PHIL 379 - Contemporary Moral Theory - Fall, 2026
Metropolitan State University
First position paper instructions (Due October 31)
Second position paper instructions
(Carried over from last time: check back for updates)
Guidelines for writing philosophy papers (by Jim Pryor of NYU)
Down below the schedule are links to a bunch of stuff.
Tentative schedule of assignments (Really tentative. Check back for updates)
!!!!!!Don't forget to refresh the page in your browser to make sure you are seeing the latest version!!!!!
| Date |
Topic |
Reading |
Writing due |
| August 26 |
Introductory session |
None |
None |
September 2 |
Utilitarianism and the trolley problem |
|
Response Paper due before class |
September 9 |
The radical potential of utilitarianism and some further complications |
Optional: Interview with Peter Singer on the Panpsycast Philosophy Podcast. This is a 45 minute podcast that starts with some personal and general questions, it gets to the philosophy issues after about 12 and a half minutes. At about 17 and a half minutes he talks about why he abandoned preference utilitarianism and decided that hedonistic (or classical) utilitarianism was the better view. There's not a lot here that's not in the written interview listed above (Twenty Questions), but it does let you hear his ideas in his own voice. |
Response Paper due before class |
| September 16 |
Does utilitarianism reflect a particular
socio-cultural point of view or perhaps a capitalist one? |
1. First, the general idea (from Marx) that
philosophical and moral ideas reflect the economic
activities of a society: a. a brief, classic statement of the doctrine from the Preface of A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (1859) b. Two passages from The German Ideology (1846) 2. The general idea applied to utilitarianism: a. Another passage from The German Ideology (with a footnote from Capital, Volume 1.(1867)) b. A brief explanation by philosopher Jeffrey Reiman Optional extra: "Marx's Critique of Utilitarianism" by George Brenkert |
Response Paper due before class |
| September 23 |
Duty-based or 'deontological' ethical
theories |
Deontological (duty-based) theories are the
main rival to utilitarianism in contemporary moral
philosophy. The classic exponent of this kind of
theory was the 18th century German philosopher Immanuel
Kant. So the theories are sometimes referred to as 'Kantian'
theories. We will, of course be focusing mainly on Kant's
contemporary followers, but I have included a brief set of
selections from the man himself. 1. Start with this clear and (relatively) simple explanation from the BBC. 2. Then these selections from Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, heavily annotated by me. 3. Then this relatively brief and clear article by the eminent contemporary Kantian, Christine Korsgaard, who argues that Kant was wrong to limit moral concern to 'rational beings.' This argument for an end to the exploitation of animals is a good illustration of the way contemporary thinkers can work within the Kantian framework without being limited by his 18th century prejudices. 4. Here's a longer piece by Korsgaard explaining "Kant's Formula of Universal Law." I've highlighted the first few pages and then a couple of later sections that contain the gist of her account. Feel free to read more than those highlighted pages if you have time and interest. Korsgaard thinks her interpretation, unlike some others, makes Kant's idea philosophically defensible and has devoted much of her career to working out the conception of a 'rational will' that she mentions here. |
Response Paper due before class |
| September 30 |
Marxian Critique and O'Neill's revision. |
In a way that bears some resemblance to his
critique of utilitarianism, Marx criticizes deontological
ethics for its 'private' or individualistic conception of
the self (and of the rights belonging to that self and of
the associated conception of justice). The first article
below provides on overview of those (Marxian) ideas and of a
number of different interpretations of them that have been
developed in recent decades. The second develops Kant's
ideas about the importance of treating people as persons (as
ends in themselves and not just as means to your
ends). I will be interested in trying to figure out
whether O'Neill's work shows that a deontological theory can
escape Marx's critique. 1. Jeffrey Reiman, "The Critique of Capitalism and the Problem of Ideology" Note: When you get to page 163 you will find that we already read the part about utilitarianism a couple of weeks ago, so you can stop there, though it probably wouldn't hurt to read it again. 2. Onora O"Neill, "Between Consenting Adults". O'Neill develops a much more complex account of what a Kantian moral theory has to say about treating people as ends in themselves (and not just as means to your ends), and she applies these ideas to sexual interactions and to work and employment. This article is much harder than I wish it was. I'll send you some explanatory notes soon. |
Response Paper due before class |
| October 7 |
Nietzsche and genealogy |
Nietzsche’s way of writing does not
lend itself to short
excerpts, in part, because nearly everything he says in
one of his short
sections has to be understood in light of things he says
elsewhere. For
example the basic idea of the first Essay in the book
comes in section 7, but
read by itself it is likely to give some wrong ideas about
where Nietzsche ends
up. And even the whole of the First Essay needs to
be understood in light
of things he says later in the book. So, if you can possibly find the time,
do read the whole
first essay. If that’s not possible, then read try
to sections 4 through
13 of that essay. (Reading more continuously gives you a
better sense of the
way Nietzsche works as a writer than reading chopped out
sections) If that’s still too much then read 6, 7, and 8, and then skip to section 13.
Optional, extra: Sabina Lovibond, “Selflessness
and Other Moral Baggage” This essay tries to explain
why, really, Nietzsche is not your friend. |
Response Paper due before class |
October 14 |
Feminist Ethics |
The idea of a "women's voice" in moral theory:
Optional extras:
|
Response Paper due before class |
| October 21 |
Response Paper due before class | ||
| October 28 |
Response Paper due before class Position Paper #1 or Topic description for term paper due by noon on Saturday October 31 |
||
| November 4 |
Response Paper due before class | ||
| November 11 |
No Class |
Veterans' Day |
None |
| November 18 |
Response Paper due before class | ||
| November 25 |
No class |
Thanksgiving holiday |
None |
| December 2 |
Response Paper due before class | ||
| December 9 |
Response Paper due before class Position Paper #2 or Final draft of Term Paper due by 10am on Tuesday December 15 |
Resources:
There is a large archive of writings by and about various Marxist thinkers (and other thinkers as well) at:
Translations and editing are not always the best, but this is still a great resource.
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Articles are highly reliable, but fairly advanced; many are written by leading scholars.)
Critical Theory (overview)
Postmodernism (overview)
Philosophy of Liberation (Latin American)
Constructivism in Metaethics (Kant, Rawls, Korsgaard)
Moral Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism
Consequentialist Moral Theories
Contractarian Moral Theories (Gauthier)
Contractualist Ethics (Scanlon)