Learning objectives
By the end of the class the student will be able to (in accordance with the Dublin indicators):
1. Understand the challenges of contemporary ethics and appreciate some of the most prominent philosophical solutions.
2. Apply the concepts acquired by the thinkers examined in class to other areas of ethical reflection.
3. Develop a critical perspective on contemporary ethics.
4. Present in clear and argumentative manner the philosophical positions discussed in class and master at least the rudiments of philosophical discussion in English.
5. Read and comprehend autonomously complex philosophical texts devoted to ethical reflection.
Prerequisites
Basic knowledge of methods and topics of moral philosophy, as well as proficiency in the English language are pre-requisites for this class.
Course unit content
This class offers an introduction to contemporary metaethics in both the analytic and the phenomenological tradition. Metaethics is the branch of moral philosophy that studies the status of our moral talk and thought. Are our moral statements truth-evaluable, i.e., are they true or false? Or do they merely express our individual and cultural preferences? Do we potentially come to know something about the world when we acquire new moral beliefs? Can someone be wrong about their moral beliefs no matter how strongly they or the people around them feel about those beliefs? Are wrongness and rightness special moral properties of actions and states of affairs or are they metaphysically identical with non-moral, natural properties? How are our moral experiences and the values/disvalues they intend best described? Metaethics in the analytic tradition offers at least two broad families of answers to these questions: anti-realism and realism. In the first module of this course we will explore the different options available to anti-realists and realists drawing on classical and contemporary texts from G.E. Moore’s Principia Ethica (1903) up to the present. In the second module we will turn to the phenomenological tradition, particularly the work of Franz Brentano and Edmund Husserl, in order to see how their reflections on value, emotional experience and ethical judgment contribute to the contemporary debate.
Full programme
(MODULE I)
We will begin with a close reading of G.E. Moore’s famous Open Question Argument (OQA) in Principia Ethica (1903) as the origin of contemporary metaethics. We will then turn to anti-realist reactions to Moore’s argument, parcularly Ayer’s expressivism, Hare’s prescriptivism, and Mackie’s error-theory. The following set of readings will include seminal work by the so-called Cornell realists (Railton, Boyd, and Brink) from the 1980es, who set out to rehabilitate moral realism. Next, we will focus on more recent varieties of anti-realism, in particular, Gibbard’s and Blackburn’s so-called quasi-realism, Joyce’s fictionalism, as well as the challenges posed by the problem of supervenience. We will conclude this module with a look at contemporary varieties of non-naturalist realism, particularly in the work of Shafer-Landau, Enoch, and Cuneo, as well as Audi’s revival of moral perception as a cognitivist conception of morality that accepts supervenience.
(MODULE II)
The second part of the course will be entirely devoted to the phenomenological tradition, particularly the work of Franz Brentano and Edmund Husserl. We will discuss Brentano’s claim that there are correct and incorrect feeling-responses to situations, in order to then turn to Husserl’s conception of a formal axiology and praxeology as the disciplines parallel to formal logic in the sphere of valuing and willing. Particular attention will be devoted to the Brentanian and Husserlian doctrine of the analogy of the various domains of reason, as well as Husserl’s later view of ethics as distinct from axiology.
Bibliography
(If available, the original texts in English will be uploaded on elly2024.dusic.unipr.it)
E. Lecaldano/P. Donatelli (eds.), Etica analitica. Analisi, teorie, applicazioni (LED Edizioni
Universitarie: Milano 1996), cap. 1, 3 & 4
G.E. Moore, Principia Ethica (Bompiani: Milano 2023), cap. 1 & 2
T. McPherson/D. Plunkett (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Metaethics (Routledge:
London/New York 2018), cap. 1-4, 10, 15
T. Cuneo/R. Shafer-Landau (eds.), Ethical Theory: An Anthology (Wiley/Blackwell: Malden
MA 2013), cap. 2, 3, 8, 9
A. Bergqvist/R. Cowan (eds.), Evaluative Perception (Oxford University Press: Oxford
2018), cap. 1, 5
R. Audi, Percezione morale. La lingua del dibattito filosofico contemporaneo (Mimesis:
Milano 2017)
F. Brentano, L’origine della conoscenza del bene e del male (PdF)
E. Husserl, Lineamenti di etica formale (Le Lettere: Firenze 2002)
E. Husserl, Introduzione all’etica (Laterza: Bari 2019)
A. Staiti, Etica naturalistica e fenomenologia (Il Mulino: Bologna 2020)
STUDENTS WHO ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND MAY INTEGRATE THEIR READINGS WITH THE FOLLOWING VOLUME:
G. Mancuso, La metaetica: Un'Introduzione (Roma: Carocci 2024)
Teaching methods
Frontal lecture, seminar-style discussion, discussion with invited international experts.
Assessment methods and criteria
One written research paper on a topic to be determined with the instructor. Alternatively, students may require to be examined orally in English or Italian after submitting a two-page critical discussion in English of one of the texts discussed in class.
Assessment criteria and assessment thresholds:
30 cum laude: Excellent, excellent solidity of knowledge, excellent expressive properties, excellent understanding of the concepts
30: Very good. Complete and adequate knowledge, well-articulated and correctly expressed
27-29: Good, satisfactory knowledge, essentially correct expression.
24-26: Fairly good knowledge, but not complete and not always correct.
22-23: Generally sufficient knowledge but superficial. Expression is often not appropriate and confused.
18-21: Sufficient. The expression and articulation of the speech show important gaps.
<18: insufficient knowledge or very incomplete, lack of guidance in discipline, expression seriously deficient. Exam failed.
Other information
The research paper topic must be discussed in person with the instructor. The determination of the research paper topic should happen a good while before the chosen examination date, in order to have enough time to write the paper and have it linguistically copy-edited.
