Philosophy Graduate Courses: Winter 2025

Seminar in Special Topics (PHIL 6048)  

Slot 19 with Arthur Sullivan

The focus of this seminar course will be on the concept of a natural kind; as such, it will primarily overlap the sub-fields of metaphysics and the philosophy of science. Secondarily, there are lots of corners within philosophy that such a course might end up exploring.

 The core idea is that, of all the categories we employ in our thought and talk, a privileged minority of them correspond to fundamental objective groupings. To use a metaphor that originates in Plato’s Phaedrus, there are special categories that ‘carve nature at the joints’. Traditionally, paradigm examples of these ‘natural kinds’ include biological species and chemical elements. Putative examples of natural kinds abound throughout, and are arguably constitutive of, the natural sciences (e.g., quark, aluminum, mammal, hurricane, galaxy). There is a classic strain within ‘realist’ philosophy of science which holds that the natural kinds are (all and only) those that figure in laws of nature, and/or (all and only) those that support substantive, significant inductions. On the other hand, there are considerable arguments to the effect that the very idea of a natural kind is a pernicious myth.

In contrast, a kind is non-natural if it corresponds to a grouping that essentially involves the interests, activities, etc., of the agents doing the categorizing. Terms employed in this region include ‘artificial kinds’, ‘social kinds’, ‘human kinds’. (Beware terminological variance – some use these as rough synonyms, others definitely not.) Such things as ‘marriage’ and ‘money’ are commonly cited as examples of non-natural kinds. While such categories can obviously be crucially important to us, they are things humans create rather than discover; or: things that we impose on, rather than observe in, the targeted phenomena.

There are longstanding debates as to whether there are, or could be, natural kinds in the social sciences (e.g., Could there be economic laws about ‘recessions’? Or sociological, political, or historical laws about ‘revolutions’?) These debates are even more heated and more difficult in the philosophy of psychology (e.g., is ‘schizophrenia’, or ‘depression’, a natural kind?) Relatedly, questions about the nature of race or gender could be posed in these terms. (We may or might not get into these, currently extremely volatile, questions.)  

 

 Seminar in Special Topics (PHIL 6061)  

Dante’s Divine Comedy

Slot 11 with Seamus O'Neill 

In this course we will undertake a close reading, analysis, and discussion of the Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri including the Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso in English translation. Though we will not cover the entire poem in class, by reading and meditating upon one canto per day, students will have read the entire work by Easter. In the classes, however, we will focus more closely on particular cantos and sections of the text. In addition to learning about Dante’s own philosophical positions, we will examine the important influences on Dante’s Commedia including the philosophical and theological positions and doctrines of Plato and Aristotle, Boethius and Augustine, and Bonaventure and Aquinas. Portions of these texts will be supplied when needed throughout the course. We will explore philosophically the various religious themes in the work: the existence and nature of evil, the relation between the soul and body, divine mediation, nature, morality, the human’s final end, and God.

 

Seminar in Special Topics (PHIL 6067) 
Slot 18 with Melanie Coughlin

*Synchronous Online

*On-Campus Space (optional): EN 1003

Nishitani’s Critique of Anthropocentrism in Religion and Nothingness

Nishitani Keiji, a 20th century Japanese philosopher of the Kyoto School, argues that religion is one way that human beings have had of caring about matters beyond the concerns of our own species. Nevertheless, religion also sometimes intensifies the anthropocentric point of view. In his magnum opus, Religion and Nothingness, Nishitani takes a critical interest in modern atheistic revolutions as an opportunity to address anthropocentric tendencies in religion. At the same time, he seeks to recuperate some of religion's ways of caring about the world beyond the narrow interests of an ideal human being defined by modern European interests. In this seminar, we will read Nishitani's Religion and Nothingness together and pay attention to the way he uses references to Buddhist and Christian concepts to support his critical engagement with modern and contemporary European philosophers like Descartes, Kant, Kierkegaard, Marx, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre, and others. No previous knowledge of Buddhism or Christianity is required but would be an aid.

While Nishitani’s own philosophy is the main topic, he often thinks through historical concepts, and participants can choose which of Nishitani's engagements with European philosophers and/or religious traditions they would like to bring into focus in the seminar and in their individual work.

As we sort through the tangle of these historical concepts, we will also discuss possible contemporary applications of critiquing anthropocentrism. Such critique is broadly relevant today in social philosophy, since anthropocentrism not only places human interests at the centre of our priorities, but more fundamentally shapes the privileges associated with characteristics regarded as essentially "human."