Philosophy 235 - Environmental Ethics, Spring 2015
Instructor: Brian Talbot
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? (It's philosophy) My email address is the name of that department, @, and then the name of this website. It's on the syllabus too.
Office Location: January 201
Office Hours: I'm happy to make appointments to meet. If you want to meet without an appointment, my plan is to be in my office on Mondays and Wednesdays starting at 5:30. I'll stick around as long as there are people who want to talk to me. If no one comes by, I'll take off around 6.
Course Requirements
Homework: 20% of final grade
Quizzes: 15% of final grade
First paper: 30% of final grade
Final paper: 35% of final grade
Attendance: You get three unexcused absences/latenesses. For every one over three, your overall grade in the class decreases by 1/3 step (e.g. from A- to B+).
Schedule
A reading or homework that is listed on a given day should be read or turned in on the day it is listed.
I will not accept late homework, emailed homework, or handwritten homework.
Monday, Jan 12
* Introduction to the class
* Handout: Click here for today's handout.
Wednesday, Jan 14
* Survey: Please click here to take a brief survey. Please try to do this by Tuesday evening.
* Handout: Click here for today's handout.
Sunday, Jan 18
* Extra credit: Due by Sunday, 8pm. Email this to Brian; subject line Video on animal experiences. We are going to discuss whether the pleasure or suffering of animals is morally significant or not. It is sometimes helpful to have real-world illustrations of this. I will give you extra credit if you email me a link to one video that is helpful. The video should help to illustrate one of the following: 1) that animals experience the same sorts of pleasure or suffering as humans do, or 2) that they do not, or 3) that the pleasure or suffering of animals is morally important, or 4) that it is not. The video should not be too long (preferably no more than 5 minutes). Please only send me videos that are suitable to show in class. Please explain clearly in your email what your video depicts (I'm fairly easy to upset, so I want to be able to choose what I watch and when).
Monday, Jan 19
* Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday. No class today.
Wednesday, Jan 21
* Reading: Singer, The animal liberation movement.
* Homework: Click here for the homework due today.
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
* Videos: Click here for selected videos on animal experiences.
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
Monday, Jan 26
* No reading or homework; bring the handout from last class.
Wednesday, Jan 28
* Reading: Regan, The case for animal rights
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
Monday, Feb 2
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
Wednesday, Feb 4
* Reading: Card, Environmental atrocities and non-sentient life.
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
Monday, Feb 9
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
* Handout: Click here for the updated handout on rights.
* Handout: Click here for the handout from today's class.
Wednesday, Feb 10
* No reading or homework.
Monday, Feb 16
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
Wednesday, Feb 18
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
Monday, Feb 23
* Reading: Busby, Ethics of Non Violent Direct Action.
* Reading: Foreman, Strategic monkeywrenching.
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
Wednesday, Feb 25
* No homework or reading.
Saturday, Feb 28
* Homework due at 8pm: Send your partner comments.
Monday, Mar 2
* Reading: Klein, How science is telling us all to revolt.
Wednesday, Mar 4
* Reading: Turner, Monkeywrenching, perverse incentives, ecodefense. You should read the whole thing to get a sense of what the topic is, but the important parts are pages 219-229.
* Homework: Click here for the homework (this is on the Klein and the Turner reading).
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
Monday, Mar 16
* Reading: Sinnott Armstrong, It's not my fault.
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
Wednesday, Mar 18
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
Monday, Mar 23
* No reading or homework.
Wednesday, Mar 25
* Reading: Sabine Hohl & Dominic Roser, Stepping in for the polluters.
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
Monday, Mar 30
* No reading or homework.
Wednesday, Apr 1
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
Thursday, Apr 2
* Homework (due by 8pm): Email me your paper outline. The outline should contain: your thesis; a brief description of how you might try to convince someone else that your thesis is true; a brief description of a non-obvious objection to your thesis (this must be a counterexample to your thesis). Put all this in the body of your email, not as an attachment. Subject line 235 OUTLINE PAPER 2
Monday, Apr 6
* Reading: Rincon, Why did Copenhagen zoo kill its giraffe?
* Reading: Bottrill et al - Is Conservation Triage just smart decision making?
* Homework: Click here for the homework.
Wednesday, Apr 8
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
Monday, Apr 13
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
* Video: Animals on trial
* Video: Pig intelligence.
* Video: Dog altruism.
* Video: Pig altruism.
Wednesday, Apr 15
* Handout: Click here for the handout.
Monday, Apr 20
* No reading or homework.
Wednesday, Apr 22
* No reading or homework.
The paper
* Click here for the second paper assignment.
* Click here for the first paper assignment.
* Grading standards: Click here for the grading standards for the paper.
* Sample paper: Click here for a sample paper with some comments.
* Sample paper: Click here for a sample paper with some comments.
Things that might be on quizzes from this point forward
* Conditionals: Be able to identify what conclusions you can draw from conditionals and what you can't; be able to show that a given conditional is false by giving a counterexample; if given an example conditional and a possible counterexample, be able to explain if the possible counterexample really is a good counterexample not; be able to properly use the terms "antecedent" and "consequent."
* Wrong/permissible: Know that these are exclusive of each other, and plausibly distinct from good and bad. Be able to give examples (not discussed in class) of very plausible acts that are wrong or permissible. If given an example of an act, be able to say something about why it might be wrong or permissible. Know what "duty" and "obligation" and "have a right" mean. Be able to translate sentences about wrongness or permissibility into sentences about duties or obligations, and vice versa.
* Good/bad: Understand difference between partly and overall good/bad, and how to derive overall goodness/badness from partial goodness/badness. Be able to give new examples of plausibly partly good/bad and overall good/bad things. Be able to discuss the partial/overall goodness/badness of examples I give and defend these points.
* 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 theories: Know the definitions of utilitarianism and deontological moral theories. If given examples of a person's moral reasoning, be able to recognize if it seems more utilitarian or deontological, and explain why. Be able to give your own examples of utilitarian and deontological moral reasoning.
* Moral rights: Be able to explain what it means to say that some being has a right to life, a right to not be harmed, or property rights. Be able to apply this to examples I give. Specifically, if I give an example where someone says "This action is wrong because ..." be able to say if the person seems to be saying that we have a certain right or not, and explain; if I give an example of action, be able to identify if this is or is not a violation of a right to life, to not be harmed, or a property right, and explain why. Be able to give your own examples of actions that would be wrong if beings have these rights, but would not be wrong if beings didn't have these rights.
* Prima facie duties: Know what a prima facie duty is, what a prima facie right is, what an absolute duty is, and what an absolute right is. Be able to give new plausible examples of each (examples not discussed in class); you might not agree with these examples (e.g. you might not believe there are any absolute rights), but you should at least be able to give examples that some reasonable person might believe in. Be able to explain what it means for duties to be overridden and give new examples of this. If given an example of moral reasoning involving duties, be able to identify if the reasoner is talking about prima facie or absolute duties. Know the difference between having a right to x and a duty to x. Be able to give examples in which someone has a right to x but not a duty to x, and in which a person has a duty to x but not a right to x.
* Know how to show that x is not a prima facie duty. Be able to give me your own, new example of an action that is not a prima facie duty, and explain why it isn't. If I give you examples of actions, be able to explain whether or not they violate a plausible prima facie duty and why.
* Moral collective action puzzles: For each of the following terms, be able to define thm, correctly identify when they are or are not used properly, correctly identify examples of each, and give your own examples (not from class) of each: moral collective action puzzle, collective action, participation, complicity, freeriding. Be able to give your own examples of collective action that are not MCAP, and you own examples in which two people are in the same situation and it is an MCAP for one but not the other, and explain why.
* Fairness and demandingness: Know what the difference is between fairness and demandingness (in the context of what our moral duties are). Be able to give an example (not discussed in class) where an apparent obligation is not overly demanding but is unfair, or is too demanding but not unfair. If given examples of alleged obligations, be able to say if they are unfair, too demanding, neither, and why. If given examples of actions involving numerous parties, be able to identify what is each party's fair share and what is not, and why.