Philosophy 2220 - Philosophy and Law (Summer 2013)
Instructor: Brian Talbot
Office Hours: Wednesday, 1:30pm-3:00pm
Office Location: Hellems (HLMS) 271
Email: When I put my address on the web, I get tons of spam. So it's a little puzzle... this course is in what department? My email address is the name of that department, @ , and then the name of this website. It's on the syllabus too.
Course Requirements
Homework: 20% of final grade
Quizzes: 20% of final grade
Midterm / first paper: 30% of final grade
Final exam / paper: 30% of final grade
Where what this website says conflicts with the syllabus, trust this site over the syllabus. Safari users might not be able to see updates to the website when they occur. It's a problem with Safari; use Firefox instead. For Firefox users, if the website is supposed to have been updated but you don't see the updates, hit the "reload current page" button.
Schedule
Tuesday, July 9:
* Introduction to the class
* Handout: Click here for today's handout.
Wednesday, July 10:
* How to use conditionals
* Normative distinctions
* Handout: Click here for today's handout.
Thursday, July 11:
* Homework: Click here for the homework due today.
Friday, July 12:
* Reading: Oberman, "Regulating Consensual Sex with Minors". Please note: This reading is 80 pages long. But you don't need to read all of those pages. Look at the homework before you read; it says there what you can skip.
* Homework: Click here for the homework due today. Please note that at least part of this homework requires a bit of internet research on your part.
Monday, July 15:
* No homework or reading for today.
* Handout: Click here for today's handout.
Tuesday, July 16:
* Reading: There are many different readings; most are fairly short, and you don't need to read all of the long one. You'll have to do all of them to do the homework.
* Reading 1 of 5: Horselenberg et al, "Individual differences and false confessions" (you can skip the "materials" section on p3)
* Reading 2 of 5: Kopel, "Miranda is not the Problem"
* Reading 3 of 5: Mount, "Strategic Deception Revisited"
* Reading 4 of 5: Gross & O'Brien, "Frequency and Predictors of False Confessions" (just read through page 8)
* Reading 5 of 5: Thomas & Leo, "The Effects of Miranda v. Arizona". (you don't have to read the whole article; please look at the homework to see what pages you have to read)
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
Wednesday, July 17
* Reading: Merriam, The Paradox of Innocence.
* Homework: Click here for the homework due today.
Thursday, July 18
* Reading: Meyerson, Why courts should not balance rights against the public interest. Note: you only need to read 801-802, and 806-817 (inclusive).
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
* Handout: Click here for today's handout.
Friday, July 19
* No homework or reading.
Sunday, July 21
* If you intend to write the paper, email me an outline by 8pm tonight. Click here for an explanation of what this outline should look like.
Monday, July 22
* "Reading": Listen to this streaming episode of This American Life; this is about an hour long.
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
Tuesday, July 23
* Reading for today: Robinson & Darley, "Does the Criminal Law Deter?".
* Homework for today: Click here for the homework.
Wednesday, July 24
* We'll talk about deterrence, and rehabilitation. No reading or homework.
Thursday, July 25
* We'll talk about punishment and the Snowden case. No reading or homework.
Friday, July 26
* MIDTERM. Bring a blue book. The midterm will cover everything that could be on a quiz, plus: arguments for and against the three views of lawmaking; main issues about laws for statutory rape, self incrimination, and the death penalty; and how all of the stuff we've talked about in class connects.
Monday, July 29
* Reading: Boonin, The Problem of Punishment (excerpts).
* Homework: Click here for the homework due today.
Tuesday, July 30
* No homework or reading.
Wednesday, July 31
* Reading: Devlin, Morals and the Criminal Law.
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
Thursday, August 1
* No homework or reading due today.
Friday, August 2
* No homework or reading due today.
Monday, August 5
* Reading: Click here for the reading.
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
Tuesday, August 6
* No homework or reading due today.
Wednesday, August 7
* Reading (1 of 2): Thoreau, "Civil Disobedience".
* Reading (2 of 2): Plato, "Crito". Focus on the last 1/3 of the text, starting where it says "Cr. I cannot tell, Socrates, for I do not know." For some context, this is a dialog between Socrates and Crito; Socrates has been sentenced to death by an Athenian court and is waiting in prison to be executed, and Crito comes and offers to help him escape.
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
Thursday, August 8
* No homework or reading.
Friday, August 9
* Final exam! Bring blue books.
Paper / final
* I've changed the due date for the final papers to August 11 at 8pm.
* On August 9, you will either turn in a paper or take a final, but not both.
* Sample paper here. Note that we covered slightly different material that semester, so some of what they discuss we haven't covered yet, and some of what we have covered, the don't discuss (specifically, they don't talk about how to deal with conflicts between goodness and wrongness as much as you should).
* If you are writing a paper, you must talk to me outside of class about your paper. Email me ASAP to schedule a time to talk.
* Details on the paper here.
* Paper rubric is here.
Things that might be on quizzes from this point forward
Please note: Questions on quizzes will often ask you to combine ideas from multiple of the categories below. So you may be asked to falsify a conditional about the connection between consent and moral wrongness, for example. When studying, you should ask yourself how every concept in each of these categories does and does not relate to every concept in every other category, and you should see if you can give a conditional showing the relationship, or if you can given an example that falsifies a conditional claim about the relationship.
* Conditionals: Be able to identify what conclusions you can draw from conditionals and what you can't, and be able to show that a given conditional is false.
* Standpoints of evaluation: know the difference between the three different standpoints we have discussed, what sorts of things count as reasons from each standpoint, be able to identify whether something is plausibly right or wrong from various standpoints. Be able to give your own examples of things that are right, acceptable, and wrong from each standpoint (i.e. give examples we did not discuss in class).
* Right/wrong/acceptable: know that these are exclusive of each other, and plausibly distinct from good and bad. Be able to talk about whether things are right or wrong or acceptable (from different standpoints) and why. Know what "duty" and "obligation" and "having a right" mean.
* Good/bad: understand difference between partly and overall good/bad, and how to derive overall goodness/badness from partial goodness/badness. Be able to discuss the partial/overall goodness/badness of things and defend these points.
* Consent: know what morally relevant and superficial consent are, be able to give examples, be able to identify if examples I give are or are not each.
* Strict liability & mens rea: Be able to define mens rea, to give your own examples of cases where it is present or absent, and be able to recognize when and why someone in an example I give does or does not have mens rea. Know what strict liability laws are, be able to give some examples, be able to identify whether or not an example I give is or isn't a strict liability law.
* Theories of lawmaking: Be able to explain the consequentialist, strict liability, and reweighting views of lawmaking. If given examples of laws, be able to say what each view would say about them. Be able to give your own examples (not from class) of laws that each view would think should and should not be makde. Be able to give your own examples (not from class) where the different views will disagree about what laws we should make. Be able to correctly use the term "side constraint."
* The problem of punishment: 1. Be able to explain who you think it is morally right or obligatory to punish (the legally guilty? the morally guilty? only those both legally and morally guilty? some other group entirely?), whether this is right or obligatory, and why. 2. Whatever your view here is, be able to provide counter-examples to the other views: you should be able to give an example of someone who would deserve punishment according to another view, but who you think clearly does not deserve punishment OR someone who would NOT deserve punishment according to the other view, but who clearly does (e.g. if you believe that all and only the morally guilty deserve punishment, then be able to give an example of someone who is legally but not morally guilty who clearly does not deserve punishment, and someone who is morally but not legally guilty who does deserve punishment). 3. Be able to explain who, according to your view, would be morally wrong to punish. 4. For each of the main reasons for punishment we discussed in class - retributivism, deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, be able to explain what, according to the view, is the reason for punishment; if given an argument for punishing a specific person, be able to identify which of these views it is most consistent with. 5. Be able to explain what "the problem of punishment is;" in other words, why do we have to justify punishment at all and what criteria should this meet? 6. Be able to define and use the term "morally justified."
* Value: Know the definitions of instrumental and intrinsic value, be able to give plausible examples of each (beyond what we've discussed in class), be able to plausibly identify examples I give as either instrumentally or intrinsically valuable.
* Moral dilemmas: Be able to explain, define, identify, and give your own examples of moral dilemmas. Understand the connection between moral dilemmas and "ought implies can."
* Victimless crime: Know the definitions of "victimless act" and "victimless crime," be able to give your own examples of each, and identify if examples I give are examples of each.
* Paternalism: Know the definition of paternalism, know the definition of strong, weak, hard, and soft paternalism. Be able to give your own examples of laws that are consistent with each, and with all possible combinations of each. If given an example, be able to recognize which version of paternalism it is consistent with.