Contemporary European Philosophy (PHIL3620)

Course overview

An exploration of contemporary themes and debates in recent European philosophy. The assessment for this course includes engagement with topical contemporary issues to show how the concepts and ideas are useful in the work environment.

This course examines some of the key thinkers and philosophical approaches in twentieth and twenty-first century European philosophy through an exploration of key developments in concepts and their interaction with contemporaneous events.ﾠThe course will examine Hannah Arendt’s considerations of thinking and judgement to combat evil and totalitarianism, Irene Watson and Sharon Venne's criticism of hum rights, consider Maurice Merleau-Ponty' account of the significance of the body and perception, thenﾠexplore Jacques Derrida’s idea of deconstruction in relation to law and democracy, investigate Giorgio Agamben’s account of sovereignty and bare life, Jacques Ranciere’s discussion of the politics of aesthetics, and end with Ann Murphy's reflections on violence and the philosophical imaginary. Assessment for this course includes engagement with topical contemporary issues to show how the concepts and ideas are useful in the work environment.

Course requirements

Assumed background

Ideally you will have done previous courses in European/Continental Philosophy.ﾠ

Prerequisites

You'll need to complete the following courses before enrolling in this one:

2 units from PHIL2220, PHIL2300, PHIL2310, PHIL2190, PHIL2340, PHIL2400, PHIL2500

Incompatible

You can't enrol in this course if you've already completed the following:

PD362, PHIL7362

Course staff

Timetable

The timetable for this course is available on the UQ Public Timetable.

Aims and outcomes

This course aims to provide students with

1. Discipline specific knowledge of key themes, methods of enquiry and traditions in twentieth to twenty-firstﾠcentury Continental Philosophy;ﾠ and
2. ﾠGeneric skills in research, critical analysis and verbal and written communication.

Learning outcomes

After successfully completing this course you should be able to:

Assessment

Assessment summary

Assessment details

Tutorial Participation

Mode

Activity/ Performance

Category

Participation/ Student contribution

Weight

10%

Learning outcomes

L01, L03, L06

Task description

Submission guidelines

Deferral or extension

You cannot defer or apply for an extension for this assessment.

Essay

Mode

Written

Category

Essay/ Critique

Weight

45%

Due date

11/04/2025 2:00 pm

Task description

Submission guidelines

Submit via the link on Turn-it-in on the Course Site.

Deferral or extension

You may be able to apply for an extension.

The maximum extension allowed is 28 days. Extensions are given in multiples of 24 hours.

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.

Summary

Mode

Written

Category

Reflection

Weight

10%

Due date

28/03/2025 2:00 pm

Task description

Submission guidelines

Submit via the link on Turn-it-in on the course site.

Deferral or extension

You may be able to apply for an extension.

The maximum extension allowed is 28 days. Extensions are given in multiples of 24 hours.

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.

Second essay

Mode

Written

Category

Essay/ Critique

Weight

35%

Due date

9/06/2025 2:00 pm

Task description

Submission guidelines

Submit via the link of Turn-it-in on the Course site.

Deferral or extension

You may be able to apply for an extension.

The maximum extension allowed is 28 days. Extensions are given in multiples of 24 hours.

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.

Additional course grading information

Tutorial Participation Assessment Criteria

Your tutorial participation will be assessed according to the following criteria: 

1.     Evidence of participation in discussions.

2.     Evidence of preparation for the tutorial, most notably through completing the set readings.

3.     Quality of contributions to discussions.

4.     Fostering of group discussions, through courteous and respectful interactions with staff and    students.

5.     Attendance is necessary to fulfill the above criteria, as per the course requirements, but marks cannot be awarded for attendance alone.

 To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85-100%), your attendance will be flawless and your participation exceptional. This grade reflects exceptional levels of preparation, mastery of course materials, and very high quality contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions. You should be able to engage with your peers very effectively.

 To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75-84) your attendance will be excellent and your participation very substantial. This grade reflects excellent levels of preparation, knowledge of course materials, and high quality contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions. You should be able to engage with your peers effectively.

 To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65 – 74%), your attendance and participation will be good. This grade reflects proficient levels of preparation, good knowledge of course materials, and good quality contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.

 To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50 – 64%) your attendance and participation will be satisfactory. This grade reflects adequate levels of preparation and knowledge of course materials, and an acceptable quality of contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.

 To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45 – 49%) your attendance and participation will be unsatisfactory. This grade reflects irregular attendance and/or participation and superficial knowledge of course materials and basic levels of preparation. However, when in attendance, there is evidence of your ability to demonstrate developing achievement in contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.

 To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25-44%), your attendance and participation will be very unsatisfactory. This grade reflects irregular attendance and/or participation, minimal knowledge of course materials, little evidence of preparation, and mixed to low quality of contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.

 To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0-24%), your attendance and participation will be unsatisfactory. This grade reflects irregular attendance and/or participation, an no evidence of preparation, and little or no evidence of quality of contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.

Critical Summary/Reading Assignment Assessment Criteria

Students will be assessed on their ability to:

1. Identify the author(s)’ argument or point of view.

2. Identify the contribution the article makes to a philosophical debate.

3. Critically evaluate the argument or point of view.

To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85-100%), the summary will typically reflect a high level of proficiency at critically reading and evaluating a philosophical article.

To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75-84%), the summary will typically reflect a moderately high level of proficiency critically reading and evaluating a philosophical article.

To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65 – 74%), the summary will typically reflect a moderate level of proficiency at critically reading and evaluating a philosophical article.

To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50 – 64%), the summary will typically reflect a sound level of proficiency at critically reading and evaluating a philosophical article.

To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45 – 49%) the summary will typically reflect a minimal level of proficiency at critically reading and evaluating a philosophical article.

To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25-44%) the summary will typically reflect below minimal level of proficiency at critically reading and evaluating a philosophical article.

To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0-24%) the summary will typically reflect either a significant non-attempt or partial attempt at the core elements of the assessment task or an inability to demonstrate proficiency in addressing the basic requirements of the assessment task. 

Essay Assessment Criteria (Philosophy)

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. Alternatively, your essay may, in part, be well written and suggest human engagement and achievement but (whether actually developed with the help of AI or not) will (a) mostly exhibit the stereotypical and/or superficial understanding characteristic of generative AI text and/or (b) mostly fail, in a manner characteristic of generative AI text, to develop a sustained (multi-layered) argument: 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. Alternatively, your essay may suggest developing or higher achievement but (whether actually developed with the help of AI or not) will (a) exhibit the stereotypical and/or superficial understanding that is characteristic of generative AI text and/or (b) may fail to develop, in a way that is characteristic of generative AI text, a sustained (multi-layered) argument: 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.ﾠWithout evidence, the assessment will receive the standard late penalty, or after 7 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

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.

Learning activities

The learning activities for this course are outlined below. Learn more about the learning outcomes that apply to this course.

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.