Course overview
- Study period
- Semester 2, 2024 (22/07/2024 - 18/11/2024)
- Study level
- Undergraduate
- Location
- St Lucia
- Attendance mode
- In Person
- Units
- 2
- Administrative campus
- St Lucia
- Coordinating unit
- Historical & Philosophical Inq
This course traces the rise of modern philosophy as a reaction to dramatic changes in scientific thinking in the seventeenth century. It examines three major points of intersection between science and philosophy in the period in debates about (1) the ontology of nature; (2) causation; and (3) cognitive psychology. Philosophers examined include Descartes, Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia, Spinoza, Malebranche, Margaret Cavendish, Ann Conway, Ralph Cudworth, Leibniz, Hobbes, Locke, Berkeley and Hume.
Many of the contemporary problems in philosophy and cognate fields have their roots in debates that began in the seventeenth century. What is the nature of matter? Is causation based on impetus? Is the unification of distinct sciences, like astronomy and physics, possible?ﾠWhat makes something alive? What does rational agency consist in? What role do the emotions play in our moral psychology and psychopathology?ﾠWhat are the origins of the State and what legitimacy does it have to coerce human activity? Does the State have a role to play in promoting the positive liberty of citizens, or should it only protect their negative liberties?ﾠ
With the demise of the dominant Aristotelian philosophy, questions such as these took on a new significance and demanded new ways of answering them. The search for cogent answers to these question has not stopped with the seventeenth century but continues today. Students in this course will, therefore, have an opportunity to understand the historical and philosophical foundations of some of the central debates of contemporary philosophy.ﾠ
The aims of this course are three: (1) to build students' knowledge of the central movements in the history of philosophy, (2) to demonstrateﾠthe continued relevance of these movements to the contemporary debates, andﾠ(3) to assist students in developing advancedﾠskills in argumentation.
Course requirements
Assumed background
Students who have not taken Philosophy before are welcome to join this course. Students who would like to familiarise themselves with some of the background to the topics discussed in this course and basic critical thinkingﾠskills might like to peruse META101x: Philosophy and Critical Thinking, a free course available through edx.org. A free online resource for texts is https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/. Please also consult the Library Guide for this course atﾠhttps://guides.library.uq.edu.au/modernphilosophy.
Recommended prerequisites
We recommend completing the following courses before enrolling in this one:
PHIL1002
Incompatible
You can't enrol in this course if you've already completed the following:
PHIL3611
Course staff
Course coordinator
Lecturer
Timetable
The timetable for this course is available on the UQ Public Timetable.
Additional timetable information
Please note: Attendance at lectures and tutorials for an in person course is compulsory according to policy, but note that assessment will be completed duringﾠtutorialsﾠso attendance in tutorials is not just compulsory but prudent.ﾠ
Aims and outcomes
This course is the ultimate Bluffer's Guide to Philosophy, a course designed to ground a student's knowledge of philosophy in an understanding of the major shifts in philosophical thinking that occurred in the 17th century and serve as the origins of many contemporary philosophical debates. It builds on knowledge and skills developed in introductory philosophy courses: skills in philosophical analysis, argumentation and clarity of expression. Students will be able to expand on their knowledge of the contours of philosophical debates, working with more complex arguments and texts, and develop advanced argumentation and presentation skills.
Learning outcomes
After successfully completing this course you should be able to:
LO1.
Reflect and report on the philosophical and historical origins of central debates in philosophy.
LO2.
Demonstrate advanced skills of effective thinking and communication.
LO3.
Conduct independent philosophical research and inquiry.
LO4.
Identify, analyse and evaluate complex arguments or points of view.
LO5.
Develop an appreciation of diverse reasoned perspectives and engage in collaborative reasoning.
Assessment
Assessment summary
| Category | Assessment task | Weight | Due date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Participation/ Student contribution, Tutorial/ Problem Set |
Tutorial Participation and Exercises
|
30% |
Students' critical questions and tutorial work must be handed in at the end of each tutorial to receive a grade. |
| Paper/ Report/ Annotation |
Nutshell
|
10% |
8/08/2024 11:59 pm |
| Essay/ Critique |
Argument analysis and evaluation
|
25% |
6/09/2024 2:00 pm |
| Essay/ Critique |
Final Essay
|
35% |
11/11/2024 2:00 pm |
Assessment details
Tutorial Participation and Exercises
- In-person
- Mode
- Activity/ Performance
- Category
- Participation/ Student contribution, Tutorial/ Problem Set
- Weight
- 30%
- Due date
Students' critical questions and tutorial work must be handed in at the end of each tutorial to receive a grade.
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L04, L05
Task description
Tutorial work involves two components: Tutorial participation and in-class activities. (Students with an accommodation must contact the course coordinator to arrange alternatives.) They run for 10 weeks (2-6 and 8-12). Marks out of 15% will be awarded in weeks 7 and 13. Each tutorial is worth 3%.
Tutorial work enables steady development of skills in philosophical analysis and critical thinking. A Community of Inquiry approach is taken where students work together to solve problems. Students will be judged on their ability to work collaboratively to progress arguments, raise critical questions, and discuss competing interpretations and points of view.
Tutorials are mandatory and attendance will be taken. Marks are not awarded for attendance but for contributions to collective discussion and completion of set tasks. Alternative or make-up work will be assigned to students who miss a tutorial due to medical or other legitimate reasons.
During tutorials, students are expected to:
1. Demonstrate evidence of comprehension of the texts assigned for reading each week through preparation and participation in the tutorial. Required readings will be marked 'required' and made available through the Library.
2. Come to class with a critical question for discussion within your group.
3. Conduct an in-class analysis of short passages.
Submission guidelines
Submit to instructor at the end of the tutorial.
Deferral or extension
You cannot defer or apply for an extension for this assessment.
Late submission
A penalty of 1 grade for each 24 hour period from time submission is due will apply for up to 7 days. After 7 days you will receive a mark of 0.
Nutshell
- Mode
- Written
- Category
- Paper/ Report/ Annotation
- Weight
- 10%
- Due date
8/08/2024 11:59 pm
- Other conditions
- Student specific.
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L03, L04, L05
Task description
In the Nutshell assignment (10%; 500 words) students are asked to contextualise, analyse, and explain a simple argument contained in the text provided. Students will identify the structure of the argument (the relationship between premises and conclusion) and explain why the author thinks the premises support the conclusion; what reasons (if any) the author proposes for thinking the premises are true; and whether there are any assumptions that the author is relying on. Students will contextualise the argument (i.e., identify what view the argument is opposing and why it is significant. These are essential skills in the history of philosophy.
Criteria & Marking:
Your nutshell assignments will be assessed according to the following criteria:
1. Ability to define the topic or philosophical issue under debate. (Topic definition.)
2. Ability to identify and analyse the structure of an argument for a certain conclusion. (Argument and Structure.)
3. Depth and breadth of understanding of the point at issue. (Scope and Depth of Treatment)
4. Insight and/or originality in analysing or argument. (Originality)
5. Capacity to produce a polished, well-written analysis and/or evaluation. (Presentation)
Submission guidelines
Submit to Turnitin.
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
All extensions require permission before the due date. For information about procedures and forms go to https://my.uq.edu.au/information-and-services/manage-my-program/exams-and-assessment/applying-assessment-extension.
Late submission
A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.
Argument analysis and evaluation
- Mode
- Written
- Category
- Essay/ Critique
- Weight
- 25%
- Due date
6/09/2024 2:00 pm
- Other conditions
- Student specific.
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L03, L04, L05
Task description
Utilising skills developed in the nutshell assignment, students analyse and evaluate a position on an assigned topic relative to other positions on the same topic. Word limit is 1000 words (excluding bibliography but including any in-text references and footnotes). Students are expected to demonstrate a familiarity with the primary and secondary literature on the topic and to take a stand on the conceptual or textual problems being addressed.
Students must discuss their research plan during tutorials prior to submission.
The word limit is a hard limit. There is no 10% leeway, so don't ask.
Due date: Friday, September 6, 2024 14:00pm
REQUIREMENTS:
1. Students should consult multiple sources (including primary and secondary sources) and incorporate them effectively either to raise problems for a view or as suggesting possible solutions. Good essays will often consult around 5 credible and significant secondary sources. Do not list sources in your bibliography that you do not cite in the body of your assignment.
2. Students must defend a thesis—for information on drafting thesis statements, consult the research paper guide on Blackboard.
3. Students should offer a clear analysis of arguments in the original texts and evaluation of those arguments, informed by scholarly criticism (secondary sources) and making use of textual and/or conceptual arguments.
4. State your conclusions clearly and signpost to the reader the structural components in the arguments (using indicator words to mark premises and conclusions).
5. Papers should exhibit a high standard of referencing used consistently (APA), and include page numbers for any attributions of ideas and/or quotes.
6. All assessment must comply with academic misconduct and integrity policies. It is mandatory for all students to complete two academic and misconduct integrity modules to receive a grade in courses (including PHIL2013) offered through the School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry. If you have not completed these modules, please do so through Academic Integrity Modules (AIM).
7. See Philosophy Criteria Rubric attached under 'Course Files' for more information about the grading criteria and standards.
Advice relating to the use of generative AI:
This task has been designed to be challenging, authentic and complex. Whilst students may use AI technologies, successful completion of assessment in this course will require students to critically engage in specific contexts and tasks for which artificial intelligence will provide only limited support and guidance.
Submission guidelines
Submit to Turnitin.
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
All extensions require permission before the due date. For information about procedures and forms go to https://my.uq.edu.au/information-and-services/manage-my-program/exams-and-assessment/applying-assessment-extension.
Late submission
A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.
Final Essay
- Mode
- Written
- Category
- Essay/ Critique
- Weight
- 35%
- Due date
11/11/2024 2:00 pm
- Other conditions
- Student specific.
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L03, L04, L05
Task description
Students are to write an essay on one of the assigned topics related to the second part of the course. Word limit is 1500 words (excluding bibliography but including any in-text references and footnotes). Students are expected to demonstrate a familiarity with the primary and secondary literature on the topic and to take a stand on the conceptual or textual problems being addressed.
Students must discuss their research plan during tutorials prior to submission.
The word limit is a hard limit. There is no 10% leeway, so don't ask.
Due date: Monday 11, 2024 14:00pm
REQUIREMENTS:
1. Students should consult multiple sources (including primary and secondary sources) and incorporate them effectively either to raise problems for a view or as suggesting possible solutions. Good essays will often consult around 5 credible and significant secondary sources. Do not list sources in your bibliography that you do not cite in the body of your assignment.
2. Students must defend a thesis—for information on drafting thesis statements, consult the research paper guide on Blackboard.
3. Students should offer a clear analysis of arguments in the original texts and evaluation of those arguments, informed by scholarly criticism (secondary sources) and making use of textual and/or conceptual arguments.
4. State your conclusions clearly and signpost to the reader the structural components in the arguments (using indicator words to mark premises and conclusions).
5. Papers should exhibit a high standard of referencing used consistently (APA), and include page numbers for any attributions of ideas and/or quotes.
6. All assessment must comply with academic misconduct and integrity policies. It is mandatory for all students to complete two academic and misconduct integrity modules to receive a grade in courses (including PHIL2013) offered through the School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry. If you have not completed these modules, please do so through Academic Integrity Modules (AIM).
7. See Philosophy Criteria Rubric attached under 'Course Files' for more information about the grading criteria and standards.
Advice relating to the use of generative AI:
This task has been designed to be challenging, authentic and complex. Whilst students may use AI technologies, successful completion of assessment in this course will require students to critically engage in specific contexts and tasks for which artificial intelligence will provide only limited support and guidance.
Submission guidelines
Submit to Turnitin.
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
All extensions require permission before the due date. For information about procedures and forms go to https://my.uq.edu.au/information-and-services/manage-my-program/exams-and-assessment/applying-assessment-extension.
Late submission
A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.
Course grading
Full criteria for each grade is available in the Assessment Procedure.
| Grade | Description |
|---|---|
| 1 (Low Fail) |
Absence of evidence of achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: <p>Grade 1, Low Fail (0-24%), is generally awarded in cases where some assessment has been submitted, but it is of wholly unsatisfactory standard or quantity. In work submitted, however, there is no demonstrated evidence of understanding of the concepts of the field of study or basic requirements of the course.</p> |
| 2 (Fail) |
Minimal evidence of achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: <p>Grade 2, Fail (25-44%), is generally awarded to work that exhibits deficiencies in understanding and applying the fundamental concepts of the course and field of study, and as such, does not satisfy the basic requirements of the course. Often, one or more major items of assessment will not have been completed.</p> |
| 3 (Marginal Fail) |
Demonstrated evidence of developing achievement of course learning outcomes Course grade description: <p>Grade 3, Marginal Fail (45-49%), is generally awarded if a student has submitted work that attempts to meet the knowledge and skill requirements of the course, but is only able to demonstrate a superficial understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course. Students will usually have attempted all major pieces of assessment and show that they have an identifiable, emerging ability to apply basic knowledge and skills.</p> |
| 4 (Pass) |
Demonstrated evidence of functional achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: <p>Grade 4, Pass (50-64%), is generally awarded where all major items of assessment have been submitted. An adequate knowledge of the fundamental concepts of the course and field of study should be demonstrated and a functional skill level achieved.</p> |
| 5 (Credit) |
Demonstrated evidence of proficient achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: <p>Grade 5, Credit (65-74%), is generally awarded where all items of assessment have been completed and a substantial understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course and field of study have been demonstrated.</p> |
| 6 (Distinction) |
Demonstrated evidence of advanced achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: <p>Grade 6, Distinction (75-84%), is generally awarded where all items of assessment have been completed and substantial knowledge of the deeper and more complex aspects of the course and field of study have been demonstrated.</p> |
| 7 (High Distinction) |
Demonstrated evidence of exceptional achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: <p>Grade 7, High Distinction (85-100%), is generally awarded where all items of assessment have been completed and there is evidence that the deeper and more complex aspects of the course and field of study have been mastered.</p> |
Additional course grading information
Your essay will be assessed according to the following criteria:
1. Ability to define the topic or philosophical issue under debate. (Topic definition.)
2. Ability to construct a well-reasoned argument for a certain point of view. (Argument and Structure.)
3. Depth and breadth of understanding of the various positions in a philosophical debate. (Scope and Depth of Treatment)
4. Insight and/or originality in interpreting texts or constructing a point of view or argument. (Originality)
5. Capacity to produce a polished, well-written and appropriately referenced essay. (Presentation)
To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85-100%), your essay should reflect an exceptional level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken extensive, high-level research, that you are able to form a very rigorous, well-organised argument, and that your discussion is original and creative. It should also demonstrate that you are able to evaluate and organise data and/or evidence in a critical manner and that you have a sophisticated and insightful understanding of problems and issues. Your essay will be very well written, clear and concise, pay strict attention to discipline conventions and have minimal, if any errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 85-100%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75-84%), your essay should reflect an advanced level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken wide research, that you are able to form a rigorous, well-organised argument, and that your discussion is coherent and convincing. It should also demonstrate that you are able to evaluate data and/or evidence in a perceptive manner, and that your understanding of problems and issues is perceptive and insightful. Your essay will be well written, clear and concise, follow discipline conventions and have few errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 75-84%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65 – 74%) your essay should reflect a proficient level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken the expected level of research, that you are able to develop or adapt convincing arguments and justify them adequately, that you are able to evaluate data and/or evidence in a proficient manner, and that you have a good understanding of problems and issues. The presentation and referencing of your essay will largely follow discipline conventions, perhaps have some errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation, and demonstrate your ability to communicate effectively: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 65-74%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50 – 64%) your essay should reflect functional achievement. It should demonstrate that you are able to apply fundamental concepts and skills, that you have undertaken a basic level of research and have the basic ability to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, to offer insights and to develop routine arguments. Your organisation, writing, referencing, spelling and grammar will be adequate and use some of the discipline conventions to communicate appropriately: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 50-64%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45 – 49%), your essay should reflect developing levels of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have a superficial knowledge of fundamental concepts and skills, that you have undertaken a basic level of research, made some attempt to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, and to offer insights. Your arguments, while underdeveloped, show your emerging ability to apply knowledge and skills. Your organisation, writing, spelling and grammar will be adequate, perhaps poor, and your referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 45-49%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25-44%) your essay will reflect deficiencies in skill acquisition and in your understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course. It will demonstrate that you have not undertaken adequate research, that you are unable to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, or to offer insights adequately. Your arguments will be unsupported and/or inappropriate, your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate, and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 25-44%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0-24%), your essay will reflect minimal evidence of achievement, and exhibit deficiencies in skill acquisition and in your understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course. It will demonstrate that you have not undertaken adequate research, that you are unable to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, and/or to offer insights adequately. Your arguments will be unsupported and/or inappropriate, your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate, and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent: This grade is assigned for a total (sum of all the assessment components) in the range 1-24%. See assessment components for specific grading criteria.
Grade X: No assessable work received.
Supplementary assessment
Supplementary assessment is available for this course.
Additional assessment information
- Failure to submit all major assessment items (those worth 15% and above) will result in a maximum grade of 2 (Fail).
- By submitting work through Turnitin you are deemed to have accepted the following declaration: ‘I certify that this assignment is my own work and has not been submitted, either previously or concurrently, in whole or in part, to this University or any other educational institution, for marking or assessment’.
- All students must ensure that they receive their Turnitin receipt on every submission of assessment items. YOU MUST CHECK THAT THE RECEIPT CONFIRMS THAT SUBMISSION HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL.
- A valid Turnitin receipt will be the only evidence accepted if assessments are missing.
Without evidence, the assessment will receive the standard late penalty, or after ten calendar days, will receive zero.
In the case of a Blackboard outage, please contact the Course Coordinator as soon as possible so that they can confirm the outage with ITS.
- It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that they are submitting assessment items on a device that is capable of the task, and that appropriate internet bandwidth and speed is available.
If you cannot be sure that your device or internet will enable you to complete or submit an assessment task, you must come onto campus and use one of the University Computers in the Library or Computer Labs.
- Plagiarism, and asking or paying someone else to do your work is cheating and constitutes academic misconduct. See ECP Section 6.1
- Feedback against the assessment criteria in the form of comments on your script will be provided through Turnitin or on your script directly.
- For information on assessment remarks see: https://my.uq.edu.au/information-and-services/manage-my-program/exams-and-assessment/querying-result
ﾠ
ﾠ
Learning resources
You'll need the following resources to successfully complete the course. We've indicated below if you need a personal copy of the reading materials or your own item.
Library resources
Find the required and recommended resources for this course on the UQ Library website.
Additional learning resources information
See the Library Guide on the course website under 'Library Links.'ﾠLibrary resources for philosophy can be accessed here: https://guides.library.uq.edu.au/philosophy
ﾠ
ﾠ
Learning activities
The learning activities for this course are outlined below. Learn more about the learning outcomes that apply to this course.
Filter activity type by
Please select
| Learning period | Activity type | Topic |
|---|---|---|
Week 1 (22 Jul - 28 Jul) |
Seminar |
Philosophy in transition This seminar focuses on the crucial shifts in thinking that mark the distinction between the philosophies of antiquity and the Middle Ages and the Early Modern period, in particular, the changes in thinking about wonder and curiosity and the collapse of the nature/art distinction. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04, L05 |
Multiple weeks From Week 2 To Week 12 |
Tutorial |
10 x 1hr per week Tutorials Weekly tutorial participation for 10 weeks is graded and runs in weeks 2-6 and 8-12. Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04, L05 |
Week 2 (29 Jul - 04 Aug) |
Seminar |
Metaphysical Themes The philosophers of the 17th and 18th century developed distinctive metaphysical ideas about the building blocks of reality--substances; modes; souls; ideas--and ideas about how things causally interact if they do at all. This week we look at the major metaphysical theories on offer and the reasons behind them. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04, L05 |
Week 3 (05 Aug - 11 Aug) |
Seminar |
Causation, Agency, Free Will An examination of different approaches to the concepts of causation and the possibility of human agency and free will. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04, L05 |
Multiple weeks From Week 4 To Week 5 |
Seminar |
Life An examination of the distinction between living and non-living things under the shift to a mechanical philosophy, as well as debates about functions, systems, and animal consciousness and thought. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04, L05 |
Week 6 (26 Aug - 01 Sep) |
Seminar |
Thinking Matter An examination of post-Cartesian debates about the possibility of thinking matter. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04, L05 |
Week 7 (02 Sep - 08 Sep) |
Seminar |
Philosophy without certainty This week examines the question of whether philosophy is possible if scepticism is unavoidable with relevance to what it is like to live with uncertainty. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04, L05 |
Week 8 (09 Sep - 15 Sep) |
Seminar |
Naturalising ethics and politics This seminar focuses on how thinkers in the early modern period developed ethical and political theories from their natural philosophical perspectives. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04, L05 |
Multiple weeks From Week 9 To Week 10 |
Seminar |
Ethics These seminars consider debates in ethics about the nature and function of the passions, passivity and activity, virtue, and power. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04, L05 |
Multiple weeks From Week 11 To Week 12 |
Seminar |
Politics These seminars explore the development of political psychologies and their influence on political theorising in the period. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04, L05 |
Week 13 (21 Oct - 27 Oct) |
Seminar |
Reception This seminar considers the influence of early modern debates on current debates in moral and political philosophy. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04, L05 |
Policies and procedures
University policies and procedures apply to all aspects of student life. As a UQ student, you must comply with University-wide and program-specific requirements, including the:
- Student Code of Conduct Policy
- Student Integrity and Misconduct Policy and Procedure
- Assessment Procedure
- Examinations Procedure
- Reasonable Adjustments - Students Policy and Procedure
Learn more about UQ policies on my.UQ and the Policy and Procedure Library.