Learning objectives
In-depth knowledge and understanding of theoretical philosophy, its
relation to socio-philosophical questions and critical theory, and its application to contemporary
debates. Ability to discuss in an argumentative form the subject-matters
proposed in the lessons and to critically compare different interpretations
of the assigned texts. Development of communicative and learning skills,
and of the ability to make autonomous judgments on theoretical
questions. Ability to compose a written work in argumentative
form on the course themes
Prerequisites
Knowledge of the fundamental concepts and the principal authors in the
history of philosophy.
Course unit content
Beautiful world, where are you?
The course will focus on the connection between poetry, nature, and philosophy in the work of some German-speaking thinkers and writers of the Romantic Age.
Full programme
Optional Readings:
P.Szondi, Poetica dell’idealismo tedesco, Einaudi 1974
Bibliography
- Friedrich Schiller, Sulla poesia ingenua e sentimentale (1795), SE,
Milano, 2005
- Friedrich Schiller, Lettere sull'educazione estetica, Bompiani, Milano, 2021 (passi indicati a lezione)
Friedrich Schiller, Gli Dei della Grecia, in Id., Poesie, a cura di G. Pinna, Feltrinelli, Milano, 2019, pp. 2-9 (testo disponibile su Elly)
- J.C. F. Hölderlin / F.W.J. Schelling / G.W.F. Hegel, "Il più antico
programma dell’idealismo tedesco" (1795-7), in Bellezza e verità, a cura
di F. Rella, Feltrinelli, Milano 1990, pp. 46-48 (testo disponibile su Elly)
G.W.F. Hegel, "La contraddizione sempre crescente, in Id., Scritti politici, a
cura di Claudio Cesa, Einaudi,1972, pp. 9-11 (testo disponibile su Elly)
- F. Hölderlin, "Prefazione al Frammento di Iperione", "Prefazione alla penultima stesura di Iperione"
", in Scritti di estetica, Milano, SE, 1987, pp. 46 e 54-5 (Testi disponibili Su Elly)
F. Schelling, Sistema dell'idealismo trascendentale, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 1990, Introduzione § 4, pp. 20-22; Sezione Sesta §§ 1-3, Annotazione Generale all'Intero Sistema, pp. 285-307 (testo disponibile su Elly)
- Novalis, Frammenti, Rizzoli 1991, fr. 1186-1307 (testo disponibile su Elly)
- Novalis, I discepoli di Sais, Bompiani, 2001
- Novalis, Enrico di Ofterdingen, Adelphi, 1997
- F. Schlegel, "fr. 116 di Atheneum", "fr.115 di Lyceum", in Frammenti
critici e poetici, a cura di M. Cometa, Einaudi, Torino, 1997 (Testi disponibili su Elly)
- Fr. Schlegel, Dialogo sulla poesia, Einaudi, 1991
Teaching methods
teacher up-front lesson
Guided discussion
Seminar
Assessment methods and criteria
The final exam involves the composition of an argumentative paper (max 20,000 characters) on the topics and texts of the course, previously agreed with the teacher.
The final grade will consist of the paper evaluation (70%) and the oral exam (30%: discussion of the bibliography of the course). For students who have attended at least 70% of the lessons, the oral exam will be performed through the assessment of participation in the class discussion and a report held during the course. For other students, the oral exam on the bibliography will be held on the occasion of the final exam
The final evaluation (on a scale of 0-30) will be determined on the basis of four factors: 1) Expressive accuracy; 2) argumentative capacity and independence of judgment; 3) Ability to read, understand, and critically analyze philosophical texts; 4) Ability to identify theoretical links between different concepts and philosophical positions.
The exam is considered passed if it reaches the minimum grade of 18/30. The final mark will be determined according to the following parameters:
30 e Lode: Cum Laude; Outstanding expressive skills, brilliant ability to argue a thesis in a convincing way and to identify its weaknesses, terrific understanding and critical analysis of the texts assigned and the main concepts involved
30: Excellent; accurate and very well articulated expression skills, excellent understanding of the texts assigned and the concepts and topics involved
27-29: Very Good; correct and orderly expression skills, adequate capacity for argumentation and critical analysis of texts and concepts
24-26: Good: Good but not always correct expression skills, satisfactory ability to argue a philosophical thesis and to analyze texts and concepts, knowledge of texts not always complete
21-23: Discreet: not always appropriate expression skills, discreet argumentative ability, sometimes unsatisfactory understanding of texts and concepts
18-21: Sufficient: expressive skills often not adequate, unsatisfactory argumentative capacity, acceptable but often superficial knowledge and understanding of texts and concepts
0-18: Insufficient: Serious expressive gaps, inability to philosophically argue a thesis, inadequate knowledge and understanding of texts and concepts
