EARLY MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY
PHIL 311: Spring 2018 in Gore 308
(Note that syllabus may need to be changed if we
are confronted with a blizzard, or some such. Always check your e-mail for
messages from me in reference to the class. If we do have to reschedule, I’ll
let you know ASAP and I’ll try to put the new syllabus up on my web page.)
Prof. Katherin Rogers:
Office: #204 in 24 Kent Way, 831-8480, krogers@udel.edu.
Office Hours: 3-4:30 MW and
by appointment.
Texts:
H= (Primary Sources) Philosophy
in the Middle Ages, Third Edition, Hyman,Walsh, and Williams eds.
W= (Secondary Source) A
Short History of Medieval Philosophy, Julius R. Weinberg.
My notes are available
on-line at www1.udel.edu/rogers. These are the notes from which I lecture.
Requirements:
Three essay tests will constitute 3/6 of the grade. (Tests will consist of 5 out of 6
relatively short essays.)
Two 5-7 page research papers will constitute 2/6 of the grade. (By “research” I
mean you will have to read at least two recent articles or parts of books about
your subject in addition to some material by the original author himself. Deadlines
for papers will be strictly enforced. You will have an option to rewrite.)
Quizzes on the readings will constitute the other 1/6 of the grade. (Quizzes
will consist of one simple question on the assigned reading. You are allowed 4
“no shows” or “wrongs” without penalty.
The other quizzes will be computed on the basis of 100, so, for example,
if you got 20% wrong, you’d get an 80 which is a B- in my book.)
Final grade will
be determined by adding up your six scores/grades and then dividing by six. I
will also consider improvement on test scores and participation in class. Such
consideration usually consists in bumping up folks who are right on the
borderline to the higher grade.
Grade equivalents: 93-100=A, 90-92=A-, 87-89=B+, 83-86=B, 80-82=B-, 77-79=C+, 73-76=C,
70-72=C-, 67-69=D+, 63-66=D, 55-62=D-.
I. BACKGROUND, PLATO,
ARISTOTLE, AND PLOTINUS
February
6 Introduction
to Late Classical and Early Medieval Philosophy; Introduction to God. (No
readings.)
8 Introduction continued: W 3-9, H xi-4.
13 Background: Plato and Aristotle: W 9-20
15 Plotinus: W 20-24.
II. AUGUSTINE
20 Introduction
to Augustine: W 30-45, H 5-8. Why Darwin isn’t a problem
22 Knowledge:
H 29-34 (Text begins, “Well, if we should consider…”)
27 The Proof for God from Reason: H pp.34-48. (Stop at “I am so
overwhelmed with joy…”)
March
1 No class (I have to be out of town)
6 The Proof for God from Reason continued: H pp. 48-50. (Stop
at 18).
8 Test #1
13 Introduction to Evil: Manicheanism and Free Will (Handout on
free will for which you are responsible)
15 Free Will: H 50-56 (Stop at 3. “Surely this is the problem…”)
20 The
Dilemma of Freedom and Divine Foreknowledge: H: 56-60.
22 Original
sin, Pelagianism and Grace: H 61-63.
SPRING BREAK
April
3 The
Human Condition: (Ethics and how to get happy) H 81- 93; Political Philosophy:
H 93-99.
5 Time: H 72-81.
Paper #1 due by midnight April 7th
10 Boethius on divine
foreknowledge: H 135 (start at Prose 6) – 137.
12 Test #2
III. PSEUDO-DIONYSIUS AND SCOTUS ERIUGENA
17 Pseudo-Dionysius
and Scotus Eriugena: W 46-57.
19 Scotus
Eriugena continued: H 141-155.
IV. ANSELM
24 Anselm of Canterbury: W 58-71; The ontological argument plus
responses: H 156-157,161-164
(You
can stop with the first two lines on 164. However, pages 164-173 give you a
really nice introduction to the nature of God. It is basically what we did the
first day of class. Pages 173-181 give you the text of criticisms of the
argument by Gaunilo and Anselm’s response. We will cover this material briefly
in class, but you don’t need to read it…unless you want to.)
26 The Necessity of the Incarnation (Reading: Handout for which
you are responsible.)
May
1 Free
will and grace, free will and foreknowledge (Reading: Handout for which you are
responsible)
V. ABELARD
3 Peter Abelard: W 72-91, H 182 – 183 (Introduction to
Universals)
8 Abelard’s own views on universals: H 191-202
10 Abelard’s Ethics: H 202-214.
15 Abelards
Ethics continued and review (no reading).
Test #3 (which is just on the material we have covered since
Test #2, not a cumulative final) during final exam period.
PHIL 311: Early Medieval Philosophy: Paper #1
Guidelines for research papers.
Please read all of the guidelines very carefully, and comply! I will be
counting off for failure to follow the instructions.
Requirements are Two 5-7 page research papers; one
due at mid-term, one due at the end.
Paper
requirements: 5-7 pages, double-spaced, reasonable
margins. (See below for suggested topics) The topic (unless I have okay’ed it
otherwise) will focus on what a philosopher’s view was on a given issue. I do not
absolutely require a philosophical evaluation of the view you discuss, but I
admire philosophical creativity and am likely to look favorably on your paper
if you include some original comments, such as interesting and plausible
analysis of why you think the view you discuss could be right or wrong, or why
it might or might not fit with the philosopher’s overall view.
Sources.
You must use at least one primary text – that is, writing by
the philosopher himself. If you are doing a comparison between two philosophers
or one philosopher in different works, you’ll have to use at least two primary
texts. You can use your Hyman and Walsh book for the primary text if it suits
your topic.
You must use at least two, good secondary sources – that
is, writing about the philosopher’s
views. (You can use both of your text
books, and you may also use internet sources, but
you must find two good sources in
addition to these. That means you cannot just use
sources off the internet – unless it is articles online from established and
respectable journals which are in our library. You may use dictionaries and
encyclopedias, but I do not consider these GOOD sources, so if you use these,
you need TWO GOOD SOURCES in addition! When in doubt, ask me.)
The easiest way to know that you have a good source is to go to the library and
get out a book from a good publisher (Oxford, Cambridge, and Brill are examples
of good publishers, as are major American University presses), or get an
article from a journal the library carries. (One of the jobs of librarians is
to decide what to get for the library, so they’ve already done some of the job
for you.) If you find a collection of papers, each paper counts as a separate
secondary source. You should probably look at the secondary sources first,
since they can tell you what primary text(s) will be of use to you. If you have
trouble finding sources I may be able to lend you some.
Citations
may
take the form of parentheses in the text with a full bibliography, or complete
footnotes or endnotes. Citations should include the specific page numbers where
you found your information. I will count off if you do not include full and
correct citations. If you have any doubt at all about what constitutes a full
and correct citation, go online under “Chicago Manual of Style Citations”. The
first thing that pops up is examples of all the different sorts of sources you
might need to cite and how to do citations. When I do this, the Chicago Manual
of Style includes page numbers for books and articles. Do be sure to include
those. The thought is
that you want your reader to be able to look up easily exactly where you got
your easily.
Helpful
Hints: 1.) Focus your thesis on a narrow topic. Saying just a little on a lot of different
issues, even if they are related, does not make for a good paper. 2.) Start
researching early to be sure you find two good secondary sources that really
have something to say on your (narrowly focused!) topic. I will count off if
you actually use only one secondary
source and just mention or quote a sentence from another. 3.) Under no
circumstances should your paper consist of simply repeating what was said in
class.
You will have the opportunity to rewrite your paper
once I have returned it. Rewriting will be optional, and I will likely insist
upon a quick turnaround time to facilitate my grading. If there is significant
improvement, I will raise the paper grade. Tweaking a minor point or two, or
just getting rid of the occasional offending sentence will probably not
constitute significant improvement.
Paper
deadlines and suggested topics: You should e-mail your
paper to me in Word. It would be a great help to me if you could get your paper
in before the due date. If the time sent is later than midnight of the deadline
date, and you have not already received an extension from me (I don’t mind
giving extensions for any reasonable reason), I will count off a grade for each
day late. (So, for example, if your paper would have been a B-, but is one day
late, it’s a C+.)
I have listed some suggested topics based on issues
I’d like to hear about. I will mention others as they occur to me. You are
welcome to write on a topic other than one among those I’ve suggested, but
check with me first! And I’m quite happy to have a paper on some issue we spend
time on in class, just so you go well beyond what we do in class.
Paper
#1 due – Midnight April 7th.
Some
suggestions for topics (feel free to think of other topics, but check with me
if you decide to do a topic not on this list).
These
are topics which I find interesting, but which I have not researched myself,
so, as your first task, you will need to make sure you can find two, good
secondary sources plus a primary source on the topic. There will be disputes about these issues,
and you are welcome to just note the dispute, or to take a side.
Plato
or Aristotle on
–
time (Maybe with a comparison to Augustine. I believe Augustine explicitly
rejects Aristotle’s view.)
Plotinus on
– time; matter; evil; sense knowledge; the nature of the human soul; human free
will.
Augustine on
– how illumination works; sense knowledge; similarities and differences between
animal and human cognition; proof of the existence of a soul; the nature of the
human soul; nature of divine creation; some moral question, e.g. conduct in
war, lying; (With Augustine be careful
to be sensitive to the fact that he changes his views over time.)
(You could also compare Plotinus and Augustine on an
issue. For example, how different is divine creation from emanation, really?)
Feel
free to ask if you have any questions on what’s expected or on sources.