (3) serve as a point of reference to the discussion in class.
2. A criticism of the argument laid out in the paper, which offers reasons supporting the criticism. This should be between 50-200 words.
3. One or more questions about the paper. Questions can be specific or general, and of any kind (about something that is not understood, something that makes no sense, etc.).
The deadline for the assignment is the night before each seminar. These need to be sent to ryan.p.doran@ub.edu. These exercises are worth 50% of the final grade.
Final examination
The final examination involves writing a single essay under timed conditions. Students will be given a range of questions, based on the readings covered, and will be asked to write an essay in response. The exam will last 3 hours, but students will not be expected to write for all that time. They will be expected to think and plan their essay for 1-1.5 hours, and spend 1.5-2 hours writing.
The University has a strict policy on plagiarism and fraudulent procedures. Please refer to this link for more information on this.
Assessment criteria
The final grade is based on active participation in the seminars, the assignments and the final essay.
- Class participation and seminar assignments: 50%.
- Final examination: 50%
These may be adapted depending on sanitary recommendations from health authorities and the University.
Examination-based assessment
Single assessment consists of the following activities:
- Final examination (100%): The final examination involves writing a single essay under timed conditions. Students will be given a range of questions, based on the readings covered, and will be asked to write an essay in response. The exam will last 3 hours, but students will not be expected to write for all that time. They will be expected to think and plan their essay for 1-1.5 hours, and spend 1.5-2 hours writing.
Only students who fail the course with a grade of at least 3 are entitled to repeat assessment, and the mark for repeating the assessment is capped at 5.
Students who wish to opt for the single assessment must submit the relevant form (available on the Faculty of Philosophy website) to the Ryan P. Doran within the first 30 days of the course.
Bibliography
Ayer, A. J. (1936/1971). Language, Truth and Logic. London: Penguin.
Blackburn, S. (1984). Spreading the Word: Groundings in the Philosophy of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mackie, J. L. (1977). Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong. London: Penguin.
Moore, G. E. (1903/1959). Principia Ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Smith, M. (1995). The Moral Problem. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Williams, B. (1979/1981). Internal and external reasons. In Moral Luck:
Philosophical Papers 1973–1980 (pp. 101–113). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Foot, P. (1972). Morality as a system of hypothetical imperatives. The Philosophical Review, 81(3), 305–316.
Lewis, D. (1989). Dispositional theories of value. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, supplementary volume 63, 113–137.
Railton, P. (1986). Moral realism. The Philosophical Review, 95(2), 163–207.
Scanlon, T. M. (2003). Metaphysics and morals. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 77(2), 7–22.
Street, S. (2006). A Darwinian dilemma for realist theories of value. Philosophical Studies, 127(1), 109–166.