| Welcome to PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION SANDRA LA FAVE Spring 2006 COURSE OBJECTIVES
Upon completion of this course students should be able to:
GETTING HELP Disabled students: West Valley College makes reasonable accommodations for persons with documented disabilities. College materials will be available in alternate formats (Braille, audio, electronic format, or large print) upon request. Please contact the Disability and Educational Support Program at (408) 741-2010 (voice) or (408) 741-2658 (TTY) for assistance.
All Students: FREE TUTORING for this class is available on campus. TEXTS
SCHEDULE
GENERAL INFORMATION My office hours in Spring 2006 are Monday and Wednesday 9:30 to 10:50 AM, and Tuesday 12:30 to 1:30 PM. No appointment is needed for office hours. If you want to see me at some other time, please make an appointment.
My office is Music 4 (in the Music Department, near the campus theater). My office phone number is 408-741-2549. You can leave a voice message at this number. If you want me to get back to you, be sure to indicate how and when I can contact you. If you do not specify a time (within regular business hours, please), I will return your call during my next office hour.
My e-mail address is sandy_lafave@yahoo.com
I will NOT return calls or email for information that is available in this syllabus.
EXPECTATIONS REGARDING STUDENT CONDUCT
Attendance is required. If you are late and miss roll, you are counted absent. If you are counted absent for more than five class meetings, the maximum grade you can receive is D, regardless of your grades on assignments. Exceptions to this policy require documentation of extreme emergency.
I make important announcements and give handouts at the beginning of the class session. Announcements are not repeated — either in or out of class — for the benefit of latecomers.
Persistent lateness, talking in class, sleeping in class, leaving early, etc., show disrespect for me and also for your classmates. Your grade is also likely to be affected. For example, I am far less inclined to award the higher grade on a “borderline” answer if the student has been frequently late, absent, or disruptive, on grounds that such a student is simply less likely to have produced the better answer.
All students are expected to know the rules regarding plagiarism. Plagiarism is a serious violation of the academic code. It is cause for expulsion in many schools. Ignorance is not an excuse. Other teachers may not enforce the rules; that is also NOT an excuse. If you are unclear about what constitutes plagiarism, educate yourself! Look closely at all the eye-opening examples here. Students are often surprised to learn that what they consider standard practice is actually plagiarism. Any direct quote or close paraphrase without proper citation — any use of anybody else’s words without giving proper credit — is plagiarism. In addition to the usual kinds of plagiarism (stealing sentences, paragraphs, papers, etc. from books or journals or web sites), it is also plagiarism to “answer” an essay question by cutting and pasting sentences from the study guide for this class. Remember I wrote the study guide. If you cut and paste from the study guide, you are plagiarizing my own sentences back to me. I will notice. Any student
who violates the academic code (e.g., by cheating or plagiarism) will, at
minimum, receive a final course grade of F. This
rule is rigidly enforced.
According to the catalog,
instructors may drop students “... when accumulated hours of absences exceed
ten percent of the total number of hours the class meets during the semester.”
I may exercise this option. But the main responsibility lies with you. If you
want to drop the class, it is YOUR responsibility to do so. The last day to drop with a W
is usually about one month before the end of the semester. Check the Schedule
of Classes for the exact date. Two exams, one worth 15%, the
other worth 20% Term Paper (20%) Final Exam, worth 25%
Important deadlines: Last day to get CR/NCR option March 15 Last day to drop with "W" See official schedule of classes Term paper due Last day of class
TERM PAPER TOPICS Term
papers must be argumentative essays, 10 pages minimum, typed double-spaced. You
may write a standard prose essay or a dialog. The page
count refers to pages of text. Cover sheet, works cited, etc. do not count as
text. Illustrations, cartoons, pictures, etc. do not count as text. If your
paper comes out too short, it is probably not detailed enough. If your
paper comes out longer than the minimum required, that’s not a problem:
please continue to double-space and use a normal font size. The term
paper gives you an opportunity to explore more advanced and technical
problems in the philosophy of religion than we have time to consider in the
mainstream class. The
following topics (among others) are acceptable: 1.
Using the readings in Pojman section I.A, critically
analyze the kalām cosmological argument 2.
Critically analyze the arguments of Pike and Plantinga in
Pojman section IV.C on omniscience and human freedom. 3.
Using the reading in Pojman I.C.3, clearly explain Norman
Malcolm’s defense of the ontological argument. 4.
Using the readings in Pojman IX, describe Plantinga’s
defense of religious exclusivism and the counterarguments and modifications
offered by Hick and Basinger. 5.
What is Swinburne’s response to Hume on miracles? In your
own words, give Hume’s arguments against miracles. Critically analyze Hume’s
arguments against miracles, and also critically analyze Swinburne’s attempts to
refute Hume. 6.
Recent work in the biology of the brain seems to
demonstrate a biological or evolutionary basis for religion. Read one or more books listed
here, and
critically analyze the arguments. Do
such works constitute a naturalistic foundation for the claim that, e.g., women
are more religious than men? Book-smart
people are less religious than others? 7.
Swinburne attempts to prove that there are reasonable
inductive arguments for the existence of God. State (paraphrase in your own
words, as much as possible) Swinburne’s arguments for God and critically
analyze them . 8.
State and critically analyze the arguments of Davis and
McCann on God and time. If you
would like to write your term paper on a different topic, please check with me.
In general, it is NOT acceptable to write a term paper for this class on topics
already covered in class, e.g., you could not simply summarize standard
arguments for or against the existence of God.
It is also not acceptable to write a paper for this class that is
outside philosophy of religion, e.g., a paper summarizing the beliefs of
Buddhists, or a paper about Bible scholarship, or a paper on the religious
aspects of abortion or some other ethical issue. CRITERIA FOR GRADING WRITTEN
ASSIGNMENTS Please do
not ask me "what I want" on written assignments until you have carefully read
this section and the Key to Paper Comments. Exams
will consist of at least two essay questions each; each exam answer should be
at least three typewritten pages long. Page count here refers to
pages of text. Cover sheets and works
cited pages are generally not necessary, and do not count as pages of text. All
papers must be typed double-spaced. If your
paper comes out too short, it is probably not detailed enough. If your
paper comes out longer than the minimum required, that's not a problem: please continue to double-space and use a normal
font size. On exams
and papers, I will be looking for the following 3 elements, each explained in a separate section
below:
Demonstrated familiarity with assigned
reading and lectures Critical
awareness
Competent English skills Demonstrated familiarity with
assigned reading and lectures The
primary purpose of papers is to present and analyze the arguments in the
reading and lectures. You are not responsible for generating any new arguments;
your job is to paraphrase the arguments and counterarguments from your texts
and lectures. If you do not present
the arguments in the assigned reading and lectures, you have not done the
assignment. Papers MUST demonstrate familiarity with all assigned readings in JR and SS on any topic assigned. The papers
must state explicitly which authors
gave which arguments. Do not merely summarize class notes in
your paper. Do not vent your
unanalyzed personal feelings or relate your autobiography — although you can
certainly argue for positions that
accord with your personal feelings. All
quotes or close paraphrases require appropriate footnotes or endnotes. Note
that using direct quotes without proper attribution constitutes plagiarism.
Direct quotes should be taken from the readings themselves, not from the editors' introductions to
the readings. Critical awareness Papers
must also demonstrate critical awareness; that is, you must analyze and critique all
relevant arguments and potential
counter-arguments. You must explain any logical and
factual errors and obvious
fallacies. The dialog format can make this task
easier and more fun. For example, you might present and critique the arguments
for and against ethical subjectivism by writing a dialog between a subjectivist
and a non-subjectivist; you might present the arguments for and against
utilitarianism by writing a dialog between a utilitarian and a Kantian. I assign
the paper so you can demonstrate skill and clarity in marshaling, presenting,
and criticizing arguments. You are not
expected to present "new" positions or break any new ground. You are not required to "state your own
personal views." Please do not
feel compelled to make one author or position come out "the winner" the
issues we will be discussing are often complicated, and every contributor may
say at least some worthwhile things. Competent English skills All assignments must demonstrate competent English
writing skills, though these
count somewhat less than clear presentation and analysis. You get up to 9
obvious
technical errors (#1-20) per assignment with no penalty. However, if there are
more than 10 obvious grammar or spelling errors, your grade will be lowered
one letter (10%); more than 20 errors, two letters (20%); more than 30 errors, three letters (30%),
etc. Each instance of a misspelling counts as one error. Passing the English test does not
guarantee that you will receive no deductions on your essays.
It is possible you have never had an English teacher as picky as I am.
You may have passed all your previous English classes; that is no guarantee
you will succeed here.
In their effort to engage you in writing, English teachers — especially
in California — often ignore
elementary errors in English grammar and spelling; and as a result,
students often are unaware of their mistakes.
I urge you not to blow off the time allocated for basic English skills!
Please use the English skills links, which contain many explanations and drills.
And read the paper comments carefully, please, so you can correct your mistakes next time!
To see just how detailed the scrutiny of your work
in this class will be, look at the sample graded papers.
Misspellings of authors' names.
Be especially careful about "Nietzsche," "Rachels," "Kierkegaard,"
"J. S. Mill" (not "Mills"). For review and selftests, see here.
Also look here for information on
possessives.
For review and selftests, see here.
Errors
in pronoun-antecedent agreement For more information and selftests, see here.
Errors
in subject-verb agreement For more information and selftests, see here.
Run-on
sentences
For more information and selftests, see here.
Sentence
fragments
For more information and
selftests, see here.
Danglers (aka "misplaced modifiers")
See here for an
excellent explanation, and quizzes to test your understanding.
Wordy,
fat, redundant sentences Most students need work on this! See Writing Concisely (explanation
and selftests).
Avoiding passive voice See Active and Passive Voice
(explanation and selftest).
Parallel
construction See Parallelism (explanation and
selftest).
Problems in punctuation of dialog
Many students like to write their papers in dialog form. I like
dialogs, too. They're more fun for both of us. BUT -- please don't attempt a dialog
unless you can punctuate it
correctly! In particular,
note carefully the correct punctuation of direct address (when one
character
addresses another by name or by words such as "man," "dude," or "girl"). There's
an important difference between "I know Jane" and "I know, Jane"; and between
"I know that girl" and "I know that, girl." Because serious ambiguities can
result from this kind of carelessness, you must use commas to separate
the direct address word from the rest of the text, even when there is no apparent
ambiguity. When the direct address word is embedded within a sentence, you
need
two commas, one before and one after: for example, "We all recognize,
Lisa, that you are unusually intelligent."
amount / number (The same explanation applies to "fewer" and "less".)
do / due ("The paper is due Friday. I know you can do it!")
fewer / less (The same explanation applies to "amount" and number".)
know / no ("You're kidding! No way! You don't know this?")
posses (more than one posse, as in "We'll round up a posse, Sheriff")
possess (have)
sole / soul ("Now that I'm dying, my sole concern is the fate of my soul!")
udder / utter (Look this one up if you don't get it: it's too funny!)
waver / waiver
your / you’re
The following words occur commonly in philosophy papers.
Spell these words correctly!
accommodate
For comprehensive review, do the General Self Test on
English Grammar and Spelling.
Click for
comprehensive online writing
help (a really good site)
comprehensive reviews of English grammar,
with explanations and self-tests
Guidelines on Writing a Philosophy Paper
by philosopher Jim Pryor of Princeton University
It is your job to edit and proofread your papers. A note on style: The imaginary "audience" for
your essay is the average high-school graduate — someone who knows nothing
about the subject matter but can follow an argument. You can assume the reader
is interested; don't worry too much about capturing the reader's attention;
e.g., don't start a paper on the ethics of abortion with "Jane's hands were
shaking as she stepped through the line of demonstrators on her way into the
clinic." Many attention-getting gambits are fallacious. Your model is a layperson's
"brief" — a piece of reasoning using clear language and logic. Define all
technical terms, use plain English and straightforward sentences. You are
striving for a sober, even-handed, modest analysis. Don't oversimplify. Take
your time. The Key to Paper Comments lists most
of my usual comments.
1 Incorrect use of apostrophe 2 Missing apostrophe
3 Singular-plural mismatch
4 Run-on sentence 5 Sentence fragment 6 Spelling error 7 Use parallel construction 8 Sentence or paragraph too long 9 Referent of pronoun or pointer not clear 10 Wordy, "fat," redundant 11 Capitalization error 12 Word order confusing 13 Punctuation error 14 Quote marks beginning and end 15 Avoid dictionary definitions; philosophical usage is
often different from ordinary language. If you feel you
must use a dictionary to define a philosophy term, at least use a
specialized
philosophical dictionary. 16 Underline or italicize book titles. 17 No space before punctuation; space after. 18 Bad word break 19 Must have a space before an open quote, but no space after one. 20 Direct quotes
require quotation marks and citations. 21 This is an odd (and perhaps unintentionally humorous) choice of words, evoking
irrelevant associations or mental images. 22 Active voice would be clearer and more vigorous here. 23 Don't say someone "feels" when you mean "thinks" or
"believes" or "argues." 24 I know what you mean, but this is not a standard
English word or idiom. 25 Sloppy imprecise word choice
30 Biographical information about the author is usually
not relevant to evaluation of philosophical argument. Students often include it
as "padding." But soundness of argument depends only on correct logic and facts. 31 Speculations about psychological influence of author's childhood, background,
etc., are usually not relevant to evaluation of philosophical argument. 32 HUH? Vague. This is either "word salad" (I haven't a
clue), or I can think of more than one thing this could mean. Ask me if you
can't imagine why I found it unclear. 33 It is more respectable among scholars to cite from the original text if
available, rather than a commentator's introduction or paraphrase. Also, citing
a commentator's paraphrase or introduction does not demonstrate the required
familiarity with assigned reading. 34 This quote does not seem related to what comes before
or after it. 35 Quote is out of context. The author is arguing against this view. (Did you read all the pages?) 36 You need to explain this more fully. 37 So? I don't see the relevance of this to the paper. 38 To a philosopher this would be a perfectly reasonable question! 39 For maximum clarity, use grammatical statements — not questions — to state
premises and conclusion of an argument. 40 This seems a great deal of fuss over nothing much. No one disputes your claim. 41 A claim isn't more true just because it's strongly felt or believed. 42 You don't need to be so tentative here. 43 Watch the weasel words. 44 Your account of this argument is oversimplified and/or
distorted. (Perhaps you do not yet fully understand it.) Remember the principle
of charity. 45 This reads like a first draft. Organization needs work. 46 I don't see the analogy here. 47 I don't see how this follows. 48 I see alternatives besides the ones mentioned. 49 This seems overstated. 50 Why? This is a conclusion. You need to support it. 51 Avoid vague relational claims. More specific statement
of the connection is needed here. 52 This seems simply untrue.
60 Your words? Please be prepared to show me your sources.
61 Your paper does not demonstrate sufficient familiarity
with lecture content and/or the assigned reading. 62 Your paper doesn’t show sufficient argument and
counter-argument. 63 A paper must be more than a string of quotes or a
"quote-quilt."
Sandy's X10 Host Home Page | Sandy's Google Sites Home Page Questions or comments? sandy_lafave@yahoo.com |