Early Modern Philosophy

(For optional readings on Early Modern Moral Philosophy, click here.)

Prof. Patrick Frierson

frierspr@whitman.edu

Office Hours in Olin 151:

Wednesday 2-4, Thursday 10-11

Goals: With respect to content, the purpose of this course is to become familiar with the central epistemological and metaphysical positions and arguments of key philosophers of the early modern period. The philosophers on whom we will focus are Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, and Kant. With respect to skills, this course should help you develop as a philosopher in three key respects. First, we will be using early modern philosophers to help our own philosophical reflection, both through philosophizing with them and through philosophical critique of them. Second, we will be reading difficult texts, and reading them carefully. Reading (and the related skill of listening) to complex arguments expressed in unfamiliar terms will prepare you for engaging with those who hold viewpoint or forms of expression different form your own, and thus for thriving in an increasingly diverse world. Finally, this course includes a substantial emphasis on clear expression of complicated ideas. You will learn both to explain the ideas of others and to articulate your own ideas in writing (both formal and informal) and orally.

Book: (Available in the Whitman Bookstore) Roger Ariew, Eric Watkins, eds., Modern Philosophy: An Anthology of Primary Sources (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1998). Page numbers below refer to this book.

Graded Work:

1. Participation is a major part of this course and the quality of your participation can either raise or lower your grade in this course, but it does not count for any particular percentage of your grade.

2. Class Presentation: 15% During the semester, there are several scheduled days on which students will be expected to give short presentations on important early modern philosophers that we do not read in this class. Because of the size of the class, each presentation will be given by a group of 2-3 students, and we will have 3-4 presentations for each class that is devoted to presentations. You need to read primary sources by this person and secondary sources about them, and then pick a short selection (no more than 15 pages) for your classmates to read that will give the main points and at least one major argument of the philosopher. (These selections must be made available to your classmates the class period prior to your presentation. You may either email me prior to that class with a link or PDF that I will insert into the syllabus, or bring 30 copies of the reading to hand out in class.) On the day of your presentation, you should give a short presentation (5-7 minutes) on the significance of the philosopher and you should provide some leading questions to get a discussion started. After the presentation, each member of the team will turn in a short report (no more than 1500 words) describing what you take to the be the most important contribution of your philosopher to early modern philosophy. In this report, you should also give each member of your team (including yourself) a grade for their part in preparing the presentation. The ultimate grade for this part of the course will be based both on the overall performance of the group (approximately 50%) and on your report and the reports of your teammates (approximately 50%).

You can find information about almost all of the figures you are expected to present on in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and on many of them in the in the Cambridge History of Seventeenth Century Philosophy (on reserve). You are expected to make use of both primary and secondary sources in preparing your presentation, and I strongnly encourage you to come to me for help in tracking these down. You must make use of at least some non-electronic resources. As you work on your project, we will also post electronic resources on this web site for the use of the rest of the class. (Incidentally, Wikipedia, while helpful in some respects, does not constitute a legitimate source of information for your presentations.)

3. Two Short Papers (1500-3000 words, details below): 15% each. The first paper is due September 18th. The second is due November 17th.

4. Quizzes and Occasional Short Assignments: 15% I will occassionally ask you to complete short written assignments in preparation for a particular course. On days that I do not give written assignments, I may quiz you on the reading.

5. Mid-Term Exam (handed out Oct. 10, due Oct. 17): 15%

6. Final Exam (on our scheduled exam day): 25%

Schedule:

Descartes

		Reading from Watkins & Ariew		Text (For the benefit of those surveying this course online, I've included hyperlinks to electronic versions of these texts where available. Students at Whitman are required to buy and use the assigned text.)	Topics to Discuss
Aug.	29	vii-viii, 1-3, 6-7 (§§ 38-44), 8-11, "Of Cannibals"	Intro, Bacon, Galileo, Montaigne	Bacon's New Organon (selection) Galileo's The Assayer (selection) Montaigne, "Of Cannibals" (be careful to only print and read the essay "Of Cannibals," not the whole page)	What is "Early Modern Philosophy"? Background to Early Modern Philosophy Expectations for the Course
	31	12-21, 22-27, 27-30, 57-59, 63 (re: Med 1)	Descartes	Discourse on Method, selections Meditations (Letter of Dedication and Meditation #1)	Origin of Descartes's Philosophy Purpose of Meditations Cartesian Skepticism
Sept.	5	30-4 , 63-6	Descartes	Meditations and Replies (Meditation # 2 and Third Set of Objections and Replies)	Proof that “I am” Nature of the I. How we have knowledge of what we can "touch and see." Criticisms and Responses to first two Meditations
	7	34-48 , 59-61, 66-80	Descartes	Meditations and Replies (Meditations #3, 4 and Third Set of Objections and Replies)	Proof of God's existence Problem of error Nature of Human Freedom
	12	41-55, 59-62	Descartes	Meditations (#s 5 and 6)	Problem of Error Second proof of God's existence Proof of the reality of the external world Distinctness of mind and body

Student Presentations

		Figure	Student Presenters
Sept.	14	Bacon	Vincent Booth, Magnus Altmayer
		Elizabeth, Princess of Bohemia	Drew Mayer, Eric Wehlitz
		Thomas Hobbes	Noah Koerper, Dan Shaw
		Arnauld	James Millikan, Stephen Parkin

Paper # 1 must be emailed to me no later than 5 PM on Monday, September 18th.

Paper #1 Topic: Does Descartes adequately respond to scepticism? In answering this question, be sure to make clear what you think the most serious sceptical challenge facing Descartes is, explain as clearly as possible how he purports to respond to this challenge, and raise at least one substantial objection to his response. Provide detailed textual support (quotes and/or references) for your textual claims and careful philosophical support for your philosophical claims. I encourage you to consult the Philosophy Writing Tutor before beginning the writing process.

Spinoza

Sept.	19	129-134 , 145-149	Spinoza	The Ethics Part One (through Proposition 14, and Appendix to Part One)	Spinoza's philosophical method Definitions and Axioms Proof of the existence of God (P11) Monism (P14)
	21	134-149	Spinoza	The Ethics Part One (Proposition 15 through the end)	Nature and Properties of God Arg't vs. Free Will (P32) Comparison of Spinoza and Descartes
	26	140-151, 164-6, 172-4	Spinoza	The Ethics Part Two (through Prop. 7 and then Props 40-44), Part Five (Preface and Props 21-28)	Nature of the human mind Types of knowledge Highest end of human beings (P 25) Comparison of Spinoza and Descartes

Locke

Sept.	28	270-282, 284-95,	Locke	Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Book I, Chapters 1-2, Book II, Chapters 1-2,	The Epistemological Turn in Locke Arg't vs. innate ideas (consider re: Descartes and Spinoza) The Origin of Ideas Ideas of Sensation and of Reflection Simple Ideas of Reflection and of Both Reflection and Sensation (Compare with Descartes) Primary vs Secondary Qualities
Oct.	3	301-310, 312-20	Locke	Essay II, 21 and II, 23.	Idea of Power Human Free Will Ideas of Substances
	5	339-47 (thru ¶6), 363-69, (358-63)	Locke	Essay IV, 1-3, (10), 11, 15.	Nature and Extent of Knowledge Mind-Body relationship ("whether any mere material being thinks") (Knowledge of God) Knowledge of Existence (compare Descartes) Response to Descartes's Dream Argument Probability

Student Presentations

		Figure	Student Presenters
Oct.	12	Malebranche	Luke Marshall, Jay Davidson
		Blaise Pascal	David Youngblood, Amy Hogg
		Margaret Cavendish	Andrea Miller, Michaela Murdock
		Damaris Cudworth	Joseph Bornstein

The Mid-Term Exam will be handed out Oct. 5. It is due Oct. 17th at the beginning of class. The Mid-term is a closed book, closed note exam. You may take up to 2 hours to complete the exam.

Leibniz

Oct.	17	374-80, 184-93	Leibniz	New Essays on the Understanding, Preface Discourse on Metaphysics §§ 1-16, especially §§ 8-9.	Innate Ideas and Ideas of Reflection Perception vs. Apperception Personal Identity Pre-established harmony Identity of Indiscernibles ("two individual things cannot be perfectly alike") , haeceitties
	19	235-243, 184-93	Leibniz	Monadology Discourse on Metaphysics §§ 1-16, especially §§ 1-3, 13-16	nature and types of monads perception and apperception proof of the existence of God interactions amongst monads, mind-body interaction principles of contradiction and sufficient reason, truths of reason and of fact the best of all possible worlds (reconciliation of final and efficient causation)
	24	229-243, 202-204, and Synopsis of Theodicy	Leibniz	Monadology New System Discourse on Metaphysics (sections 30-32)	perception and apperception preestablished harmony Theodicy/the best of all possible worlds human freedom

Student Presentations

		Figure	Student Presenters
Oct.	26	Voltaire	Christian Sayre, David Radler
		Anne Conway	Margot Wielgus, Nikita Parekh
		Isaac Newton	Dane Henager, Andrey Yu
		Samuel Clarke	Jason Wofsey

Berkeley

Oct.	31	462-469	Berkeley	Principles of Human Knowledge, Preface and Introduction	Dealing with skepticism (Berkeley vs. Descartes) Abstract Ideas
Nov.	2	470-477	Berkeley	Principles of Human Knowledge, Part One	Esse is Percepi corporal substance primary/secondary qualities ideas of substratum, powers minds God's existence

Hume

Nov.	7	491-512	Hume	Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Sections I-V Optional: Treatise on Human Nature xxx	Ideas and Impressions Hume's scepticism (compare Descartes, Berkeley) Hume's solution to sceptical doubts (compare Descartes, Berkeley)
	9	512-32, 534-43	Hume	Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding Sections VI-VIII, X Optional: Treatise on Human Nature xxx	Hume on causation (necessary connection) Hume on free will miracles
	14	558-72	Hume	Treatise on Human Nature I.v-vi.	Self-knowledge Substance Personal Identity

Student Presentations

		Figure	Student Presenters
Nov.	16	Thomas Reid	Kyle Cotler, Margi Bhatt
		Jean-Jacques Rousseau	Alex Lemay, David Ogle
		(Jonathan Edwards)	Paul Burdett

Paper # 2 must be emailed to me no later than 5 PM on Friday, November 17th.

Paper #2 Topic: Choose an important philosophical issue, either one we have discussed this semester (such as scepticism, the nature of substance, or personal identity) or a philosophical issue in which you are particularly interested. Present your own original philosophical position on this issue, arguing in detail for your position. In the defense of your view, you should make use of at least one important philosophical argument or distinction from the philosophers we have studied in this course. You should also raise (and respond to) the most relevant objections (at least two) that these philosophers would raise against your view. However, in the body of your paper, you should not explicitly quote or even mention any of the philosophers we have read this semester. The paper should be written in your own voice, or that of your own (imagined) interlocutors. References to the philosophers we have read (including quotes if appropriate) can and should be extensive, but they should occur in footnotes to your paper.

Thanksgiving Break

Kant

	28	634-646	Kant	Critique of Pure Reason, Prefaces, Introduction .	Kant's “Copernican Turn” Analytic vs. Synthetic, A priori vs. A posteriori (empirical) judgments Problem of a priori synthetic judgments
	30	646-53	Kant	Critique of Pure Reason, Transcendental Aesthetic	Proof that space (and time) are a priori intuitions Significance of this proof Transcendental idealism
Dec.	5	683-697, 713-5, 726-34	Kant	Critique of Pure Reason, Analogies of Experience (focus on the Second Analogy, pp. 688-94), Third Antinomy and Solution of the Third Antinomy	Argument for the permanence of substance Argument for causation (compare with Hume) Possibility of Human Freedom
	7	697-698	Kant	Critique of Pure Reason, Refutation of Idealism	Kant's argument against “idealism” Response to Descartes Response to Berkeley (review pp. 647-53) Conclusion of Course

The Final Exam will be a 2 hour closed note, closed book final exam given during Exam Week.