.png?lmsauth=aeb003561ff92466c0363039bcfbf9b70d9841ad){kind=logo}
Introduction to Philosophy - PHI125/2 Fall 2025
Course
Jakub Jirsa
In this course students will be introduced to the key philosophical debates and to the thought of the greatest minds within the Western philosophical tradition. The students will have an opportunity at once to (a) explore the most fundamental philosophical questions, (b) to acquaint themselves with the ideas of history’s greatest philosophers, and (c) to read and analyze some of the most famous philosophical works. In particular, the seminar focuses on different problems and questions related to our usage of the terms good and goods in relation to us, human beings, and our lives. We will philosophically examine questions like what does it mean to live a good life? What makes us good human beings? And when are our actions good? The approach will be systematic and focused on discussion of the problems; the historical materials will serve us for learning about the roots of the problems as well as to get some distance from current approaches.
Introduction to Philosophy
Course code: PHI 125 / 2
Term and year: Fall 2025
Day and time: Tuesday 8:15-11
Instructor: Jakub Jirsa
Instructor contact: jakub.jirsa@aauni.edu
Consultation hours: Tuesday 11:00-12:00 in the Faculty Lounge (or other times by email appointment)
|
Credits US/ECTS |
3/6 |
Level |
Bachelor |
|
Length |
15 weeks |
Pre-requisite |
TOEFL iBT 71 |
|
Contact hours |
42 hours |
Grading |
Letter grade |
1. Course Description
In this course students will be introduced to the key philosophical debates and to the thought of the greatest minds within the Western philosophical tradition. The students will have an opportunity at once to (a) explore the most fundamental philosophical questions, (b) to acquaint themselves with the ideas of history’s greatest philosophers, and (c) to read and analyze some of the most famous philosophical works. In particular, the seminar focuses on different problems and questions related to our usage of the terms good and goods in relation to us, human beings, and our lives. We will philosophically examine questions like what does it mean to live a good life? What makes us good human beings? And when are our actions good? The approach will be systematic and focused on discussion of the problems; the historical materials will serve us for learning about the roots of the problems as well as to get some distance from current approaches.
2. Student Learning Outcomes
Upon completion of this course, students should be able to:
· Comprehend and have a clear understanding of the main philosophical questions and of the main positions taken in the central philosophical debates
· Outline and analyze the most important ideas of history’s greatest philosophers
· compare and contrast the ways in which various philosophers justify their claims and defend their philosophical positions
3. Reading Material
Required Materials
· Mary Midgley, „Can We Base Freedom on Ignorance?“, in: Can’t We Make Moral Judgements? New York 1993, 3-11.
· Herodotus, „Custom is King“ + Ruth Benedict, „In Defense of Moral Relativism“ in: Pojman, L. (ed.), Moral Philosophy, Indianapolis/Cambridge 1993, 20-25. + Bernard Williams, “Interlude: Relativism” in: Morality, Cambridge 1993, 20-25.
· Sophocles, Antigone
· Plato, Crito
· Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics 1, 2.1-6, 10.6-9
· Philippa Foot, „Transition to Human Beings“, in: Natural Goodness, Oxford 2001/2010, 38-51.
· Immanuel Kant, Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (selection) for two sessions.
· Onora O’Neill, „Kantian Approaches to Some Famine Problems“, chap. 57 in: Russ Shafer-Landau, Ethical Theory, Oxford 2007, p. 553-564.
· John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism (selection).
· Julia Driver (2005), Consequentialism and Feminist Ethics. Hypatia, 20: 183-199
· Bernard Williams, “A Critique of Utilitarianism” (Selections) in Utilitarianism: For and Against, by J.J.C. Smart and B. Williams. Cambridge 1973, pp. 82–100.
· Raimond Gaita, “Fearless thinkers and evil thoughts”, in: Good and Evil: An Absolute Conception, London/New York 2004, p. 308-330.
Recommended Materials
· Blackburn, Simon. Ethics : A Very Short Introduction. Second ed. Oxford, 2021.
· Driver, Julia. Ethics : The Fundamentals. Malden, MA, 2006.
· Rachels, James. The Elements of Moral Philosophy. 9th ed. New York, 2018.
· Wolff, Jonathan. An Introduction to Moral Philosophy. Second ed. New York, 2021.
4. Teaching methodology
The seminar will start with introduction, which will place the material and problems under discussion into context. Next, there will be a short presentation of the materials for a given meeting (focused on problems and questions, not exactly summarizing the entire text) followed by an exposition to answer these problems. We will proceed with discussion of the materials and their implications for current ethically loaded problems. In relevant classes students will receive the feedback on their assignments as well.
5. Course Schedule
|
Date |
Class Agenda |
|
Session 1 2.9. |
Topic: Introduction – what is the problem with “good”? Description: Course introduction, its structure and aims. Introduction to the readings. The problem of “amoralism” and further objections to morality. Reading: Mary Midgley, „Can We Base Freedom on Ignorance?“, in: Can’t We Make Moral Judgements? New York 1993, p. 3-11. Assignments / deadlines: |
|
Session 2 9.9. |
Topic: Relativism and other false dilemmas Description: We will discuss relativism, its usefulness, its pitfalls and limits. Issue of toleration and its uneasiness. Reading: Herodotus, „Custom is King“ + Ruth Benedict, „In Defense of Moral Relativism“ in: Pojman, L. (ed.), Moral Philosophy, Indianapolis/Cambridge 1993, p. 20-25. + Bernard Williams, “Interlude: Relativism” in: Morality, Cambridge 1993, p. 20-25. Assignments / deadlines: |
|
Session 3 16.9. |
Topic: Good life, moral luck and conflict Description: Creon and Antigone, who is right? How are their stances justified? We will discuss value conflict and moral luck on the example of Sophocles play Antigone. Ancient views of good life will be introduced. Reading: Sophocles, Antigone Assignments / deadlines: paper instructions |
|
Session 4 23.9. |
Topic: Socrates’ high moral standard Description: Socrates’ was convinced that one ought never do any harm. We will examine this claim on the background of Plato’s Crito (the short dialogue explaining why Socrates died). Reading: Plato, Crito Assignments / deadlines: 1st short paper (written in class) |
|
Session 5 30.9. |
Topic: Happiness and virtues: ancient view Description: What is happiness (and why is this term so strange)? What is a virtue? We will discuss Aristotelian approach to good and successful human life. Reading: Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics 1, 2.1-6, 10.6-9 Assignments / deadlines: 1st short paper feedback and evaluation |
|
Session 6 7.10. |
Topic: Modern variations on Aristotle Description: We will discuss views of some contemporary Aristotelians and critically examine what is still so attractive on this approach. Reading: Philippa Foot, „Transition to Human Beings“, in: Natural Goodness, Oxford 2001/2010, p. 38-51. Assignments / deadlines: |
|
Session 7 14.10. |
Topic: Duty and imperative Description: Why morality should not focus on happiness? This class will be devoted to Kant’s explanation of the very foundations of morality. We will see why is he convinced that moral principles must be independent on empirical reality. Reading: Immanuel Kant, Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (selection) Assignments / deadlines: paper instructions |
|
Session 8 20.10 |
Topic: Autonomy and respect Description: What is the ground for respect according to Kant? And how does autonomy relate to morality? What kind of behavior is granted to human beings (being ends not means) and how to deal with the different wordings of the moral principle? Reading: Immanuel Kant, Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (selection) Assignments / deadlines: 2nd short paper (written in class) |
|
MID TERM BREAK |
|
|
Session 9 4.11. |
Topic: Kantian ethics in praxis Description: Kantian ethics might be seen as perhaps pure but rather unpractical. We will examine one particularly interesting application of the Kantian ethics in contemporary world. Reading: Onora O’Neill, „Kantian Approaches to Some Famine Problems“, chap. 57 in: Russ Shafer-Landau, Ethical Theory, Oxford 2007, p. 553-564. Assignments / deadlines: 2nd short paper feedback and evaluation |
|
Session 10 11.11. |
Topic: It is simple: benefits and harms as a way of life Description: We will discuss Mill’s consequentialism. We will focus on his idea of utilitarianism as a way of life (rather than a strict doctrine). We will discuss his claims about importance of liberty as well. Reading: John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism (selection) Assignments / deadlines: |
|
Session 11 18.11. |
Topic: Special ties and consequences Description: If consequences are all what matters, how do we accommodate, for example, special family ties? Or gender issues? We will discuss Julia Driver’s way through these issues. Reading: Julia Driver (2005), Consequentialism and Feminist Ethics. Hypatia, 20: 183-199. Assignments / deadlines: |
|
Session 12 25.11. |
Topic: Identity and integrity Description: The question will be about the value of our personal integrity and our character. Bernard Williams will serve us as an example of one possible contemporary approach to the issue of good human life. Reading: Bernard Williams, “A Critique of Utilitarianism” (Selections) in Utilitarianism: For and Against, by J.J.C. Smart and B. Williams. Cambridge 1973, pp. 82–100. Assignments / deadlines: final paper introduction |
|
Session 13 2.12. |
Topic: On the relation between author and her text Description: The first part of the class will be the final paper (cca 90 minutes). The second part of the class will be devoted to the discussion of the relation between author, teacher and the ethical issues in question. Gaita will serve as an example for yet another contemporary approach to the moral questions. Reading: Raimond Gaita, “Fearless thinkers and evil thoughts”, in: Good and Evil: An Absolute Conception, London/New York 2004, p. 308-330. Assignments / deadlines: final paper (written in class) |
|
Session 14 9.12. |
Topic: The End of Ethics Description: The closing meeting will be devoted to (a) feedback and evaluation of the final papers, and (b) discussion of the conflict between different styles of ethics we read. We will discuss the notion of moral luck. Reading: no assigned reading Assignments / deadlines: final paper feedback and evaluation |
6. Course Requirements and Assessment (with estimated workloads)
|
Assignment |
Workload (hours) |
Weight in Final Grade |
Evaluated Course Specific Learning Outcomes |
Evaluated Institutional Learning Outcomes* |
|
Class Participation |
42 |
10% |
Active, critical and well-argued (thoughtful) participation in class. This will show comprehension and understanding of the main philosophical questions and of the main positions taken in the central philosophical debates. |
1, 2, 3 |
|
Presentation |
10 |
10% |
Comprehension and a clear understanding of the main philosophical questions and the main positions taken in central philosophical debates. An outline and analysis of the most important ideas of history's greatest philosophers. Comparison and contrast of the ways in which various philosophers justify their claims and defend their philosophical positions. Ability to identify the main argument, critical evaluation. |
1, 2, 3 |
|
1st short paper |
25 |
20% |
Comprehension and a clear understanding of the main philosophical questions and the main positions taken in central philosophical debates. An outline and analysis of the most important ideas of history's greatest philosophers. |
1, 2 |
|
2nd short paper |
28 |
25% |
Comprehension and a clear understanding of the main philosophical questions and the main positions taken in central philosophical debates. An outline and analysis of the most important ideas of history's greatest philosophers. |
1, 2 |
|
Final paper |
45 |
35% |
Comprehension and a clear understanding of the main philosophical questions and the main positions taken in central philosophical debates. An outline and analysis of the most important ideas of history's greatest philosophers. Comparison and contrast of the ways in which various philosophers justify their claims and defend their philosophical positions. |
1, 2 |
|
TOTAL |
150 |
100% |
|
|
*1 = Critical Thinking; 2 = Effective Communication; 3 = Effective and Responsible Action
7. Detailed description of the assignments
Assignment 1: Class participation
Students will participate in discussion during the seminar. The discussion presupposes familiarity with the relevant text. It is welcomed (but not necessary) to search for other relevant material on the subject and use it in the discussion.
Assessment breakdown
|
Assessed area |
Percentage |
|
Content (do your points relate to the matter in discussion, do they move the discussion forward) |
35% |
|
Form of argumentation (is your point supported by valid argumentation and reasons which you are able to explain) |
35% |
|
Reaction to questions (if asked by a lecturer or student, are you capable of (i) providing a reply based on the material read and (ii) explain your position in detailed to your colleagues) |
30% |
Assignment 2: Presentation
Each student will do two short presentations (max. 10 minutes) about the main argument of the text and (more importantly) relevant questions and problems related to the text. The first presentation will be before the midterm break, the second one after the midterm break. For the presentation please prepare slides which will (a) identify the main theses of the discussed text; (b) highlight ideas of particular interest (and explain why you think these ideas are important) and (c) provide questions for the subsequent discussion. These question might be of two sorts – question of understanding (what do you think should be explained in detail, what was hard to follow) and critical questions (on the points which you believe were weak or wrong, please explain reasons for your evaluation).
Assessment breakdown
|
Assessed area |
Percentage |
|
Content – getting the main argument right; identifying some important topics; formulating questions for the subsequent discussion |
40% |
|
Presentation – clarity, structure and convincing argumentation |
40% |
|
Reaction to questions – can you help your colleagues with their questions? Based on the text under discussion, can you react to the questions by the lecturer? |
20% |
Assignment 3: 1st short paper
At the beginning of the class students will be presented with three topics; each student will choose one topic and write a short reflection/essay. The text should be around one page long, structured and all the claims should be supported by valid argumentation based on the knowledge of the texts discussed so far. The texts must handed in 60 minutes after the start of the paper.
Assessment breakdown
|
Assessed area |
Percentage |
|
Content (does the text answer the question and/or explain the topic; does it use the texts discussed so far) |
35% |
|
Structure (clarity of the text, leading the reader towards the conclusion) |
30% |
|
Argumentation (are the arguments valid? Consideration of counter-arguments and reply to them) |
35% |
Assignment 4: 2nd short paper
At the beginning of the class students will be presented with three topics; each student will choose one topic and write a short reflection/essay. The text should be around one page long, structured and all the claims should be supported by valid argumentation based on the knowledge of the texts discussed so far. The texts must handed in 60 minutes after the start of the paper.
Assessment breakdown
|
Assessed area |
Percentage |
|
Content (does the text answer the question and/or explain the topic; does it use the texts discussed so far) |
35% |
|
Structure (clarity of the text, leading the reader towards the conclusion) |
30% |
|
Argumentation (are the arguments valid? Consideration of counter-arguments and reply to them) |
35% |
Assignment 5: final paper
At the beginning of the class students will be presented with three topics; each student will choose one topic and write a short reflection/essay. The text should be at least two pages long, structured and all the claims should be supported by valid argumentation based on the knowledge of the texts discussed so far. The texts must handed in 120 minutes after the start of the paper.
Assessment breakdown
|
Assessed area |
Percentage |
|
Content (does the text answer the question and/or explain the topic; does it use the texts discussed so far) |
35% |
|
Structure (clarity of the text, leading the reader towards the conclusion) |
30% |
|
Argumentation (are the arguments valid? Consideration of counter-arguments and reply to them) |
35% |
8. General Requirements and School Policies
General requirements
All coursework is governed by AAU’s academic rules. Students are expected to be familiar with the academic rules in the Academic Codex and Student Handbook and to maintain the highest standards of honesty and academic integrity in their work. Please see the AAU intranet for a summary of key policies regarding coursework.
Course specific requirements
There are no special requirements or deviations from AAU policies for this course.
Here is the course outline:
1. Introduction – what is the problem with “good”?
Sep 2
Course introduction, its structure and aims. Introduction to the readings. The problem of “amoralism” and further objections to morality. |
2. Relativism and other false dilemmas
Sep 9
We will discuss relativism, its usefulness, its pitfalls and limits. Issue of toleration and its uneasiness. |
3. Good life, moral luck and conflict
Sep 16
Creon and Antigone, who is right? How are their stances justified? We will discuss value conflict and moral luck on the example of Sophocles play Antigone. Ancient views of good life will be introduced. |
4. Socrates’ high moral standard
Sep 23
Socrates’ was convinced that one ought never do any harm. We will examine this claim on the background of Plato’s Crito (the short dialogue explaining why Socrates died). Assignments / deadlines: 1st short paper (written in class) |
5. Happiness and virtues: ancient view
Sep 30
What is happiness (and why is this term so strange)? What is a virtue? We will discuss Aristotelian approach to good and successful human life. |
6. Modern variations on Aristotle
Oct 7
We will discuss views of some contemporary Aristotelians and critically examine what is still so attractive on this approach. |
7. Duty and imperative
Oct 14
Why morality should not focus on happiness? This class will be devoted to Kant’s explanation of the very foundations of morality. We will see why is he convinced that moral principles must be independent on empirical reality. |
8. Autonomy and respect
Oct 20
What is the ground for respect according to Kant? And how does autonomy relate to morality? What kind of behavior is granted to human beings (being ends not means) and how to deal with the different wordings of the moral principle? Assignments / deadlines: 2nd short paper (written in class) |
9. Kantian ethics in praxis
Nov 4
Kantian ethics might be seen as perhaps pure but rather unpractical. We will examine one particularly interesting application of the Kantian ethics in contemporary world. |
10. It is simple: benefits and harms as a way of life
Nov 11
We will discuss Mill’s consequentialism. We will focus on his idea of utilitarianism as a way of life (rather than a strict doctrine). We will discuss his claims about importance of liberty as well. |
11. Special ties and consequences
Nov 18
If consequences are all what matters, how do we accommodate, for example, special family ties? Or gender issues? We will discuss Julia Driver’s way through these issues. |
12. Identity and integrity
Nov 25
The question will be about the value of our personal integrity and our character. Bernard Williams will serve us as an example of one possible contemporary approach to the issue of good human life. |
13. On the relation between author and her text
Dec 2
The first part of the class will be the final paper (cca 90 minutes). The second part of the class will be devoted to the discussion of the relation between author, teacher and the ethical issues in question. Gaita will serve as an example for yet another contemporary approach to the moral questions. Assignments / deadlines: final paper (written in class) |
14. The End of Ethics
Dec 9
The closing meeting will be devoted to (a) feedback and evaluation of the final papers, and (b) discussion of the conflict between different styles of ethics we read. We will discuss the notion of moral luck. |