Announcements

11/22
For our next meeting on Monday Nov 26, we'll start discussing three papers by John Broome (posted below). These papers overlap in several ways, so if you're unable to read all of them, make as much progress as you can.
11/22
Those enrolled in the class for credit: you should be getting short polished drafts to me asap. If you haven't already submitted this, I expect to be seeing it the week after Thanksgiving. You'll be allowed to rewrite these in response to my feedback. You may choose to develop them into a single, longer paper for the seminar, or to write an additional short paper. I'm glad to give you as much feedback on any of these as we can arrange; but to avoid an incomplete, all work for the class must be submitted by Monday Dec 17.

Course Description

This will be a rigorous survey and introduction to fundamental issues in epistemology, for graduate students. Students who are already writing dissertations in epistemology are welcome, and the course will be plenty substantial enough to hold their interest. But we won't presuppose that much background. I do assume that you will already have an undergrad-level prep in epistemology, and a certain amount of philosophical sophistication. But the course is meant to be accessible to students who haven't yet done serious graduate-level work in epistemology.

Our focus for the first part of the course will be on the ethics of belief; we'll use that as a springboard into various issues about justification, internalism, the basing relation, and so on. We won't do much with issues specific to knowledge, like debates about contextualism.

Meetings

The course meets on Mondays, from 1-3, in the large seminar room, on the 2nd floor of the new NYU Philosophy Dept at 5 Washington Place.
The course is taught by Prof. Jim Pryor. You can reach me as follows:
Email: jim.pryor@nyu.edu
Office: #403 5 Washington Place
Office hours: by appointment

Students Only

Because this is an "Advanced Introduction," which the department means to be a training class, it is open to students only. Participation from other faculty would of course be helpful in some ways, and I'd be glad for their input. But it also tends to dampen and preempt student contributions; and such contributions are an essential part of the learning process. So all things considered, I think it's best to enforce a students only policy.

The course is open to graduate student auditors and enrollers at any stage: as I said, it's meant to be substantial enough for dissertation-writers but accessible to beginners. I trust we'll be able to find a good balance for our discussions.

I expect that anyone auditing or attending the course will be a philosophy graduate student, at NYU or elsewhere, or will have a comparable background. If you're hoping to qualify under the latter heading, consult with me. If need be, we can assess how well you're managing the material and the class discussion over the first few weeks.

Responsibilities

Students (and those with comparable background) are welcome to either audit the class or enroll for credit. However, since the material will be building from week to week, and continuity in our discussion is also an important part of the learning process, I think we should enforce a committed participants only policy. I'll expect auditors to attend regularly if at all, and everyone must come to class prepared to talk about the readings. There will be 2-4 readings for each meeting and committing yourself to the class requires not just reading them all in advance, but also thinking about them in advance.

The format I like best is for me to give little lecture chunks, punctuated by lots of interruptions from you, which will regularly break out into classwide discussion. If this doesn't happen naturally, then we'll do things to nurture it. You can do your part by coming to class with questions, and ready to talk. Also by being reasonable to each other, so that we can get the whole group participating in discussion.

Those taking the class for credit will write two short (~10 pp) or one medium-length paper, in several drafts. They should start planning and executing these early in the term, and should consult with me throughout.

Proposed Organization

We may shuffle this around as we proceed, since the issues are so interdependent. But this is how I now propose to attack them. We'll spend 2-3 weeks on most of these topics.

  1. Is Believing an Action? Is It under Our Voluntary Control? Why Does This Matter?
  2. Ethics of Belief, optional
  3. Does Belief "Aim" at Anything, e.g. Truth? If So, in What Sense? Must It Be Voluntaristic to Do So?
  4. WHat are the connections between epistemic justification and the notion of being "epistemically responsible"? Do they pose a threat to the possibility of immediate justification? To justification from non-propositional sources?
  5. What Does "Internalism" Amount To? Is It Motivated by the Thought That Justified Belief is Belief That's Guided By Epistemic Norms?
  6. What are Reasons? "Subjective" versus "Objective" Epistemic Requirements.
  7. Applications: Moorean Responses to Skepticism; Disagreement