Dirty-Hands Politics: Theories and Practices
A.Y. 2025/2026
Learning objectives
Undefined
Expected learning outcomes
Undefined
Lesson period: Second trimester
Assessment methods: Esame
Assessment result: voto verbalizzato in trentesimi
Single course
This course can be attended as a single course.
Course syllabus and organization
Single session
Responsible
Lesson period
Second trimester
Course syllabus
This is the Calendar of the lessons for attendant-students:
1. What is political philosophy? What is ethics? General presentation and overview of the DHP course
2. Ethics and/or Politics? - Analogies, Differences and Method
3. Sophocles' Antigone
4. "Interpretation and Social Criticism": Michael Walzer's Three Paths
5. Machiavelli, Weber and the founding fathers of the "means-ends problem"
6. Machiavelli's The Prince
7. The Dirty-Hands Problem
8. Michael Walzer's Essay on DH
9. Consequences and Responsibilities in Politics: Hannah Arendt
10. Intermediate test
11. Torture: Causes, Aims, Forms
12. Coming To Terms With Torture?
13. (Injustice and) The Liberalism of Fear
14. Politics and Resposibility
15. Radical Evil/Banality of Evil: the Argument of Hannah Arendt
16. Judith Shklar's Faces of Injustice
17. On compromise: moral, political?
18. Class discussion on compromise
19. On Transitional Justice: doing justice or making peace?
20. M. Ignatieff's Lesser Evil (or other r.a.)
NON-ATTENDANT STUDENTS WILL BE EVALUATED ON THE BASIS OF A WRITTEN EXAM AND OF AN ORAL EXAM:
WRITTEN PART (50%):
The written part for non-attendant students consists in a take-home essay (or Research Paper) with these characteristics:
Length: about 6.000 words;
Character and size: Times New Roman, 12, ½ space;
You will write a research paper and the research subject must be related to at least one of the course subjects of students' choice. It has to be a critical and problematized analysis of the general problem, the key concepts and arguments of the text(s) in a clear and non-paraphrasing way, with a critical and compared analysis of the two texts selected. You will send the Word document to the following e-mail address until the date of the exam: [email protected].
You can choose ONE subject and TWO reading assignments (or chapters) among:
1) Politics and Ethics:
- MACHIAVELLI, N. (1532), The Prince, any edition;
- LUKES, T. J. (2001), "Lionizing Machiavelli", in American Political Science Review, vol. 95, n. 3, September;
- WEBER, M. (1919), "The Profession and Vocation of Politics", in Political Writings, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1994;
- WILLIAMS, B. (1978), "Politics and Moral Character", in Hampshire, Stuart (ed.) Public and Private Morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;
- COADY, C. A. J. (2009), "Politics and Lying", in Messy Morality. The Challenge of Politics, Oxford, Oxford University Press;
2) The Dirty-Hands Dilemma:
- MACHIAVELLI, N. (1532), The Prince, any edition;
- WEBER, M. (1919), "The Profession and Vocation of Politics", in Political Writings, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1994;
- WALZER, M. (1973), "Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands", in Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 2, n. 2, Winter;
- CULLITY, G. (2007), "The Moral, the Personal, and the Political", in Primoratz Igor (ed.) Politics and Morality, New York, Palgrave;
- DE WIJZE, S. (2007), "Dirty Hands: Doing Wrong to Do Right", in Primoratz Igor (ed.) Politics and Morality, New York, Palgrave;
3) On Torture:
- MILLER, S. (2005), "Is Torture Ever Morally Justifiable?", in International Journal of Applied Philosophy, Volume 19, Issue 2, Fall;
- ROVIE, E. M. (2009), "Tortured Knowledge", in International Journal of Applied Philosophy, Volume 23, Issue 2, Fall;
- ANDERSON, S. A., NUSSBAUM, M. C. (2018), Confronting Torture. Essays on the Ethics, Legality, History, and Psychology of Torture Today, Chicago, University of Chicago Press (choice only among part III and IV);
- LEVINSON, S. (ed)(2004), Torture. A Collection, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
4) On Terrorism:
- PRIMORATZ, I. (ed.)(2004), Terrorism. The Philosophical Issues, London, Palgrave.
5) On Compromise:
- ROSTBØLL, C. F., SCAVENIUS T. (eds.)(2018), Compromise and Disagreement in Contemporary Political Theory, NY, Routledge.
ORAL PART (50%):
The oral exam is meant to discuss the written essay, on the one hand; on the other hand, it is meant both to ascertain the acquisition of appropriate knowledge and understanding of the topics addressed in the assigned readings, and to ascertain also students' capacity to establish meaningful connections among the different topics covered by the assigned readings and to comparatively assess different approaches and arguments.
Compulsory Texts for the oral part:
- MACHIAVELLI, N. (1532), The Prince, any edition;
- WALZER, M. (1973), "Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands", in Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 2, n. 2, Winter;
- WALZER, M. (1985), "Interpretation and Social Criticism", Tanner Lectures on Human Values;
- LEVINSON, S. (ed)(2004), Torture. A Collection, Oxford, Oxford University Press (chap: 2, 14, 16);
- PRIMORATZ, I. (ed.)(2004), Terrorism. The Philosophical Issues, London, Palgrave (chap. 4, 8);
- ROSTBØLL, C. F., SCAVENIUS T. (eds.)(2018), Compromise and Disagreement in Contemporary Political Theory, NY, Routledge (chap. 4, 5).
1. What is political philosophy? What is ethics? General presentation and overview of the DHP course
2. Ethics and/or Politics? - Analogies, Differences and Method
3. Sophocles' Antigone
4. "Interpretation and Social Criticism": Michael Walzer's Three Paths
5. Machiavelli, Weber and the founding fathers of the "means-ends problem"
6. Machiavelli's The Prince
7. The Dirty-Hands Problem
8. Michael Walzer's Essay on DH
9. Consequences and Responsibilities in Politics: Hannah Arendt
10. Intermediate test
11. Torture: Causes, Aims, Forms
12. Coming To Terms With Torture?
13. (Injustice and) The Liberalism of Fear
14. Politics and Resposibility
15. Radical Evil/Banality of Evil: the Argument of Hannah Arendt
16. Judith Shklar's Faces of Injustice
17. On compromise: moral, political?
18. Class discussion on compromise
19. On Transitional Justice: doing justice or making peace?
20. M. Ignatieff's Lesser Evil (or other r.a.)
NON-ATTENDANT STUDENTS WILL BE EVALUATED ON THE BASIS OF A WRITTEN EXAM AND OF AN ORAL EXAM:
WRITTEN PART (50%):
The written part for non-attendant students consists in a take-home essay (or Research Paper) with these characteristics:
Length: about 6.000 words;
Character and size: Times New Roman, 12, ½ space;
You will write a research paper and the research subject must be related to at least one of the course subjects of students' choice. It has to be a critical and problematized analysis of the general problem, the key concepts and arguments of the text(s) in a clear and non-paraphrasing way, with a critical and compared analysis of the two texts selected. You will send the Word document to the following e-mail address until the date of the exam: [email protected].
You can choose ONE subject and TWO reading assignments (or chapters) among:
1) Politics and Ethics:
- MACHIAVELLI, N. (1532), The Prince, any edition;
- LUKES, T. J. (2001), "Lionizing Machiavelli", in American Political Science Review, vol. 95, n. 3, September;
- WEBER, M. (1919), "The Profession and Vocation of Politics", in Political Writings, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1994;
- WILLIAMS, B. (1978), "Politics and Moral Character", in Hampshire, Stuart (ed.) Public and Private Morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;
- COADY, C. A. J. (2009), "Politics and Lying", in Messy Morality. The Challenge of Politics, Oxford, Oxford University Press;
2) The Dirty-Hands Dilemma:
- MACHIAVELLI, N. (1532), The Prince, any edition;
- WEBER, M. (1919), "The Profession and Vocation of Politics", in Political Writings, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1994;
- WALZER, M. (1973), "Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands", in Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 2, n. 2, Winter;
- CULLITY, G. (2007), "The Moral, the Personal, and the Political", in Primoratz Igor (ed.) Politics and Morality, New York, Palgrave;
- DE WIJZE, S. (2007), "Dirty Hands: Doing Wrong to Do Right", in Primoratz Igor (ed.) Politics and Morality, New York, Palgrave;
3) On Torture:
- MILLER, S. (2005), "Is Torture Ever Morally Justifiable?", in International Journal of Applied Philosophy, Volume 19, Issue 2, Fall;
- ROVIE, E. M. (2009), "Tortured Knowledge", in International Journal of Applied Philosophy, Volume 23, Issue 2, Fall;
- ANDERSON, S. A., NUSSBAUM, M. C. (2018), Confronting Torture. Essays on the Ethics, Legality, History, and Psychology of Torture Today, Chicago, University of Chicago Press (choice only among part III and IV);
- LEVINSON, S. (ed)(2004), Torture. A Collection, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
4) On Terrorism:
- PRIMORATZ, I. (ed.)(2004), Terrorism. The Philosophical Issues, London, Palgrave.
5) On Compromise:
- ROSTBØLL, C. F., SCAVENIUS T. (eds.)(2018), Compromise and Disagreement in Contemporary Political Theory, NY, Routledge.
ORAL PART (50%):
The oral exam is meant to discuss the written essay, on the one hand; on the other hand, it is meant both to ascertain the acquisition of appropriate knowledge and understanding of the topics addressed in the assigned readings, and to ascertain also students' capacity to establish meaningful connections among the different topics covered by the assigned readings and to comparatively assess different approaches and arguments.
Compulsory Texts for the oral part:
- MACHIAVELLI, N. (1532), The Prince, any edition;
- WALZER, M. (1973), "Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands", in Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 2, n. 2, Winter;
- WALZER, M. (1985), "Interpretation and Social Criticism", Tanner Lectures on Human Values;
- LEVINSON, S. (ed)(2004), Torture. A Collection, Oxford, Oxford University Press (chap: 2, 14, 16);
- PRIMORATZ, I. (ed.)(2004), Terrorism. The Philosophical Issues, London, Palgrave (chap. 4, 8);
- ROSTBØLL, C. F., SCAVENIUS T. (eds.)(2018), Compromise and Disagreement in Contemporary Political Theory, NY, Routledge (chap. 4, 5).
Prerequisites for admission
No prior knowledge is required to attend the course or to take the exam.
Teaching methods
Prerequisites for admission:
No prior knowledge is required to attend the course or to take the exam.
Teaching methods:
Teaching will be provided according to a path that will alternate frontal lessons with group work, individual presentations, case analysis and seminary discussions. The teaching uses e-learning teaching materials on the Ariel platform (the material will be defined in detail later).
Course Policies
As attendance and active participation is considered vital to success in this course, the attendance during both Monday and Tuesday classes is considered mandatory and will count towards the overall participation grade. Further, it is the responsibility of every student to ensure they come to class prepared and on time each week.
Students who miss a discussion class for an excused university absence will be given the option to write a short written assignment to make up for the missed attendance and participation points for that class. In such cases, it is the responsibility of each student to get in touch in advance of any absence by email to give notification that you will be unable to attend class or complete an assignment.
No prior knowledge is required to attend the course or to take the exam.
Teaching methods:
Teaching will be provided according to a path that will alternate frontal lessons with group work, individual presentations, case analysis and seminary discussions. The teaching uses e-learning teaching materials on the Ariel platform (the material will be defined in detail later).
Course Policies
As attendance and active participation is considered vital to success in this course, the attendance during both Monday and Tuesday classes is considered mandatory and will count towards the overall participation grade. Further, it is the responsibility of every student to ensure they come to class prepared and on time each week.
Students who miss a discussion class for an excused university absence will be given the option to write a short written assignment to make up for the missed attendance and participation points for that class. In such cases, it is the responsibility of each student to get in touch in advance of any absence by email to give notification that you will be unable to attend class or complete an assignment.
Teaching Resources
Evaluation and Course Requirements for Attendant-Students in a nutshell:
1. Class Participation, Presentation, debate and discussion (40%): Any student prepare an informed debate on a given topic and based on two reading assignments (at least), presenting pro and con arguments. You need to problematize the topic, have a structured presentation, and give relevant examples. After about 30 minutes, some other students open the debate to the rest of the class and lead the discussion. You can prepare a powerpoint presentation for the rest of the class.
2. Take-home essay (Position Paper) (30%): About 5.000 words. You will write a position paper and the research subject must be related to at least one of the course subjects of students' choice but after consultation with the professor. It has to be a critical and problematized analysis of the general problem, the key concepts and arguments of the text(s) in a clear and non-paraphrasing way. You will send the Word document to the following e-mail address: [email protected].
3. Intermediate exam (30%): You have to prepare the texts of the program.
List of the required reading assignments for Attendant-Students:
- GRANT R. W. (2002), "Political Theory, Political Science, and Politics", Political Theory, vol. 30, n. 4, August, pp. 577-595;
- MILLER, D. (2013), "Political Philosophy for Earthlings", in Miller (ed.) Justice for Earthlings. Essays in Political Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press;
- BERLIN, I. (1972), "The Originality of Machiavelli", in Against the Current;
- LUKES, T. J. (2001), "Lionizing Machiavelli", in American Political Science Review, vol. 95, n. 3, September;
- WILLIAMS, B. (1978), "Politics and Moral Character", in Hampshire, Stuart (ed.) Public and Private Morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;
-WALZER, M. (2002), "Passion and Politics", Philosophy & Social Criticism, vol. 28, n. 6;
- DE WIJZE, S. (2007), "Dirty Hands: Doing Wrong to Do Right", in Primoratz Igor (ed.) Politics and Morality, New York, Palgrave;
- SCHEFFLER, S. (2006), "Is Terrorism Morally Distinctive?", The Journal of Political Philosophy, 14, 1, 2006;
- WALDRON, J. (2004), "Terrorism And The Uses Of Terror", The Journal of Ethics, 8, 2004;
- COADY, C. A. J. (2009), "Politics and Lying", in Messy Morality. The Challenge of Politics, Oxford, Oxford University Press;
- ROSTBØLL, C. F., SCAVENIUS T. (eds.)(2018), Compromise and Disagreement in Contemporary Political Theory, NY, Routledge (chapters 4 and 5).
Non-attendant students can choose ONE subject and TWO reading assignments (or chapters) among:
1) Politics and Ethics:
- MACHIAVELLI, N. (1532), The Prince, any edition;
- LUKES, T. J. (2001), "Lionizing Machiavelli", in American Political Science Review, vol. 95, n. 3, September;
- WEBER, M. (1919), "The Profession and Vocation of Politics", in Political Writings, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1994;
- WILLIAMS, B. (1978), "Politics and Moral Character", in Hampshire, Stuart (ed.) Public and Private Morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;
- COADY, C. A. J. (2009), "Politics and Lying", in Messy Morality. The Challenge of Politics, Oxford, Oxford University Press;
2) The Dirty-Hands Dilemma:
- MACHIAVELLI, N. (1532), The Prince, any edition;
- WEBER, M. (1919), "The Profession and Vocation of Politics", in Political Writings, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1994;
- WALZER, M. (1973), "Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands", in Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 2, n. 2, Winter;
- CULLITY, G. (2007), "The Moral, the Personal, and the Political", in Primoratz Igor (ed.) Politics and Morality, New York, Palgrave;
- DE WIJZE, S. (2007), "Dirty Hands: Doing Wrong to Do Right", in Primoratz Igor (ed.) Politics and Morality, New York, Palgrave;
3) On Torture:
- MILLER, S. (2005), "Is Torture Ever Morally Justifiable?", in International Journal of Applied Philosophy, Volume 19, Issue 2, Fall;
- ROVIE, E. M. (2009), "Tortured Knowledge", in International Journal of Applied Philosophy, Volume 23, Issue 2, Fall;
- ANDERSON, S. A., NUSSBAUM, M. C. (2018), Confronting Torture. Essays on the Ethics, Legality, History, and Psychology of Torture Today, Chicago, University of Chicago Press (choice only among part III and IV);
- LEVINSON, S. (ed)(2004), Torture. A Collection, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
4) On Terrorism:
- PRIMORATZ, I. (ed.)(2004), Terrorism. The Philosophical Issues, London, Palgrave.
5) On Compromise:
- ROSTBØLL, C. F., SCAVENIUS T. (eds.)(2018), Compromise and Disagreement in Contemporary Political Theory, NY, Routledge.
ORAL PART (50%):
The oral exam is meant to discuss the written essay, on the one hand; on the other hand, it is meant both to ascertain the acquisition of appropriate knowledge and understanding of the topics addressed in the assigned readings, and to ascertain also students' capacity to establish meaningful connections among the different topics covered by the assigned readings and to comparatively assess different approaches and arguments.
Compulsory Texts for the oral part:
- MACHIAVELLI, N. (1532), The Prince, any edition;
- WALZER, M. (1973), "Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands", in Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 2, n. 2, Winter;
- WALZER, M. (1985), "Interpretation and Social Criticism", Tanner Lectures on Human Values;
- LEVINSON, S. (ed)(2004), Torture. A Collection, Oxford, Oxford University Press (chap: 2, 14, 16);
- PRIMORATZ, I. (ed.)(2004), Terrorism. The Philosophical Issues, London, Palgrave (chap. 4, 8);
- ROSTBØLL, C. F., SCAVENIUS T. (eds.)(2018), Compromise and Disagreement in Contemporary Political Theory, NY, Routledge (chap. 4, 5).
1. Class Participation, Presentation, debate and discussion (40%): Any student prepare an informed debate on a given topic and based on two reading assignments (at least), presenting pro and con arguments. You need to problematize the topic, have a structured presentation, and give relevant examples. After about 30 minutes, some other students open the debate to the rest of the class and lead the discussion. You can prepare a powerpoint presentation for the rest of the class.
2. Take-home essay (Position Paper) (30%): About 5.000 words. You will write a position paper and the research subject must be related to at least one of the course subjects of students' choice but after consultation with the professor. It has to be a critical and problematized analysis of the general problem, the key concepts and arguments of the text(s) in a clear and non-paraphrasing way. You will send the Word document to the following e-mail address: [email protected].
3. Intermediate exam (30%): You have to prepare the texts of the program.
List of the required reading assignments for Attendant-Students:
- GRANT R. W. (2002), "Political Theory, Political Science, and Politics", Political Theory, vol. 30, n. 4, August, pp. 577-595;
- MILLER, D. (2013), "Political Philosophy for Earthlings", in Miller (ed.) Justice for Earthlings. Essays in Political Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press;
- BERLIN, I. (1972), "The Originality of Machiavelli", in Against the Current;
- LUKES, T. J. (2001), "Lionizing Machiavelli", in American Political Science Review, vol. 95, n. 3, September;
- WILLIAMS, B. (1978), "Politics and Moral Character", in Hampshire, Stuart (ed.) Public and Private Morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;
-WALZER, M. (2002), "Passion and Politics", Philosophy & Social Criticism, vol. 28, n. 6;
- DE WIJZE, S. (2007), "Dirty Hands: Doing Wrong to Do Right", in Primoratz Igor (ed.) Politics and Morality, New York, Palgrave;
- SCHEFFLER, S. (2006), "Is Terrorism Morally Distinctive?", The Journal of Political Philosophy, 14, 1, 2006;
- WALDRON, J. (2004), "Terrorism And The Uses Of Terror", The Journal of Ethics, 8, 2004;
- COADY, C. A. J. (2009), "Politics and Lying", in Messy Morality. The Challenge of Politics, Oxford, Oxford University Press;
- ROSTBØLL, C. F., SCAVENIUS T. (eds.)(2018), Compromise and Disagreement in Contemporary Political Theory, NY, Routledge (chapters 4 and 5).
Non-attendant students can choose ONE subject and TWO reading assignments (or chapters) among:
1) Politics and Ethics:
- MACHIAVELLI, N. (1532), The Prince, any edition;
- LUKES, T. J. (2001), "Lionizing Machiavelli", in American Political Science Review, vol. 95, n. 3, September;
- WEBER, M. (1919), "The Profession and Vocation of Politics", in Political Writings, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1994;
- WILLIAMS, B. (1978), "Politics and Moral Character", in Hampshire, Stuart (ed.) Public and Private Morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;
- COADY, C. A. J. (2009), "Politics and Lying", in Messy Morality. The Challenge of Politics, Oxford, Oxford University Press;
2) The Dirty-Hands Dilemma:
- MACHIAVELLI, N. (1532), The Prince, any edition;
- WEBER, M. (1919), "The Profession and Vocation of Politics", in Political Writings, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1994;
- WALZER, M. (1973), "Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands", in Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 2, n. 2, Winter;
- CULLITY, G. (2007), "The Moral, the Personal, and the Political", in Primoratz Igor (ed.) Politics and Morality, New York, Palgrave;
- DE WIJZE, S. (2007), "Dirty Hands: Doing Wrong to Do Right", in Primoratz Igor (ed.) Politics and Morality, New York, Palgrave;
3) On Torture:
- MILLER, S. (2005), "Is Torture Ever Morally Justifiable?", in International Journal of Applied Philosophy, Volume 19, Issue 2, Fall;
- ROVIE, E. M. (2009), "Tortured Knowledge", in International Journal of Applied Philosophy, Volume 23, Issue 2, Fall;
- ANDERSON, S. A., NUSSBAUM, M. C. (2018), Confronting Torture. Essays on the Ethics, Legality, History, and Psychology of Torture Today, Chicago, University of Chicago Press (choice only among part III and IV);
- LEVINSON, S. (ed)(2004), Torture. A Collection, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
4) On Terrorism:
- PRIMORATZ, I. (ed.)(2004), Terrorism. The Philosophical Issues, London, Palgrave.
5) On Compromise:
- ROSTBØLL, C. F., SCAVENIUS T. (eds.)(2018), Compromise and Disagreement in Contemporary Political Theory, NY, Routledge.
ORAL PART (50%):
The oral exam is meant to discuss the written essay, on the one hand; on the other hand, it is meant both to ascertain the acquisition of appropriate knowledge and understanding of the topics addressed in the assigned readings, and to ascertain also students' capacity to establish meaningful connections among the different topics covered by the assigned readings and to comparatively assess different approaches and arguments.
Compulsory Texts for the oral part:
- MACHIAVELLI, N. (1532), The Prince, any edition;
- WALZER, M. (1973), "Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands", in Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 2, n. 2, Winter;
- WALZER, M. (1985), "Interpretation and Social Criticism", Tanner Lectures on Human Values;
- LEVINSON, S. (ed)(2004), Torture. A Collection, Oxford, Oxford University Press (chap: 2, 14, 16);
- PRIMORATZ, I. (ed.)(2004), Terrorism. The Philosophical Issues, London, Palgrave (chap. 4, 8);
- ROSTBØLL, C. F., SCAVENIUS T. (eds.)(2018), Compromise and Disagreement in Contemporary Political Theory, NY, Routledge (chap. 4, 5).
Assessment methods and Criteria
EVALUATION
Class Participation, Presentation, Debate and Discussion (40%)
Discussion of the weekly readings, participation to the debates, class attendance (attendance is required, more than two absences in the trimester would lead to fail the class). Students are responsible for all material presented in class.
Active student engagement with the course material and frequent participation in class discussions is considered vital to success in this course. Each week, class time will be divided roughly in half, with Tuesday's class being devoted to a brief talk/discussion on the weekly topic provided by the professor on a previous week. This includes raising appropriate questions and making constructive comments based on the course material to further our group discussions. In essence, active involvement for participation will be measured by both the quantity and the quality of each student's engagement during the discussions. The majority of the participation grade will be assessed according to the student's level of involvement in our weekly discussion sessions though attendance during both Monday and Tuesday classes is considered mandatory and will count towards your overall participation grade. As such, it should be noted that active engagement in the course also includes attendance and attentive listening during talks delivered by the professor or students speakers.
In addition, for course dates that you sign-up to write critical position papers (see below), students will also be required sometimes to take on the role of discussant leader and come to class prepared with comments and questions that will help to begin our discussion of the readings and the weekly topic.
Position Paper (30%)
During the course of the trimester each student must submit one critical analysis position paper reflecting on and evaluating some assigned readings. In these papers students are to apply their own independent critical analysis to the set of assigned readings. This analysis should be focused on identifying and critically assessing common themes or key points of debate and disagreement between the readings, and/or your independent reflection regarding the significance of the points you've identified to the broader topic being discussed during our weeks. These papers should be approximately 5-6 pages in length (and they should follow standard formatting guidelines: double-spaced; Times New Roman 12-point font). All late paper submissions will be penalized at a rate of -5% per day (or fraction therefore) past the deadline. No papers will be accepted more than five days past the due date. Here you can find some useful suggestions: https://advice.writing.utoronto.ca/types-of-writing/philosophy/
Oral exam (30%)
Two students prepare a text presentation of some of the texts of the program. It has to be a critical and problematized analysis of the general problem, the key concepts and arguments of the text(s) in a clear and non-paraphrasing way. In the last part of the oral presentation, you will be asked some questions on the assigned readings and lecture/discussion in class.
Class Participation, Presentation, Debate and Discussion (40%)
Discussion of the weekly readings, participation to the debates, class attendance (attendance is required, more than two absences in the trimester would lead to fail the class). Students are responsible for all material presented in class.
Active student engagement with the course material and frequent participation in class discussions is considered vital to success in this course. Each week, class time will be divided roughly in half, with Tuesday's class being devoted to a brief talk/discussion on the weekly topic provided by the professor on a previous week. This includes raising appropriate questions and making constructive comments based on the course material to further our group discussions. In essence, active involvement for participation will be measured by both the quantity and the quality of each student's engagement during the discussions. The majority of the participation grade will be assessed according to the student's level of involvement in our weekly discussion sessions though attendance during both Monday and Tuesday classes is considered mandatory and will count towards your overall participation grade. As such, it should be noted that active engagement in the course also includes attendance and attentive listening during talks delivered by the professor or students speakers.
In addition, for course dates that you sign-up to write critical position papers (see below), students will also be required sometimes to take on the role of discussant leader and come to class prepared with comments and questions that will help to begin our discussion of the readings and the weekly topic.
Position Paper (30%)
During the course of the trimester each student must submit one critical analysis position paper reflecting on and evaluating some assigned readings. In these papers students are to apply their own independent critical analysis to the set of assigned readings. This analysis should be focused on identifying and critically assessing common themes or key points of debate and disagreement between the readings, and/or your independent reflection regarding the significance of the points you've identified to the broader topic being discussed during our weeks. These papers should be approximately 5-6 pages in length (and they should follow standard formatting guidelines: double-spaced; Times New Roman 12-point font). All late paper submissions will be penalized at a rate of -5% per day (or fraction therefore) past the deadline. No papers will be accepted more than five days past the due date. Here you can find some useful suggestions: https://advice.writing.utoronto.ca/types-of-writing/philosophy/
Oral exam (30%)
Two students prepare a text presentation of some of the texts of the program. It has to be a critical and problematized analysis of the general problem, the key concepts and arguments of the text(s) in a clear and non-paraphrasing way. In the last part of the oral presentation, you will be asked some questions on the assigned readings and lecture/discussion in class.
Professor(s)