Philosophy of Language
A.Y. 2020/2021
Learning objectives
The aim of teaching is to provide in-depth knowledge of some of the classical topics of the philosophy of language which already have been addressed in an introductory way in the courses of philosophy of language for the Laurea Triennale, such as the relationship between language and thought, the nature of meaning and of the basic rules of linguistic communication. An additional objective of teaching is to familiarize the students with the formal instruments required to address the contemporary literature on the topics discussed.
Expected learning outcomes
Knowledge and Understanding
At the end of the course the students
- have in-depth knowledge of some important aspects of the contemporary debate on the nature of meaning, the relationship between language and thought, and on the mechanisms of linguistic communication;
- know part of the relevant scientific literature on the topics discussed;
- know the important implications of some of the advanced theoretical proposals by philosophers of language for metaphysics, epistemology, or the philosophy of mind.
Ability to Apply Knowledge and Understanding
At the end of the course the students
- have the ability of analyzing complex arguments in the context of the philosophy of language, also with regard to hypotheses in the philosophy of mind and metaphysics;
- are in a position to formulate significant objections to the diverse theoretical approaches;
- are able to successfully indicate the argument strategies used by the diverse advanced theories in the philosophy of language, the philosophy of mind, and metaphysics in order to respond to various objections.
At the end of the course the students
- have in-depth knowledge of some important aspects of the contemporary debate on the nature of meaning, the relationship between language and thought, and on the mechanisms of linguistic communication;
- know part of the relevant scientific literature on the topics discussed;
- know the important implications of some of the advanced theoretical proposals by philosophers of language for metaphysics, epistemology, or the philosophy of mind.
Ability to Apply Knowledge and Understanding
At the end of the course the students
- have the ability of analyzing complex arguments in the context of the philosophy of language, also with regard to hypotheses in the philosophy of mind and metaphysics;
- are in a position to formulate significant objections to the diverse theoretical approaches;
- are able to successfully indicate the argument strategies used by the diverse advanced theories in the philosophy of language, the philosophy of mind, and metaphysics in order to respond to various objections.
Lesson period: Second semester
Assessment methods: Esame
Assessment result: voto verbalizzato in trentesimi
Single course
This course cannot be attended as a single course. Please check our list of single courses to find the ones available for enrolment.
Course syllabus and organization
Single session
Responsible
Lesson period
Second semester
During the ongoing covid emergency, the course syllabus will be maintained with the following changes made to enhance the effectiveness of the online version of the course, which was originally designed for face-to-face teaching.
Online environments used:
Ariel: https://epaganinilm.ariel.ctu.unimi.it
MSTeams: code s2942xj (to attend lectures: enter Teams, click on "Unisciti a un Team o creane uno" and then on "Partecipa a un Team con un codice" where you need to insert the above code)
Teaching methods:
Classes will be held according to the following risk scenarios:
- maximum severity (red zone): classes will be held only remotely in synchronous mode (using MSTeams)
- high severity (orange zone): lessons will be held in mixed mode, partly in person and partly online. the face-to-face lessons will allow the participation of students connected with MSTeams as well as students in the classroom. Online lessons will be held synchronously (using MSTeams)
- severity (yellow zone): classes will be held according with the orange zone guidelines and, if conditions allow, the number of lessons on campus will be increased.
The calendar of in person lessons and updates will be published on the online course platform.
Learning assessment procedures and evaluation criteria:
The exam is oral in any emergency situation, whether yellow, orange or red zone, in compliance with the guidelines provided by the University. The online course on Ariel will make available constantly updated details about the oral examination sessions that will be held over several days.
Students wishing to participate in face-to-face lessons must refer to the following University provisions: https://www.unimi.it/it/studiare/frequentare-un-corso-di-laurea/seguire-il-percorso-di-studi/didattica-presenza
Students wishing to participate in MSTeams lessons must refer to the following technical guides: https://www.unimi.it/it/studiare/servizi-gli-studenti/servizi-tecnologici-e-online/microsoft-office-365-education
To participate in the exam sessions, students must refer to the following provisions: https://www.unimi.it/it/studiare/frequentare-un-corso-di-laurea/seguire-il-percorso-di-studi/esami/esami-distanza-faq-gli-student
Online environments used:
Ariel: https://epaganinilm.ariel.ctu.unimi.it
MSTeams: code s2942xj (to attend lectures: enter Teams, click on "Unisciti a un Team o creane uno" and then on "Partecipa a un Team con un codice" where you need to insert the above code)
Teaching methods:
Classes will be held according to the following risk scenarios:
- maximum severity (red zone): classes will be held only remotely in synchronous mode (using MSTeams)
- high severity (orange zone): lessons will be held in mixed mode, partly in person and partly online. the face-to-face lessons will allow the participation of students connected with MSTeams as well as students in the classroom. Online lessons will be held synchronously (using MSTeams)
- severity (yellow zone): classes will be held according with the orange zone guidelines and, if conditions allow, the number of lessons on campus will be increased.
The calendar of in person lessons and updates will be published on the online course platform.
Learning assessment procedures and evaluation criteria:
The exam is oral in any emergency situation, whether yellow, orange or red zone, in compliance with the guidelines provided by the University. The online course on Ariel will make available constantly updated details about the oral examination sessions that will be held over several days.
Students wishing to participate in face-to-face lessons must refer to the following University provisions: https://www.unimi.it/it/studiare/frequentare-un-corso-di-laurea/seguire-il-percorso-di-studi/didattica-presenza
Students wishing to participate in MSTeams lessons must refer to the following technical guides: https://www.unimi.it/it/studiare/servizi-gli-studenti/servizi-tecnologici-e-online/microsoft-office-365-education
To participate in the exam sessions, students must refer to the following provisions: https://www.unimi.it/it/studiare/frequentare-un-corso-di-laurea/seguire-il-percorso-di-studi/esami/esami-distanza-faq-gli-student
Course syllabus
Imaginative Resistance
We are able to imagine scenarios which are very different from actual ones: for example, we can imagine that some rings make the persons wearing them invisible or that a genius is living in a small lamp and comes out when called. But there are cases in which we experience a resistance to imagination: for example, we cannot imagine an oval which is also a square or we cannot imagine how it might be morally correct to torture human beings. What inhibits our imagination in such cases? The course investigates the different answers which have been given to this question.
We are able to imagine scenarios which are very different from actual ones: for example, we can imagine that some rings make the persons wearing them invisible or that a genius is living in a small lamp and comes out when called. But there are cases in which we experience a resistance to imagination: for example, we cannot imagine an oval which is also a square or we cannot imagine how it might be morally correct to torture human beings. What inhibits our imagination in such cases? The course investigates the different answers which have been given to this question.
Prerequisites for admission
The course is in English. A B2 level of English is assumed.
Teaching methods
Lectures
Discussions
Student presentations
Discussions
Student presentations
Teaching Resources
The final program will be available on the Ariel website at the beginning of the online course. The program is the same for both attending and non-attending students.
The material for both 6 and 9 CFU will include some of the following texts:
· Gendler T. S. & Liao S., 2016, «The Problem of Imaginative Resistance», in N. Carroll & J. Gibson (eds), The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Literature, London and New York, Routledge, pp. 405-418.
· Paganini E., 2020, «Resistenza Immaginativa», AphEx 22 (only for italian speakers)
· Hume D., 1757, «Of the Standard of Taste», in D. Hume, Selected Essays, S. Copley & A. Edgar (eds), Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1996, pp. 133-154.
· Walton K., 1990, Mimesis as Make-Believe: On the Foundations of the Representational Arts, Cambridge Mass., Harvard University Press.
· Walton K., 1994, «Morals in Fiction and Fictional Morality/I», Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, supp. vol. 68, pp. 27-50.
· Moran R., 1994, «The Expression of Feeling in Imagination», Philosophical Review, 103, pp. 75-106.
· Gendler T. S., 2000, «The Puzzle of Imaginative Resistance», Journal of Philosophy, 97, 2, pp. 55-81.
· Currie G., 2002, «Desire in Imagination», in T. S. Gendler & J. Hawthorne (eds), Conceivability and Possibility, Oxford, Clarendon Press, pp. 201-221.
· Yablo S., 2002, «Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda», in T. S. Gendler & J. Hawthorne (eds), Conceivability and Possibility, Oxford, Clarendon Press, pp. 441-492; reprinted in S. Yablo, Thoughts. Philosophical Papers, vol. 1, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008, pp. 103-150.
· Matravers D., 2003, «Fictional Assent and the (So-Called) 'Puzzle of Imaginative Resistance'», in M. Kieran e D. M. Lopes (eds), Imagination, Philosophy, and the Arts, London, Routledge, pp. 91-106.
· Stock K., 2003, «The Tower of Goldbach and Other Impossible Tales», in M. Kieran e D. M. Lopes (eds), Imagination, Philosophy, and the Arts, London, Routledge, pp. 107-124.
· Weatherson B., 2004, «Morality, Fiction, and Possibility», Philosopher's Imprint, 4, 3, pp. 1-27.
· Stock K., 2005, «Resisting Imaginative Resistance», The Philosophical Quarterly, 55, 221, pp. 607-624.
· Levy N., 2005, «Imaginative Resistance and the Moral/Conventional Distinction», Philosophical Psychology, 18, 2, pp. 231-241.
· Gendler T. S., 2006, «Imaginative Resistance Revisited», in S. Nichols (ed), The Architecture of Imagination, Oxford, Clarendon Press, pp. 149-173.
· Walton K., 2006, «On the (So-called) Puzzle of Imaginative Resistance», in S. Nichols (ed), The Architecture of Imagination, Oxford, Clarendon Press, pp. 137-147.
· Nichols S., 2006, «Imaginative Blocks and Impossibility: An Essay in Modal Psychology», in S. Nichols (ed), The Architecture of Imagination, Oxford, Clarendon Press, pp. 237-256.
The material for 9 CFU will additionally include some of the following texts:
· Todd C., 2009, «Imaginability, Morality, and Fictional Truth: Dissolving the Puzzle of 'Imaginative Resistance'», Philosophical Studies, 143, 2, pp. 187-211.
· Nanay B., 2010, «Imaginative Resistance and Conversational Implicatures», The Philosophical Quarterly, 60, 240, pp. 586-600.
· Stueber K. R., 2011, «Imagination, Empathy, and Moral Deliberation: The Case of Imaginative Resistance», The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 49 (Spindel Supplement), pp. 156-180.
· Levin J., 2011, «Imaginability, Possibility, and the Puzzle of Imaginative Resistance», Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 41, 3, pp. 391-421.
· Brock S., 2012, «The Puzzle of Imaginative Failure», The Philosophical Quarterly, 62, 248, pp. 443-463.
· Mahtani A., 2012, «Imaginative Resistance without Conflict», Philosophical Studies, 158, pp. 415-429.
· Matravers D., 2014, Fiction and Narratives, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
· Stear N.-H., 2015, «Imaginative and Fictionality Failure: A Normative Approach», Philosopher's Imprint, 15, 34, pp. 1-18.
· Stock K., 2017, Only Imagine: Fiction, Interpretation, and Imagination, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
· Camp E., 2017, «Perspectives in Imaginative Engagement with Fiction», Philosophical Perspectives, 31, pp. 73-102.
· Tooming U., 2018, «Imaginative Resistance as Imagistic Resistance», Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 48, 5, pp. 684-706.
· Szanto T., 2020, «Imaginative Resistance and Empathic Resistance», Topoi, pp. 1-12.
The material for both 6 and 9 CFU will include some of the following texts:
· Gendler T. S. & Liao S., 2016, «The Problem of Imaginative Resistance», in N. Carroll & J. Gibson (eds), The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Literature, London and New York, Routledge, pp. 405-418.
· Paganini E., 2020, «Resistenza Immaginativa», AphEx 22 (only for italian speakers)
· Hume D., 1757, «Of the Standard of Taste», in D. Hume, Selected Essays, S. Copley & A. Edgar (eds), Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1996, pp. 133-154.
· Walton K., 1990, Mimesis as Make-Believe: On the Foundations of the Representational Arts, Cambridge Mass., Harvard University Press.
· Walton K., 1994, «Morals in Fiction and Fictional Morality/I», Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, supp. vol. 68, pp. 27-50.
· Moran R., 1994, «The Expression of Feeling in Imagination», Philosophical Review, 103, pp. 75-106.
· Gendler T. S., 2000, «The Puzzle of Imaginative Resistance», Journal of Philosophy, 97, 2, pp. 55-81.
· Currie G., 2002, «Desire in Imagination», in T. S. Gendler & J. Hawthorne (eds), Conceivability and Possibility, Oxford, Clarendon Press, pp. 201-221.
· Yablo S., 2002, «Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda», in T. S. Gendler & J. Hawthorne (eds), Conceivability and Possibility, Oxford, Clarendon Press, pp. 441-492; reprinted in S. Yablo, Thoughts. Philosophical Papers, vol. 1, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008, pp. 103-150.
· Matravers D., 2003, «Fictional Assent and the (So-Called) 'Puzzle of Imaginative Resistance'», in M. Kieran e D. M. Lopes (eds), Imagination, Philosophy, and the Arts, London, Routledge, pp. 91-106.
· Stock K., 2003, «The Tower of Goldbach and Other Impossible Tales», in M. Kieran e D. M. Lopes (eds), Imagination, Philosophy, and the Arts, London, Routledge, pp. 107-124.
· Weatherson B., 2004, «Morality, Fiction, and Possibility», Philosopher's Imprint, 4, 3, pp. 1-27.
· Stock K., 2005, «Resisting Imaginative Resistance», The Philosophical Quarterly, 55, 221, pp. 607-624.
· Levy N., 2005, «Imaginative Resistance and the Moral/Conventional Distinction», Philosophical Psychology, 18, 2, pp. 231-241.
· Gendler T. S., 2006, «Imaginative Resistance Revisited», in S. Nichols (ed), The Architecture of Imagination, Oxford, Clarendon Press, pp. 149-173.
· Walton K., 2006, «On the (So-called) Puzzle of Imaginative Resistance», in S. Nichols (ed), The Architecture of Imagination, Oxford, Clarendon Press, pp. 137-147.
· Nichols S., 2006, «Imaginative Blocks and Impossibility: An Essay in Modal Psychology», in S. Nichols (ed), The Architecture of Imagination, Oxford, Clarendon Press, pp. 237-256.
The material for 9 CFU will additionally include some of the following texts:
· Todd C., 2009, «Imaginability, Morality, and Fictional Truth: Dissolving the Puzzle of 'Imaginative Resistance'», Philosophical Studies, 143, 2, pp. 187-211.
· Nanay B., 2010, «Imaginative Resistance and Conversational Implicatures», The Philosophical Quarterly, 60, 240, pp. 586-600.
· Stueber K. R., 2011, «Imagination, Empathy, and Moral Deliberation: The Case of Imaginative Resistance», The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 49 (Spindel Supplement), pp. 156-180.
· Levin J., 2011, «Imaginability, Possibility, and the Puzzle of Imaginative Resistance», Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 41, 3, pp. 391-421.
· Brock S., 2012, «The Puzzle of Imaginative Failure», The Philosophical Quarterly, 62, 248, pp. 443-463.
· Mahtani A., 2012, «Imaginative Resistance without Conflict», Philosophical Studies, 158, pp. 415-429.
· Matravers D., 2014, Fiction and Narratives, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
· Stear N.-H., 2015, «Imaginative and Fictionality Failure: A Normative Approach», Philosopher's Imprint, 15, 34, pp. 1-18.
· Stock K., 2017, Only Imagine: Fiction, Interpretation, and Imagination, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
· Camp E., 2017, «Perspectives in Imaginative Engagement with Fiction», Philosophical Perspectives, 31, pp. 73-102.
· Tooming U., 2018, «Imaginative Resistance as Imagistic Resistance», Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 48, 5, pp. 684-706.
· Szanto T., 2020, «Imaginative Resistance and Empathic Resistance», Topoi, pp. 1-12.
Assessment methods and Criteria
The exam consists of a written essay (max 5000 words) and an oral interview.
As for the written text, the student should delineate a specific position in the debate on imaginative resistance and examine it critically. The written text should be sent to the teacher by e-mail at least 10 days before the date of the oral examination.
As for the oral examination, the written essay will be reviewed, and there will be an evaluation of the student's ability to recover and critically examine the debate on imaginative resistance and the reasons adopted in support of the different philosophical views.
As for the written text, the student should delineate a specific position in the debate on imaginative resistance and examine it critically. The written text should be sent to the teacher by e-mail at least 10 days before the date of the oral examination.
As for the oral examination, the written essay will be reviewed, and there will be an evaluation of the student's ability to recover and critically examine the debate on imaginative resistance and the reasons adopted in support of the different philosophical views.
Modules or teaching units
Unità didattica A
M-FIL/05 - PHILOSOPHY AND THEORY OF LANGUAGE - University credits: 3
Lessons: 20 hours
Unità didattica B
M-FIL/05 - PHILOSOPHY AND THEORY OF LANGUAGE - University credits: 3
Lessons: 20 hours
Unità didattica C
M-FIL/05 - PHILOSOPHY AND THEORY OF LANGUAGE - University credits: 3
Lessons: 20 hours
Professor(s)
Reception:
Wednesday from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.
Teams or Skype - Reception is by appointment by email