Reference no: EM131984020

Assignment

1. With respect to climate change, humans are not capable of thinking long term. On the contrary, humans are capable of thinking long term. Argue both sides. Philosophers to examine: Mill, Kant, Aristotle, Serres, Plato, Nietzsche, Spinoza, Descartes (I added Descartes): pick 3 to analyze in depth with citation. 2-3 pages (3 optimal).

Question one needs some setting up as it is not obvious how to orient oneself philosophically towards the "short term" and "long term" positions. Strategies to set up answers (3): 1. ask yourself what position is the Philosopher going against or negating. For ex. in Kant, notice what he says about positions not having duty (i.e. inclination, expediency, limited interest, results, accomplishments, etc.) - this would be your "short-term" argument. 2. work with and against different philosophies (i.e. happiness vs. freedom; individual vs. community; dualism vs. monism, etc.). 3. take the Philosopher's argument to its ultimate conclusions and argue with or against this. For ex. in Aristotle, virtue is a means between extremes; his short term logic is strategic. His long term thinking, however, is metaphysical: virtue (as the friend) is an end in itself. How do you read this? is the virtuous life (i.e. the life with friends) one of intellectual interest (i.e. thinking philosophically together, having like minds) or practical interest (thinking as a means to improve one's everyday experiences). Another example: Kant ultimately justifies categorical imperative in terms of humanity as an end in itself, which is the plural "good will", this desire to take other's ends into consideration in our decisions. Last example: Aristophanes argues for a bi-lateral and ambiguous definition of self. We don't really settle on a "third thing" as in Aristotle; the mean reverts back to differences within oneself and the other.

2. How can Philosophy teach us about otherness? Plato (Aristophanes Speech) Levinas ("Ambiguity of Love" (Handout), Badiou, Aristotle, Kant. Pick 3 to analyze in depth. With citations. 2-3 pages.

3. Explain Cartesian dualism (for understanding Cartesian dualism, see Meditation One and how he works his way out of problem of doubt in Meditation Two). Explain the overcoming of this in Nietzsche and Heidegger. Refer to the object of the bridge in Heidegger; the metaphor of bridge in Nietzsche. Can opt to use Leopold. 2 pages.

4. What is a friend? Explain what this means in Aristotle and compare to Agamben's sense of "whatever" (Coming Community, written in the 1990's). 2-3 pages. Offer your own views and examples. I handed out the Agamben, but here is the link below in case you need it ("Whatever", section 1).