Joined: Nov 2004 Gender: Male Posts: 33 Location: Kingsville
P.C. Indian History 101 « Result #1 on Jan 24, 2006, 11:13pm »
For anyone that has at least read chapter one of "Awakening" (or any good Critical Thinker), this article may be of some interest:
India history spat hits US By Scott Baldauf, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor Tue Jan 24, 3:00 AM ET
In the halls of Sacramento, a special commission is rewriting Indian history: debating whether Aryan invaders conquered the subcontinent, whether Brahman priests had more rights than untouchables, and even whether ancient Indians ate beef.
That this seemingly arcane Indian debate has spilled over into California's board of education is a sign of the growing political muscle of Indian immigrants and the rising American interest in Asia.
The foes - who include established historians and Hindu nationalist revisionists - are familiar to each other in India. But America may increasingly become their new battlefield as other US states follow California in rewriting their own textbooks to bone up on Asian history.
At stake, say scholars who include some of the most elite historians on India, may be a truthful picture of one of the world's emerging powers - one arrived at by academic standards of proof rather than assertions of national or religious pride.
"Some of the groups involved here are not qualified to write textbooks, they do not draw lines between myth and history," says Anu Mandavilli, an Indian doctoral candidate at the University of Southern California, and activist against the Hindu right. Speaking of one of the groups, the Vedic Foundation in Austin, Texas, she adds, "On their website, they claim that Hindu civilization started 111.5 trillion years ago. That makes Hinduism billions of years older than the Big Bang." (The assertion has since been pulled from the site.)
"It would be ridiculous if it weren't so dangerous."
p>Communities use history to define themselves - their core ideals, achievements, and grudges. Small wonder, then, that history is frequently reevaluated as political pendulums shift, or as long-oppressed minority groups finally get their say. History, and efforts to revise it, have touched off recent controversies between Japan and its neighbors over its World War II past, as well as between France and its former colonies over the portrayal of imperialism.
Here in India, Hindu nationalists have pushed forcefully for revisionism after what they see as centuries of cultural domination by the British Raj and Muslim Mogul Empire.
Instigating the California debate were two US-based Hindu groups with long ties to Hindu nationalist parties in India. One, the Vedic Foundation, is a small Hindu sect that aims at simplifying Hinduism to the worship of one god, Vishnu. The other, the Hindu Education Foundation (HEF), was founded in 2004 by a branch of the right-wing Indian group the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.
This year, as California's Board of Education commissioned and put up for review textbooks to be used in its 6th-grade classrooms, these two groups came forward with demands for substantial changes.
Textbooks did have glaring mistakesSome of the changes were no-brainers. One section said, incorrectly, that the Hindi language is written in Arabic script. One photo caption misidentified a Muslim as a Brahman priest.
But instead of focusing on such errors, the groups took steps to add their own nationalist imprint to Indian history.
In one edit, the HEF asked the textbook publisher to change a sentence describing discrimination against women in ancient society to the following: "Men had different duties (dharma) as well as rights than women."
In another edit, the HEF objected to a sentence that said that Aryan rulers had "created a caste system" in India that kept groups separated according to their jobs. The HEF asked this to be changed to the following: "During Vedic times, people were divided into different social groups (varnas) based on their capacity to undertake a particular profession."
The hottest debate centered on when Indian civilization began, and by whom. For the past 150 years, most historical, linguistic, and archaeological research has dated India's earliest settlements to around 2600 BC. And most established historical research contends that the cornerstone of Indian civilization - the practice of Hindu religion - was codified by people who came from outside India, specifically Aryan language speakers from the steppes of Central Asia.
Many Hindu nationalists are upset by the notion that Hinduism could be yet another religion, like Islam and Christianity, with foreign roots. The HEF and Vedic Foundation both lobbied hard to change the wording of California's textbooks so that Hinduism would be described as purely home grown.
"Textbooks must mention that none of the [ancient] texts, nor any Indian tradition, has a recollection of any Aryan invasion or migration," writes S. Kalyanaraman, an engineer and prominent pro-Hindu activist, in an e-mail to this reporter. He and other revisionists refer to recent studies that don't support an Aryan migration, including skeletal anthropology research that claims to show a continuity of record from Neolithic times. Such research has not convinced top Indologists to abandon the Aryan theory, however.
The final changes in California's textbooks are expected in the next few weeks, but in the meantime, mainstream academics, both in America and abroad, are setting off alarm bells.
"It was a whitewash," says Michael Witzel, a Harvard University Sanskrit scholar and Indologist, who testified before the commission in Sacramento. "The textbooks before were not very good, but at least they were more or less presentable. Now, it is completely incorrect."
Aryan invasion a British-era theoryEarly proponents of the "Aryan Invasion Theory" proposed in 1850 by philologist Max Mueller may have had political agendas to justify the subjugation of the subcontinent, Mr. Witzel says, but the preponderance of evidence shows that Aryans came to India, with their horses, their chariots, and their religious beliefs, from outside.
"Unquestionably, all sides of Indian history must be repeatedly re-examined," wrote Witzel and comparative historian Steve Farmer, in an influential article in the Indian magazine Frontline in 2000. "But any massive revisions must arise from the discovery of new evidence, not from desires to boost national or sectarian pride at any cost."
On the other side of the debate, the historian Meenakshi Jain, a self-described nationalist, says that history is meant to be rewritten, depending on the perspective and needs of the present time.
"Indic civilization has been a big victim of misrepresentation and belittling of our culture," says Ms. Jain, a historian at Delhi University and author of a high school history textbook accepted by India's previous government, led by the pro-Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party.
Pride has its place in history?Like many Hindus, Jain is proud of the accomplishments of Indian history, such as the fact that three small Hindu kingdoms - Kabul, Zabul, and Sindh - were able to hold off invading Muslim armies for 400 years. She also thinks that students should learn that some of India's most famous temples were commissioned not by upper caste Hindu kings but by aboriginal tribes, who in modern times have been relegated to "backward status."
"There is no such thing as an objective history," Jain says. "So when we write a textbook, we should make students aware of the status of current research of leading scholars in the field. It should not shut out a love for motherland, a pride in your past. If you teach that your country is backward, that it has no redeeming features in our civilization, it can damage a young perspective."
But no matter which version of Indian history California adopts for its 6th graders, it is bound to aggravate someone. The Board of Education has already heard from South Indians who argued that the HEF and Vedic Foundation represent a North Indian upper-caste perspective.
"We were saying, 'These groups don't speak for us,' " says Anu Mandavilli, herself a South Indian. When groups like the Vedic Foundation try to simplify Hinduism as the worship of a single god, "they have their own agendas."
Re: Look! A new Topic!!! « Result #2 on Dec 16, 2005, 10:17pm »
Interesting you should ask, Anthony. The Ethics Bowl is just like a debate...only completely different. It is sort of abstract to say the least. Essentially what takes place is that anywhere from four to six weeks prior to the competition the team coaches are emailed somewhere between seven and ten case each containing situations that depict various ethical conundrums. The coach then gets together with anyone interested in partaking in the Ethics Bowl and they begin to rigorously discuss and, in our case, research all of the cases.
Five of those interested are then decided upon as being the "Ethics Bowlers" for the competition. Upon arriving at the competition, each team is pitted against another in a "round". This involves flipping a coin to decide whom will go first and upon that decision the judges open a sealed envelope containing one of the cases and a question unknown to the judges or teams beforehand. Whichever team was selected to go first then gets one minute to confer and then one member of that team must address the presented question. The presenter gets ten minutes to address the question (typically general enough to apply various ethical theories to establish one's stance). At the conclusion of the response, the other team gets the chance to confer for one minute and then one person presents a response up to five minutes in length. The other team need not disagree with the first, but as points are given based upon these responses something original ought be presented.
After this reply, the team who received the original question gets a five minute rejoinder after a one minute conferring time. Finally comes the time for the judges to ask any questions they may have to the original team for a period of ten minutes.
At the conclusion of this, the round is half over. The above process is then repeated with a different unrevealed case and question with the other team taking the initial response this time. After this half of the round is completed, the judges tally up their score. The team with the highest score is said to have won the round and receives an additional 25 bonus points for doing so.
The regional competition contained three rounds against various teams. It took roughly four and a half hours total to complete the competition, itself, with little or no time between rounds to regain your composure.
It was INTENSE to say the least. I am happy I took part, however. It is probably the most fun I have ever had being that stressed in my entire life. Of course, placing was an added bonus. It was commitment and work enough to have been its own class and even then it would have been an intimidating amount of work.
Anyways, if you want to know anymore about it you can reply here or email me at greywolfe03@hotmail.com.
Joined: Nov 2004 Gender: Male Posts: 33 Location: Kingsville
Advanced Logic (Any Takers?) « Result #4 on Dec 12, 2005, 1:52pm »
Welcome to the Advanced Logic Group!
This email is to confirm that the ALG will convene next semester with the minimum five students who have committed to taking the course for DIS credit. Sometime before the close of enrollment TAMUCC students will need to drop by my office so we can complete the paperwork for a Directed Independent Study (3 cr.) TAMUK students will need to make arrangements with Professor Ketchum to sign up for credit with him. (Norberto and/or Anthony, would you please forward this email to interested students?)
My plan is to meet with the ALG every other week for three hours at a mutually convenient time. Weeks the ALG does not meet should be spent working on the problem sets, which will be collected once per month for feedback. Students are strongly encouraged to work together on the problem sets. Together with your notes, these problem sets will make up a fairly substantial portfolio by the end of the semester. It would not be a bad idea to get a 3" binder over break for this purpose. Your grade will be determined by the clarity, completeness, and correctness of your portfolio, to be submitted for grading by me at the end of the semester. (I will submit grade recommendations for TAMUK students to Professor Ketchum.)
The difference between the ALG and a first-course in logic or critical thinking is substantial. Instead of treating logic as a set of tools for the analysis of informal argumentation, the ALG will take logic itself to be the subject of investigation. Thus we will develop logical systems so as to prove results *about* them. It is a further and very important level of abstraction over what you have thus far seen.
Our topics for the semester include:
The Propositional Calculus (PC).
PC syntax and semantics.
Axiomatic and Natural Deducation (Fitch-Rule) treatments of PC.
Consistency, Completeness, Soundness, and Decidability results for PC.
The Lower Predicate Calculus (LPC).
LPC syntax and semantics.
LPC Proof Theory.
Consistency, Completeness, Soundness, and Undecidability results for LPC.
Zermelo-Fraenkel Set Theory w/o the Axiom of Choice.
First-Order Arithmetic.
The Godelian incompleteness results for First-Order Arithmetic.
Because of the extremely difficult nature of Godel's Incompleteness Proof, we will rely on Nagel and Newman's superb non-technical exposition in "Godel's Proof". (It has been said that when he published his proof there were only about 5 people in the world who grasped what he had accomplished! To this day, it is more usual to hear Godel's result incorrectly than correctly articulated.) It is neither a long nor an expensive book. Indeed, you should hint to your families that it would make an excellent stocking-stuffer for the Holidays! There is no other text for the course.
As 2006 would have been Kurt Godel's 100th birthday, and as incompleteness is at once the least well-known yet most astounding discoveries of the 20th century in any field whatsoever, I will work very hard to make sure we get to cover that material by the end of the semester, even if it means truncating some of the other topics.
Note that I have had several students use this course for Math credit. I do not know if that is still possible, as no formal policy has been developed. Nevertheless, it may be worth pursuing, and you would have my full support in doing so.
I will be in contact before the start of next semester to arrange meeting times.
Re: Look! A new Topic!!! « Result #5 on Dec 5, 2005, 12:26pm »
*Kant - One ought to respect my right to be vicious except possibly when such viciousness interferes with another individual's right to be self-determining.
*Mill - Being vicious in one's pursuit of a suitable parking spot is justified in that it will promote the greatest overall balance of utility versus dis-utility of any possible alternative.
*Rawls - If placed behind an impenetrable "Veil of Ignorance" would you still agree that a person ought to be vicious in pursuit of a parking spot knowing full well that it may be you that is the target of said viciousness?
*Euthyphro - The gods told me that I ought to be vicious, so vicious I shall be.
*Aquinas - My proper purpose is to be vicious while in pursuit of parking.
*Descartes - What parking spot. There is no evidence to support the existence of such a thing.
*Heraclitus - The available parking spot is forever changing.
Just a few off the top of my head...Your turn again!
Oh...did you all hear that we won first and second at the Regional Ethics Bowl at Saint Mary's in San Antonio? I am still high off the sweet sweet nectar of victory . Apparently we are ethically superior to the competition .
Also, Don Berkich is contemplating teaching an advanced logic course in the spring semester as a DIS class and I believe that he was entertaining the possibility of extending the invite to all of our illustrious brethren of the Kingsville variety. Reply back if you are interested and I will keep him updated...or you could always just email him...I suppose that would work as well.
SYLLABUS - Philosophy 3323 « Result #8 on Aug 24, 2005, 5:47pm »
College of Business Administration Texas A&M University-Kingsville
PHIL 3323: Non-Western Philosophy
Course Description
Historical and critical study of non-European philosophical traditions with emphasis on South and East Asia
Instructor
Allen Ketcham, Ph.D. Director, Manning Center for Professional Ethics & Distinguished Professor
Class Room
CBA 104
Office Location
CBA 121 Message Phone: 593-2148. I check my messages often.
Office Hours
Monday ……..… 2:15 pm to 2:30 pm, 3:45 pm to 6:20 pm Wednesday …. 2:15 pm to 2:30 pm, 3:45 pm to 6:20 pm Thursday …….. 3:00 pm to 6:00 pm, 8:50 pm to 10:10 pm
Required Textbook
Awakening, by Patrick S. Bresnan, 2003, 2nd Ed., Prentice Hall.
Topics Outline
1. India before the Vedas 2. Vedas 3. Upanishads 4. Bhagavad-Gita 5. Overview of India 6. Confucianism 7. Daoism 8. Shinto 9. Buddha 10. Teachings of Buddha 11. Theravada 12. Mahayana 13. Tibet 14. China 15. Chan 16. Zen
Learning Objectives
1. Identify and understand the viewpoints of the Upanishads 2. Identify and understand the viewpoints of the Dao De Jing 3. Identify and understand the outlook of Theravada Buddhism 4. Identify and understand the perspective of the Chinese Confucius’ social order. 5. Identify and understand the beliefs of the Shinto worldview.
Methods of Evaluation and Grading
This class is a “contract for grade” course. The DEADLINE for accepting materials for the class from students is: November 11th, 2005 @ 5:00 p.m. There is never an extension!
Grading
Students answer all questions for each chapter and e-mail their answers to the professor. The professor will grade the answers upon receiving them. The semester grade will be assigned as per the following chart:
Contract for Grade Chart
1. All questions from 16 chapters answered correctly ---------- A 2. All questions from 15 chapters answered correctly ---------- B 3. All questions from 13 chapters answered correctly ---------- C 4. All questions from 11 chapters answered correctly ---------- D 5. Fewer than 11 chapters’ questions answered correctly ------ F
Attendance
You are not graded on attendance, and it is not necessary to inform me if you have to miss a class.
Drop policy --- You may drop the course any time including the last drop date with a "Q", regardless of your tests scores except in cases of cheating. You must process the drop yourself.
General Course Policies
Incompletes are an extreme rarity, and no grade is dropped. Normally, all missed tests are made up at the same time at the end of the semester. Since students have the entire semester to study for these make-up tests, they are much more difficult than the regular tests.
Look especially at the message board for this class.
Comments
“MCPE” stands for the Manning Center for Professional Ethics. The MCPE is a university center that is the home of philosophy on our campus. The courses offered by MCPE include:
(1) History of ancient and medieval philosophy (2) History of modern and contemporary philosophy (3) Introduction to philosophy (4) Foundations of professional ethics (5) Logic of critical thinking (6) Philosophy of religion (7) Nonwestern philosophy
Note that some students (for example: arts & sciences students) can earn a minor in philosophy with 18 hours. Please inform me if you are a Philosophy minor.
Disability Statement
(See pages 2 & 11 of Student Handbook)
Students with disabilities, including learning disabilities, who wish to request accommodations in class should register with the Services for Students with Disabilities (SSD) early in the semester so that appropriate arrangements may be made. In accordance with federal laws, a student requesting special accommodations must provide documentation of their disability to the SSD coordinator.
Academic Misconduct
(See page 23, section 100 of Student Handbook)
You are expected to practice academic honesty in every aspect of this course and all other courses. Make sure you are familiar with your Student Handbook, especially the section on academic misconduct. Students who engage in academic misconduct are subject to university disciplinary procedures.
Forms of academic dishonesty:
Cheating: deception in which a student misrepresents that he/she has mastered information on an academic exercise that he/she has not mastered; giving or receiving aid unauthorized by the instructor on assignments or examinations. Academic misconduct: tampering with grades or taking part in obtaining or distributing any part of a scheduled test. Fabrication: use of invented information or falsified research. Plagiarism: unacknowledged quotation and/or paraphrase of someone else’s words, ideas, or data as one’s own in work submitted for credit. Failure to identify information or essays from the Internet and submitting them as one’s own work also constitutes plagiarism.
Nonacademic Misconduct
(See page 23, section 100 of the Student Handbook)
The university respects the rights of instructors to teach and students to learn. Maintenance of these rights requires campus conditions that do not impede their exercise. Campus behavior that interferes with either (1) the instructor’s ability to conduct the class, (2) the inability of other students to profit from the instructional program, or (3) campus behavior that interferes with the rights of others will not be tolerated. An individual engaging in such disruptive behavior may be subject to disciplinary action. Such incidents will be adjudicated by the Dean of Students under nonacademic procedures.
Sexual Misconduct
(See page 23, section 200 of Student Handbook)
Sexual harassment of students and employers at Texas A&M University-Kingsville is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. Any member of the university community violating this policy will be subject to disciplinary action.
SYLLABUS - Philosophy 3301 « Result #9 on Aug 23, 2005, 8:49pm »
College of Business Administration Texas A&M University-Kingsville
PHIL 3301: Logic of Critical Thinking
Course Description
The Logic of Critical Thinking class examines deductive reasoning. This course is designed to approach logic in an extremely broad format from fallacious reasoning to classic categorical logic. Philosophy 3301 surveys logic and common logical fallacy heard daily in students' lives, and thereby, is intended to integrate critical thinking into the individual’s personal experience. For that reason, class participation is imperative.
Instructor
Allen Ketcham, Ph.D. Director, Manning Center for Professional Ethics & Distinguished Professor
Class Room
CBA 207
Office Location
CBA 121 Message Phone: 593-2148. I check my messages often.
Office Hours
Monday ……..… 2:15 pm to 2:30 pm, 3:45 pm to 6:20 pm Wednesday …. 2:15 pm to 2:30 pm, 3:45 pm to 6:20 pm Thursday …….. 3:00 pm to 6:00 pm, 8:50 pm to 10:10 pm
Required Textbook
Critical Thinking, Seventh Edition, by Moore & Parker, published by Mayfield
Course Objectives
It is intended that we will survey and master the following areas: A. The Argument: Premise, Conclusion, & Fog B. Nonargumentative Notions C. Pseudoreasoning (often called logical fallacies) D. Deductive --- Categorical Claims 1. Square of Opposition 2. Venn Analysis
Look especially at the message board for this class.
Comments
“MCPE” stands for the Manning Center for Professional Ethics. The MCPE is a university center that is the home of philosophy on our campus. The courses offered by MCPE include:
(1) History of ancient and medieval philosophy (2) History of modern and contemporary philosophy (3) Introduction to philosophy (4) Foundations of professional ethics (5) Logic of critical thinking (6) Philosophy of religion (7) Nonwestern philosophy
Note that some students (for example: arts & sciences students) can earn a minor in philosophy with 18 hours. Please inform me if you are getting a minor in Philosophy.
Classroom Effort
We will do most of the questions in each chapter that we cover. We will go around the class and students will have a chance to answer one or more questions. The score of 0 or 1 is given for each question. Usually, one student is assigned the responsibility of keeping track of the points. At the end of the semester the class scores are fit to a normal curve to assign the grade for each student.
Methods of Evaluation and Grading
1. Tests
First exam - covers first section of the semester .............................. 20% Second exam - covers second section of the semester ...................... 20% Third exam - covers third section of the semester ............................. 20%
2. Class questions and answers ..................................................... 40%
Attendance
You are not graded on attendance, and it is not necessary to inform me if you have to miss a class.
Drop policy --- You may drop the course any time including the last drop date with a "Q", regardless of your tests scores except in cases of cheating. You must process the drop yourself.
General Course Policies
Incompletes are an extreme rarity, and no grade is dropped. Normally, all missed tests are made up at the same time at the end of the semester. Since students have the entire semester to study for these make-up tests, they are much more difficult that the regular tests.
Learning Objectives
1. Distinguish between facts and opinions. 2. Be able to identify a claim. 3. Name and identify the aspects of an argument. 4. Distinguish between pseudoreasoning and logical reasoning. 5. Be able to identify the aspects of the square of opposition. 6. Distinguish between induction and deduction.
Disability Statement
(See pages 2 & 11 of Student Handbook):
Students with disabilities, including learning disabilities, which wish to request accommodations in class should register with the Services for Students with Disabilities (SSD) early in the semester so that appropriate arrangements may be made. In accordance with federal laws, a student requesting special ac-commodations must provide documentation of their disability to the SSD coordinator.
Academic Misconduct
(See page 23, section 100 of Student Handbook):
You are expected to practice academic honesty in every aspect of this course and all other courses. Make sure you are familiar with your Student Handbook, especially the section on academic misconduct. Students who engage in academic misconduct are subject to university disciplinary procedures.
Forms of academic dishonesty:
Cheating: deception in which a student misrepresents that he/she has mastered information on an aca-demic exercise that he/she has not mastered; giving or receiving aid unauthorized by the instructor on assignments or examinations. Academic misconduct: tampering with grades or taking part in obtaining or distributing any part of a scheduled test. Fabrication: use of invented information or falsified research. Plagiarism: unacknowledged quotation and/or paraphrase of someone else’s words, ideas, or data as one’s own in work submitted for credit. Failure to identify information or essays from the Internet and submitting them as one’s own work also constitutes plagiarism.
Nonacademic Misconduct
(See page 23, section 100 of the Student Handbook:
The university respects the rights of instructors to teach and students to learn. Maintenance of these rights requires campus conditions that do not impede their exercise. Campus behavior that interferes with either (1) the instructor’s ability to conduct the class, (2) the inability of other students to profit from the instructional program, or (3) campus behavior that interferes with the rights of others will not be tolerated. An individual engaging in such disruptive behavior may be subject to disciplinary action. Such incidents will be adjudicated by the Dean of Students under nonacademic procedures.
Sexual Misconduct
(See page 23, section 200 of Student Handbook):
Sexual harassment of students and employers at Texas A&M University-Kingsville is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. Any member of the university community violating this policy will be subject to disciplinary action.
SYLLABUS - Philosophy 1301 « Result #10 on Aug 23, 2005, 8:44pm »
College of Business Administration Texas A&M University-Kingsville
PHIL 1301: Introduction to Philosophy
Course Description
Introduction to Philosophy inquires into the nature of the God, Freedom, Ethics, and Society as they relate to various definitions of reality, truth, and value.
Instructor
Allen Ketcham, Ph.D. Director, Manning Center for Professional Ethics & Distinguished Professor
Class Room
CBA 207
Office Location
CBA 121 Message Phone: 593-2148. I check my messages often.
Office Hours
Monday ……..… 2:15 pm to 2:30 pm, 3:45 pm to 6:20 pm Wednesday …. 2:15 pm to 2:30 pm, 3:45 pm to 6:20 pm Thursday …….. 3:00 pm to 6:00 pm, 8:50 pm to 10:10 pm
Required Textbook
Does the Center Hold. by Donald Palmer, published by Mayfield, Third Edition.
Course Objectives
We will survey the following areas:
a. The Character of Philosophy b. Philosophy of Religion c. Philosophy of Freedom d. Moral Philosophy e. Political Philosophy f. Social Philosophy
Methods of Evaluation
You are evaluated by four tests, class presentations, a one-page paper, and class participation. Test dates are set one week in advance, however, all test dates are tentative. Presentation dates are set in advance. Also, daily grades are given.
Students have grade sheets they fill out and hand in at the end of each class. Also, the professor turns in a grade sheet. The grade sheet is used to grade others’ presentations, and class participation. All grades are given in percentages. If the class is large, then the professor will give the class participation grade, not the students.
Class participation includes questions and answers concerning the presentation of the day. This class is very much a discussion class, and taught in a manner similar to a seminar.
Attendance
You are not graded on attendance, and it is not necessary to inform me if you have to miss a class.
Drop policy --- You may drop the course any time including the last drop date with a "Q", regardless of your tests scores except in cases of cheating. You must process the drop yourself.
Grading
1. First exam - covers the character of philosophy & philosophy of religion ......... 15% Second exam – covers the philosophy of freedom .......................................... 15% Third exam – covers moral philosophy .......................................................... 15% Fourth exam - covers political & social philosophy .......................................... 15%
2. Class Presentations - professor will give you your topic ............................... 19%
3. One page paper .................................................................................... 2%
4. class participation ................................................................................ 19%
5. Make-up tests are given with a valid university excuse. Make-up tests are given at the same time at the end of the semester. The make-up tests are much more difficult than the regular test because the ill student has the entire semester to study for it.
General Course Policies
Incompletes are an extreme rarity, and no grade is dropped. Normally, all missed tests are made up at the same time at the end of the semester. Since students have the entire semester to study for these make-up tests, they are much more difficult than the regular tests.
Look especially at the message board for this class.
Comments
“MCPE” stands for the Manning Center for Professional Ethics. The MCPE is a university center that is the home of philosophy on our campus. The courses offered by MCPE include:
(1) History of ancient and medieval philosophy (2) History of modern and contemporary philosophy (3) Introduction to philosophy (4) Foundations of professional ethics (5) Logic of critical thinking (6) Philosophy of religion (7) Nonwestern philosophy
Note that some students (for example: arts & sciences students) can earn a minor in philosophy with 18 hours. Please inform me if you are getting a minor in Philosophy.
Learning Objectives
1. Distinguish between epistemology and ontology. 2. Be able to identify the categorical imperative. 3. Name and identify the ontological, cosmological, and teleological proofs. 4. Distinguish between hard determinism, soft determinism, and indeterminism. 5. Be able to identify the calculus of felicity. 6. Distinguish between political and social philosophy.
Disability Statement
(See pages 2 & 11 of Student Handbook)
Students with disabilities, including learning disabilities, who wish to request accommodations in class should register with the Services for Students with Disabilities (SSD) early in the semester so that appropriate arrangements may be made. In accordance with federal laws, a student requesting special accommodations must provide documentation of their disability to the SSD coordinator.
Academic Misconduct
(See page 23, section 100 of Student Handbook)
You are expected to practice academic honesty in every aspect of this course and all other courses. Make sure you are familiar with your Student Handbook, especially the section on academic misconduct. Students who engage in academic misconduct are subject to university disciplinary procedures.
Forms of academic dishonesty:
Cheating: deception in which a student misrepresents that he/she has mastered information on an academic exercise that he/she has not mastered; giving or receiving aid unauthorized by the instructor on assignments or examinations. Academic misconduct: tampering with grades or taking part in obtaining or distributing any part of a scheduled test. Fabrication: use of invented information or falsified research. Plagiarism: unacknowledged quotation and/or paraphrase of someone else’s words, ideas, or data as one’s own in work submitted for credit. Failure to identify information or essays from the Internet and submitting them as one’s own work also constitutes plagiarism.
Nonacademic Misconduct
(See page 23, section 100 of the Student Handbook)
The university respects the rights of instructors to teach and students to learn. Maintenance of these rights requires campus conditions that do not impede their exercise. Campus behavior that interferes with either (1) the instructor’s ability to conduct the class, (2) the inability of other students to profit from the instructional program, or (3) campus behavior that interferes with the rights of others will not be tolerated. An individual engaging in such disruptive behavior may be subject to disciplinary action. Such incidents will be adjudicated by the Dean of Students under nonacademic procedures.
Sexual Misconduct
(See page 23, section 200 of Student Handbook)
Sexual harassment of students and employers at Texas A&M University-Kingsville is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. Any member of the university community violating this policy will be subject to disciplinary action.
![[Home]](http://www.tamuk.edu/mcpe/home.gif)
![[Help]](http://www.tamuk.edu/mcpe/help.gif)
![[Search]](http://www.tamuk.edu/mcpe/search.gif)
![[Login]](http://www.tamuk.edu/mcpe/login.gif)
![[Register]](http://www.tamuk.edu/mcpe/register.gif)
![[Search This Thread]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/search2.gif)
![[Send Topic To Friend]](http://www.tamuk.edu/mcpe/sendtopic.gif)
![[Print]](http://www.tamuk.edu/mcpe/print.gif)
Author
![[yim]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/yim.gif)
Logged
. Apparently we are ethically superior to the competition 
![[homepage]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif)
Author