PHIL

Ancient Greek tragedy has been of continuous interest to philosophers, whether they love it or hate it.  But they do not agree about what it is and does, or about what insights it offers.  This seminar will study the tragic festivals and a select number of tragedies, also consulting some modern studies of ancient Greek tragedy.  Then we shall turn to philosophical accounts of the tragic genre, including those of Plato, Aristotle, the Greek and Roman Stoics (especially Seneca), Lessing, Schlegel, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Iris Murdoch, Sartre, and Bernard Williams.  If we have time we will include some study of ancient Greek comedy and its philosophical significance.

Syllabus

Leo Strauss’s œuvre contains two discussions of the works of classical poets: An outstanding book on Aristophanes’ comedies (Socrates and Aristophanes, 1966), and a demanding essay on Lucretius’ poem (“Notes on Lucretius”, 1968). Socrates and Aristophanes I shall teach in the spring of 2022. In the spring of 2021, I shall present my interpretation of Strauss’s “Notes on Lucretius” and of Lucretius’ work itself − a most radical, non-teleological and non-anthropocentric view of nature. In a 1949 letter to E. Voegelin Strauss wrote about Lucretius: “His poem is the purest and most glorious expression of the attitude that elicits consolation from the absolutely hopeless truth for the only reason that it is the truth … The closest approximation in our world is the side of Nietzsche that is turned to science.” A special focus of the seminar will be on the poetic means Lucretius uses for teaching philosophy. Literature: Leo Strauss: “Notes on Lucretius,” in: Liberalism Ancient and Modern. New York 1968, pp. 76−139. Lucretius: De rerum natura / On the Nature of Things. Ed. Cyril Bailey, Oxford 1947. 

In this course, we will examine the psychological bases of knowledge and inquire into their wider epistemological significance. Our guiding aim is to understand
some of the ways in which our reliance on intuition, heuristics, and gut feelings shape our attitudes toward “fake news”—or deliberate misinformation and manipulation—in its many guises. Three questions will guide our investigation. First, how should insights about the rationality (or lack thereof) of gut feelings inform the way we think about fundamental issues in epistemology? We will consider, for example, justification, the nature of evidence, the reliability of testimony, and intellectual virtues and
vices. Second, might some of the reasoning biases that are typically deemed irrational be, at least in some contexts, rational? Third, insofar as our gut feelings do produce irrational behavior, what lessons should we draw about our own thinking and the ways in which we evaluate and engage in discourse? What normative principles might we adopt that both (a) give due place to our deep dependence upon gut feelings and (b) help mitigate their potentially pernicious effects? (B)

We will focus on Hegel’s philosophy of history and its influence on Marx’s historical materialism; and on Hegel’s critique of Christianity in the Early Theological Writings and also in the Phenomenology and its relation to Marx’s early theory of human nature in the 1840s and his critique of ideology. (I)

Descartes’s Meditations is often regarded as a masterpiece which begins the era of distinctively modern philosophy. However, it is also deeply indebted to the medieval tradition. Early criticisms of the Meditations swing between criticizing its radical novelty and criticizing Descartes for simply repackaging existing debates. In this course, we will try to get a grip on the Meditations by reading it in relation to a variety of medieval thinkers. Primary sources covered will include Avicenna, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, Teresa of Avila, Francisco Sanches, Francisco Suarez, and Descartes and his objectors. Secondary sources will include, among others, works by Christia Mercer, Tad Schmaltz, John Carriero, Helen Hattab, Paul Hoffman, and Anat Schechtman. (IV) (V)

A survey of the thought of some of the most important figures of the period from the fall of Rome to the Scottish Enlightenment. The course will begin with an examination of the medieval hylomorphism of Aquinas and Ockham and then consider its rejection and transformation in the early modern period. Three distinct early modern approaches to philosophy will be discussed in relation to their medieval antecedents: the method of doubt, the principle of sufficient reason, and empiricism. Figures covered may include Ockham, Aquinas, Descartes, Avicenna, Princess Elizabeth, Émilie du Châtelet, Spinoza, Leibniz, Abelard, Berkeley, Hume, and al-Ghazali.