PHIL 110
Fall ’14

Schedule    Lecture: Mon, Wed, Fr 12:00-12:50 (180 PLC)

                    Discussion Sessions are scheduled on Friday


Office Hours:

Nicolae Morar TU 11:30-1:30 PM              

Brock Baines FR 10:00-12:00 PM                Claire Pickard WED 1:30-3:30 PM

Larry Busk TU 3:00-5:00 PM                        Jon LaRochelle FR 10:00-12:00 PM

Martina Ferrari TU 12:00-2:00 PM               Joshua Skorburg WED 2:00-4:00 PM



Syllabus: Now available here & on Blackboard.


There is no required textbook for this course. All readings will be posted on Blackboard.


Course Description:

We are living in a world where a philosophically complex concept like human nature makes the headlines of major newspapers. Journalists seem to be taken by surprise by the recent revival of this concept when they raise the question: “has there ever been a time when there were so many different views of human nature floating around all at once?” (NYT)


For centuries, this concept was a core part of philosophy and theology. The Christian tradition tells us that we are created in the image of God and carry nonetheless within our fallen nature the traces of original sin. On the other hand, the secular philosophical tradition has emphasized our rational or conscious nature, as the unique character of who we are as human beings. Economists have told us that we are driven by our rational choices given certain incentives and opportunities we are exposed to (Becker, 1976). Others continue to believe that we are nothing more than outcomes of social and historical processes whose forces shape us and make us who we truly are (Foucault, 1976). Or, maybe, there is no human nature and we are only what we can make of ourselves while confronting the social forces at hand in our societies (Sartre 2007). Evolutionary psychologists have always denounced the “dogma that human nature does not exist” (Pinker 2002) They say, there is enough scientific evidence that the doctrine of the blank slate is once and for all corrupted. The architecture of the mind grounds a new form of humanism, and shows us “the psychological unity of our species beneath the superficial differences of physical appearances and parochial culture” (Pinker 2002). But, this very idea of human nature, some critics claim, stands sometimes at the very edge of making up another “just so story" (Gould & Lewontin, 1979).


So, it looks difficult, if not impossible, to find a consensus over the notion of human nature. Nonetheless, we can observe one invariant among all the notions of human nature that we have developed. From Christian anthropology to Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Descartes, Hobbes, “human nature” played a key role in determining our moral and political behavior by setting us apart from the rest of the animal kingdom and by making us special among the other living organisms. Nonetheless, recent biotechnological innovations have strongly called into question the (so called) fixed limits of the reality denoted by the concept of human nature. What are the ethical and political consequences of such dramatic future possible changes? Are we playing God?


It is true that “to the extent that theorizing about justice has been based on assumptions about human nature, and in particular on the assumptions that there is (and will remain) one human nature that provides the basis for the moral equality of persons, the radical malleability of life through its application of genetic science presents yet another basic challenge to our thinking about justice” (Buchannan 2000). We used to think of human nature as an ideal for what a flourishing human life is (Stevenson & Haberman 2002). But if Darwinism has changed our metaphysics with its “twin idea of mutability of the species and variation within populations” (Blackburn 2009), and we no longer believe in a fixed human nature as the touchstone of our moral and political systems, how could we still convince ourselves that human nature provides us any constraints in the pursuit of individual and social goods?


If some universal human nature cannot serve anymore as a measure for societies, “if we cannot offer a prescription of a “truly human” society, what can be the objective of our political practice?” (Levins & Lewontin, 1987) What is our vision of a future just society? Can we even have such a vision if it is not based on “some firm and humane concept of human essence or human nature"? (Chomsky 2006) We used to believe that human and moral progress is a function of a growing awareness of our common humanity. But, if our nature is not one and fixed, “this simple idea of moral progress no longer applies” (Buchannan 2000). Can we even think anymore of the idea of moral progress? “We may feel cast adrift in a sea of possibilities” (Buchannan 2000)


Does a new biological definition of human nature solve these issues? Maybe it does, but only to a certain extent. It shows us that we are “are the outcomes of an extraordinary multiplicity of causal pathways” (Lewontin, Rose, Kamin 1985) that we create and re-create the environments that we inhabit, and that inequalities in our societies are not biologically determined, and as we have been told, inevitable and immutable. In this sense, our biology makes us free because it tells us that we are not bound to accept the status quo of the world we live in.



Announcements:

Midterm Exam 1 - Monday, 10/20 during class time 12:00-12:50 PM - 180 PLC.

Midterm Exam 2 - Friday, 11/14 during class time 12:00-12:50 PM - 180 PLC.

FINAL EXAM - Wednesday, 12/10 from 10:15am-12:15pm - 180 PLC.



Extra-credit Opportunities:

Extra Credit means = you go to one of the lectures below (or one of the events recommended by one of your GTFs), write 1p single spaced (summary), and email it to your GTF before the end of the term.


  1. 1)Alexandra Stern, Dividing Humans: genetics, race, & disability in Mid-century America

Tuesday, Oct 14 from 5:30pm to 7:00pm

Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art (1430 Johnson Lane, Eugene, OR)


  1. 2)Geraldine Ondrizek, From Eugenics to Genetics: Tracing Visual Categorizations in 21st Century Art

Saturday, November 8 from 2:00pm to 3:30pm

Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art (1430 Johnson Lane, Eugene, OR)


Recommended Readings:

  1. 1)Among our policies, we have one that prohibits the use of computer/ tablet in class. Here are some of the reasons for this (recent blogpost in Washington Post).


  1. 2)With Aristotle, we approach the question of human nature and happiness. But, happiness is not always linked to meaningful lives. Roy Baumeister explores this question in The Meanings of Life (AEON Magazine).


  1. 3)This week (week 8), we will continue our conversation about the relationship between theories of human nature and racism and/or sexism. I encourage you to read David Dobbs’ review in The New York Times of Christine Kenneally’s The Invisible History of the Human Race. (PDF available here)