This course focuses
on the views of Aristotle (387–321 B.C.) about morality by means of a careful
study of his Nicomachean Ethics. Often called “the philosopher of common sense,”
Aristotle offers an extremely balanced account of many ethical questions. The
goal of this course will be to present his ideas clearly and to suggest ways in
which the thought of a philosopher from so long ago still bears tremendous
relevance for our own age. After providing some important background about
Aristotle’s general approach to philosophy, this course will turn to the text
of his main work on ethics. In the first book (and then again in the tenth), he
argues that the chief goal of human life must be something desirable for itself
and not merely as a means to something else. He then reviews the perennial candidates
for this goal, including pleasure, wealth, and honor, before arguing that the
only satisfactory answer to the question is happiness. Everything else,
including pleasure, wealth, and honor, may contribute to a happy life and may
even be necessary conditions for it, but only a life of genuine virtue will
make one truly happy.
- Teacher: Mr. Michael Anderson
The courses begins by
examining the human mind and seeing the ways in which logic is and is not a
natural part of the way we think. We’ll look at some of our cognitive biases,
ways in which social psychologists have demonstrated that the brain naturally
works against good inferences. Humans can be rational beings, but it takes work
to realize the pitfalls we need to avoid. Then, we’ll introduce a wide range of
logical concepts. We will rigorously introduce the notion of an argument and
examine both the types of arguments—deductive and inductive—and the criteria by
which we assess an argument—validity and well-groundedness. We will learn that
arguments have two parts: conclusions (that which is being argued for) and
premises (the support given for the conclusion). Next, we’ll focus on informal
logic—that is, considerations of well-groundedness, the criterion of assessment
that considers the truth of an argument’s premises. We’ll learn to spot common
fallacies, reasoning errors that sound good to the ear but that undermine the
support for the conclusion.
- Teacher: Mr. Michael Anderson