HACS-logo-master-small

PHH 301 Online

Ancient Philosophy
Term: Fall 2017

Peter J. Mango, Ph.D., MLIS

pmango@holyapostles.edu / 845-343-1889

1. COURSE DESCRIPTION

This course will consider some of the historical origins, some of the methods, and some of the implications of philosophy in the Western world classified as “ancient” – as well as sociocultural implications of ancient philosophical claims within the history of ideas.  The course will examine ancient authors spanning from the Greek Pre-Socratics through the Neo-Platonists.

2. ENVISIONED LEARNING OUTCOMES

3. COURSE SCHEDULE

Week 1: The Pre-Socratics

1) Power Point Lecture

 2) Read Entry entitled, “Pre-Socratics” at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/presocrtics/#Mil -- the sections on:

-  the Milesians

- Xenophanes

- the Pluralists

- Empedocles

-  the Presocratic Atomists

 3) Post at least one article or video on one (or more) of the Presocratics

 4) In no fewer than 250 words, respond to the “Question of the Week” posted

 5) In no fewer than 250 words at a time, respond to at least three (3) other students' comments:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Week 2: Socrates and the Socratic Movement

 1) Power Point Lecture

 2) Read “The Life of Socrates” of Diogenes Laertius, www.classicpersuasion.org/pw/diogenes/dlsocrates.htm 

3) Read pages 35-36 of Socrates and Early Socratic Philosophers of Law, by R. F. Stalley and Roderick T. Long1, http://praxeology.net/chap2.pdf

 4) Post at least one article, or video, in reference to Socrates

 5) In no fewer than 250 words, respond to “Question(s) of the week” posted.

 6) In no fewer than 250 words at a time, respond to at least three (3) other students' comments:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Week 3: Lives of Plato and Aristotle

 1) Power Point Lecture

 2) Read “The Life of Plato” www.classicpersuasion.org/pw/diogenes/dlplato.htm, and “The Life of Aristotle” www.classicpersuasion.org/pw/diogenes/dlaristotle.htm, respectively, in Diogenes Laertius

 3) Post at least one article or video on the life of either Plato or Aristotle

 4) In no fewer 250 words, respond to the “Question of the Week” posted on this page.

 5) In no fewer than 250 words at a time, respond to at least three (3) other student’s comments:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Week 4: Plato and His Epistemology

1) Power Point Lecture

2) Post at least one article or video on the Epistemology of Plato

3) In no fewer than 250 words, respond to “Question(s) of the week” posted

4) In no fewer than 250 words at a time, respond to at least three (3) other student’s comments:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Week 5: Plato’s General Ethics

  1. Power Point Lecture

  1. Post at least one article or video on the Ethics of Plato

  1. In no fewer than 250 words, respond to “Question(s) of the week” posted

  1. In no fewer than 250 words at a time, respond to at least three (3) other student’s comments:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Optional Readings

Plato’s Moral Realism. The Discovery of the Presuppositions of Ethics, John Rist, The Catholic University of America Press, 2012

Real Ethics: Rethinking the Foundations of Morality, John Rist, Cambridge University Press, 2002

Week 6: Plato’s Politics

  1. Power Point Lecture
  2. Post at least one article or video on the Politics of Plato
  3. In no fewer than 250 words, respond to “Question(s) of the week” posted
  4. In no fewer than 250 words at a time, respond to at least three (3) other student’s comments:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Week 7: Plato’s Metaphysics

1) Power Point Lecture

2) Entry:  “Plato's Middle Period Metaphysics and Epistemology” at the Stanford Online Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-metaphysics), sections 1, 2, 4, and 6;

- Sections 65d-68d of Plato's Phaedrus; e.g., available at www.perseus.tufts.edu

- 509-521d in Plato's Republic (in Books 6 and 7); e.g., available at www.perseus.tufts.edu

- 29e-31b; 33b-35a; 36e-38c; 48a; 51d-52a of Plato's Timaeus; e.g., available at www.perseus.tufts.edu

- 210a-211d of Plato's Symposium; e.g., available at www.perseus.tufts.edu 

Pages 40-41 of John M. Rist's book “Real Ethics:  Rediscovering the Foundations of Morality,” Cambridge University Press, available online at Google Books.

3) Locate either an article in a database of the HACS online library system (or an online video clip) relate to one or more of the required readings.  Summarize your article in no more than 7-10 lines.  Please post it on our Weekly Discussion board.

4) In no fewer than 250 words, respond to the three (3) “Weekly Questions” posted

  1. 5) In no fewer than 250 words at a time, respond to no fewer than three (3) other postings:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Week 8: Aristotle’s Epistemology and Dialectic

1)  PowerPoint Lecture Module

2) Read Entry “Aristotle’s Logic” at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, sections:

6.4 “Knowledge of First Principles: Nous”

 - 8.3 “The Uses of Dialectic and Dialectical Argument”

-    9. “Dialectic and Rhetoric”; 10. “Sophistical Arguments” at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-logic

- Aristotle's De Anima, Book Three (III), parts 1-11; e.g., http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/soul.3.iii.html

- Aristotle's Topics, Book One (I), chapters 1, 2, 5, 9, 10, 12; http://en.wikisource/wiki/Topics

- Aristotle's On Interpretation,  chapters 9, 12; e.g., http://en.wikisource/wiki/On_Interpretation

- Aristotle's Prior Analytics, Book One (I), chapter 1; Book Two (2), chapter 16; e.g, http://en.wikisource/wiki/Prior_Analytics/Book_1#Chapter1 

3) In no fewer than 250 words, respond to the four-part Exercise posted for Week Eight (8)

  1. 4) In no fewer than 250 words at a time, respond to at least three (3) other student’s comments:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Week 9: Aristotle’s Metaphysics

  1. Power Point Lecture

  1. Entry: “Aristotle's Metaphysics” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-metaphysics :

  1. Entry: “Aristotle’s Psychology,” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-psychology

  1. Locate either an article in a database of the HACS online library system (or an online video clip) relate to one or more of the required readings. Summarize your article in no fewer than seven 7 – and no more than ten (10) sentences. Please post it on our Weekly Discussion board.

  1. In no fewer than 250 words at a time, respond to at least three (3) other student’s comments:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Week 10: Aristotle’s General Ethics

1) Listen to the Podcast of Dr. Dennis McInerney posted.

2) Watch Aristotle on the Purpose of Life: www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQk6t-9mQjE 

3) Read Power Point notes in PDF.

4) Read  Entry: “Aristotle’s Psychology,” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-psychology sections entitled

- Hylomorphic Soul-Body Relations: Materialism, Dualism, Sui Generis?” paragraphs one through five (1-5) of this section section entitled

 - Psychic Faculties,” first (1st) paragraph of this section section entitled

 - Nutrition,” paragraphs one through five (1-5) of this section section entitled

 - Mind,” paragraphs one (1) and five 5) [“Here, at least…”] of this section

4) Create at least three (3) questions inspired by reading Book Three (III) of Aristotle's “De Anima”

5) In no fewer than 250 words, respond to the Exercise of the Week posted

  1. 6) In no fewer than 250 words at a time, respond to at least three (3) other student’s comments:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Week 11: Aristotle’s Politics

1) Power Point Lecture Module.  ('Start Slideshow' on the version on top, and you'll get audio with pictures, though you'll still have to keep scrolling through.)

2) Read Aristotle's Politics:

 

  -  Book I, Parts 1-2

   - Book II, Parts 1-4

   - Book VI

   - Book VII, Parts 1-3

   - Book VIII, Parts 1-3

3) Create at least three (3) questions inspired by your reading of the text read

4) Post an article or video explaining a topic from this week's Theme

5) In no fewer than 250 words, respond to the Exercise of the Week posted

6) In no fewer than 250 words per response, respond to the comments of at least three (3) other student comments:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Resources:  Audiobook of Aristotle's Politics, downloadable from LibriVox, or Youtube.com

Week 12: The Stoics

1) Power Point Lecture

2) Readings:

 - “The Rebirth of Stoicism” (see This Week's Readings attachment)

 - “Five Reasons Why Stoicism Matters Today” in Forbes (see This Week's Readings attachment)

  - Alain de Botton's YouTube video entitled “A Guide to Happiness: Seneca on Anger”

 - “On the Shortness of Life,” by Seneca

 - “On Mercy,” by Seneca

3) In no fewer than 250 words, respond to our “Question of the Week.”

4) In no fewer than 250 words per response, respond to at least three (3) other students' comments:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Week 13: The Epicureans

1) Power Point Lecture

2) Readings: Book One (1) of “On the Nature of Things,” by Lucretius (e.g., at the perseus.tufts.edu)

3) In no fewer than 150 words, respond to “Question(s) of the week” posted

4) Create no fewer than three (3) questions based on either Lucretius or something else you've read or heard on either Epicureanism or Skepticism

5) In no fewer than 50 words at a time, respond to at least three (3) other student’s comments

6) Post either an article or a video to the discussion board on either a thinker or a school of thought described in the Lecture Module.

* Optional resources:

“On the Nature Things,” available as a free download at LibriVox

http://historyofphilosophy.net/sextus

http://historyofphilosophy.net/skeptics.academ

http://historyofphilosophy.net/pyrrho

Week 14: Middle Platonism

  1) Read Power Point Lecture Module

  2) Readings: The three (3) readings from Plutarch uploaded

  3) Post at least one article or video on one of the Middle Platonist authors seen

  4) In no fewer than 250 words, respond to “Question(s) of the week” posted

 5) In no fewer than 250 words at a time, respond to at least three (3) other student’s comments:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Week 15: NeoPlatonism

1) Power Point Lecture

2) Readings: Plotinus's Ennead 1, Tractates 2 and 4; and Ennead 5

3) Post at least either one article or video pertaining to NeoPlatonism

4) In no fewer than 250 words, respond to “Question(s) of the week” posted

5) In no fewer than 250 words at a time, respond to at least three (3) other student’s comments:

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

 

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response merely summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

4. COURSE REQUIREMENTS

Quizz One (1), 10%:        September 2, 2017 (11:59 p.m U.S. Pacific Time)

Quizz Two (2), 10%:        October 7, 2017 (11:59 p.m U.S. Pacific Time)

Midterm Exam, 20%:         October 23, 2017 (due October 28, 2017 by 11:59 p.m U.S. Pacific Time)

Final Exam 20%:        December 1, 2017

Final Paper, 20%:         December 9, 2017 (by 11:59 p.m U.S. Pacific Time) Should be no shorter than seven (7), and no longer than fifteen (15) double-spaced pages, excluding cover and bibliography pages, and citing at least three (3) sources]

Class Participation 20%

5.1 REQUIRED READINGS and RESOURCES:

See above.  No course textbook for purchase.

6. SUGGESTED READINGS and RESOURCES:

Posterior Analytics AUDIO BOOK for free, in public domain (Octavio Owen’s translation): https://archive.org/details/posterior_analytics_ge_librivox 

Posterior Analytics online for free, in public domain https://archive.org/stream/L391AristotlePosteriorAnalyticsTopica/L391-Aristotle%20Posterior%20Analytics%20Topica#page/n35/mode/2up 

Entry: “Aristotle’s Psychology,” the section entitled, “2. Hylomorphism in General,” paragraphs 1-6 of this section (table of causes included), http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-psychology 

Book Chapter entitled, “Changing Aristotle’s Mind” in Words and Life, authored by Drs. Hilary Putnam and Martha Nussbaum, pp.24-25; 42 (par.2), 50; 51 (par. 2); 52-56

http://books.google.com/books?id=wfE6xy-SNS4C&pg=PA22&dq=%22changing+aristotle's+mind%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hxFqVJ7GNIbgsAS81IHoDQ&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22changing%20aristotle's%20mind%22&f=false 

Book Two (2), Lecture One (1) of Thomas Aquinas’s Commentary on Aristotle’s De Anima, Translated by R.A. Kocoureck.  E.g., No.213; No. 215; and/or Lesson Thirteen (13) No. 385; No. 386; https://archive.org/stream/CommentaryOfSt.ThomasAquinasOnAristotlesTreatiseOnTheSoul.Tanslated/kocourek#page/n7/mode/2up/search/soul

7. EVALUATION

(Basis of evaluation with explanation regarding the nature of the assignment and the percentage of the grade assigned to each item below). Students who have difficulty with research and composition are encouraged to pursue assistance with the Online Writing Lab (available at http://www.holyapostles.edu/owl).

GRADING SCALE:

A 94-100; A- 90-93; B+ 87-89; B 84-86; B- 80-83; C+ 77-79; C 74-76; C- 70-73 60-69; F 59 and below

CONTENT FOR WRITTEN ASSIGNMENTS

Absence of Understanding

Analysis shows no awareness of the discipline or its methodologies as they relate to the topic.

Lack of Understanding

Analysis seems to misunderstand some basic concepts of the discipline or lacks ability to articulate them.

Inadequate understanding

Analysis is sometimes unclear in understanding or articulating concepts of the discipline.

Adequate understanding

Analysis demonstrates an understanding of basic concepts of the discipline but could express them with greater clarity.

Solid Understanding

Analysis demonstrates a clear understanding and articulation of concepts with some sense of their wider implications.

Insightful understanding

Analysis clearly demonstrates an understanding and articulation of concepts of the discipline as they relate to the topic; highlights connections to other concepts; integrates concepts into wider contexts.

RESEARCH

Missing Research

Paper shows no evidence of research: citation of sources missing.

Inadequate research and/or documentation

Over-reliance on few sources; spotty documentation of facts in text; pattern of citation errors.

Weak research and/or documentation

Inadequate number or quality of sources; many facts not referenced; several errors in citation format.

Adequate research and documentation but needs improvement

Good choice of sources but could be improved with some additions or better selection; did not always cite sources; too many citation errors.

Solid research and documentation

A number of relevant scholarly sources revealing solid research; sources appropriately referenced in paper; only a few minor citation errors.

Excellent critical research and documentation

Critically selected and relevant scholarly sources demonstrating extensive, in-depth research; sources skillfully incorporated into paper at all necessary points; all citations follow standard bibliographic format.

WRITING & EXPRESSION

Incomplete writing

Analysis is only partially written or completely misses the topic.

Writing difficult to understand, serious improvement needed

Analysis fails to address the topic; confusing organization or development; little elaboration of position; insufficient control of sentence structure and vocabulary; unacceptable number of errors in grammar, mechanics, and usage.

Episodic writing, a mix of strengths and weaknesses

Analysis noticeably neglects or misinterprets the topic; simplistic or repetitive treatment, only partially-internalized; weak organization and development, some meandering; simple sentences, below-level diction; distracting errors in grammar, mechanics, and usage.

Acceptable writing, but could use some sharpening of skill

Analysis is an uneven response to parts of the topic; somewhat conventional treatment; satisfactory organization, but more development needed; adequate syntax and diction, but could use more vigor; overall control of grammar, mechanics, and usage, but some errors.

Solid writing, with something interesting to say

Analysis is an adequate response to the topic; some depth and complexity in treatment; persuasive organization and development, with suitable reasons and examples; level-appropriate syntax and diction; mastery of grammar, mechanics, and usage, with hardly any error.

Command-level writing, making a clear impression

Analysis is a thorough response to the topic; thoughtful and insightful examination of issues; compelling organization and development; superior syntax and diction; error-free grammar, mechanics, and usage.

COMMUNITY INTERACTION

Inadequate response

Response merely provides laudatory encouragement for original post, e.g., “Excellent post! You really have thought of something there.”

Poor response

Response misses the point of the original posting.

Weak response

Response summarizes original posting to which it responds.

Acceptable response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds.

Individually-conscious contributory response

Response makes a contribution to the posting to which it responds and fosters its development.

Community-conscious contributory response

Response makes a contribution to the learning community and fosters its development.

8. DISABILITIES ACCOMMODATIONS POLICY

Holy Apostles College & Seminary is committed to the goal of achieving equal educational opportunities and full participation in higher education for persons with disabilities who qualify for admission to the College. Students enrolled in online courses who have documented disabilities requiring special accommodations should contact Bob Mish, the Director of Online Student Affairs, at rmish@holyapostles.edu or 860-632-3015. In all cases, reasonable accommodations will be made to ensure that all students with disabilities have access to course materials in a mode in which they can receive them. Students who have technological limitations (e.g., slow Internet connection speeds in convents) are asked to notify their instructors the first week of class for alternative means of delivery.

9. ACADEMIC HONESTY POLICY

Students at Holy Apostles College & Seminary are expected to practice academic honesty.

Avoiding Plagiarism

        In its broadest sense, plagiarism is using someone else's work or ideas, presented or claimed as your own.  At this stage in your academic career, you should be fully conscious of what it means to plagiarize. This is an inherently unethical activity because it entails the uncredited use of someone else's expression of ideas for another's personal advancement; that is, it entails the use of a person merely as a means to another person’s ends.

Students, where applicable:

Consequences of Academic Dishonesty:

        Because of the nature of this class, academic dishonesty is taken very seriously.  Students participating in academic dishonesty may be removed from the course and from the program.

10. ATTENDANCE POLICY

You are expected to login several times during each week. Because this class is being taught in a technology-mediated forum, it is important to actively participate each week in the course. In a traditional classroom setting for a 3-credit course, students would be required, per the federal standards, to be in class three 50-minute sessions (or 2.5 hours a week) and prepare for class discussions six 50-minute sessions (or 5 hours) a week. Expect to devote at least nine 50-minute sessions (or 7.5 quality hours) a week to this course. A failure on the student’s part to actively participate in the life of the course may result in a reduction of the final grade.

11. INCOMPLETE POLICY

An Incomplete is a temporary grade assigned at the discretion of the faculty member. It is typically allowed in situations in which the student has satisfactorily completed major components of the course and has the ability to finish the remaining work without re-enrolling, but has encountered extenuating circumstances, such as illness, that prevent his or her doing so prior to the last day of class.

To request an incomplete, distance-learning students must first download a copy of the Incomplete Request Form. This document is located within the Shared folder of the Files tab in Populi. Secondly, students must fill in any necessary information directly within the PDF document. Lastly, students must send their form to their professor via email for approval. “Approval” should be understood as the professor responding to the student’s email in favor of granting the “Incomplete” status of the student.

Students receiving an Incomplete must submit the missing course work by the end of the sixth week following the semester in which they were enrolled. An incomplete grade (I) automatically turns into the grade of “F” if the course work is not completed.

Students who have completed little or no work are ineligible for an incomplete. Students who feel they are in danger of failing the course due to an inability to complete course assignments should withdraw from the course.

A “W” (Withdrawal) will appear on the student’s permanent record for any course dropped after the end of the first week of a semester to the end of the third week. A “WF” (Withdrawal/Fail) will appear on the student’s permanent record for any course dropped after the end of the third week of a semester and on or before the Friday before the last week of the semester.

12. ABOUT YOUR PROFESSOR

My name is Dr. Peter J. Mango. My Ph.D. in Philosophy is from Rome’s Pontifical Athenaeum Regina Apostolorum. I have a degree in Information Studies from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. I have taught Philosophy since 2003, and have engaged in adjunct teaching at City University of New York-York College; SUNY-Westchester; Molloy College; St. Joseph’s Seminary in Yonkers; New York, and Sacred Heart College in Fairfield, CT.photo

My teaching assumptions include the following:  

  1. the proposition of philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre that philosophy too often is expounded separately from its own history; i.e., presented as a “finished” product when it’s really not

  1. the understanding (in the spirit of Socrates) each student I teach probably knows lots of things I don’t know, so I ought to learn from them – that we’re all seeking truth together

  1. the claim of Augustine and Aquinas that “no one says something that is completely false”

  1. the belief one should hear out just about everyone, in the spirit of Aquinas

  1. the belief students should feel comfortable raising objections about ideas proposed (i.e., the classroom method of Aquinas)

  1. the simultaneous belief one should proceed “systematically” too, seeking coherence and not just “picking and choosing” from the flow of ideas without standards for evaluating these

  1. the belief that one’s standards inevitably come from a “tradition” of thought – one better, less, least, or perhaps best, conformed to reality

Partial translation:  This course will be at least part history lesson. I wish to hear you out. Observe the Golden Rule when communicating. There’s no penalty for disagreeing with what I say. You may learn something from this course, and I may learn something from you. We’re going to get through this together. Hopefully we may become conscious of whichever tradition(s) of thought we inhabit as the course progresses – and there’s nothing wrong with having one. (It’s inevitable that we do.)

This course is an introductory course only.  It may be viewed as complementary to such fields as Biblical Studies, Classical Studies, Medieval Philosophy, General Ethics, Social Ethics, Epistemology, Formal Logic, Philosophy of Science, and Renaissance & Baroques Studies, among others, etc.