POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

The main aims of this course is to provide the students with: the argumentative tools to reflect critically on concepts, such as anarchism, contractarianism, democratic theories, fair play, consequentialism, utilitarianism, egalitarianism, prioritarianism, sufficientarianism, citizenship, migration, power, legal and social norms, human rights, learning to argue for and against a variety of positions on crucial political issues of our time, both at the domestic and global level; An understanding of the historical underpinnings and evolution of classical and modern political thought, making them able to use historical notions and texts in social science discussions and research.

None.

The basic skills to be assessed are the following: 1. ability to read philosophical texts and to grasp their specific language; 2. ability to grasp the connections between premises and arguments and to find them in the texts; 3. ability to put forward and defend one's own views and criticizing others’, during guided discussions; 4. ability to emphasize similarities and differences between competing claims; 5. capacity to give articulate oral and written expression to critical analytical thinking, in a thesis-driven, analytical essay format.

This course is an introduction to the main topics in political philosophy. It will cover the following topics: theories of political obligation (anarchism, contractarianism, democratic theories, fair play, consequentialism) and of distributive justice (utilitarianism, egalitarianism, prioritarianism, sufficientarianism), views about citizenship, migration, power, legal and social norms, human rights.

Arneson, Richard, "Egalitarianism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2013/entries/egalitarianism/>. Christiano, Tom, "Authority", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2020 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2020/entries/authority/>. Dagger, Richard and David Lefkowitz, "Political Obligation", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2021 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2021/entries/political-obligation/ Delmas, Candice and Kimberley Brownlee, "Civil Disobedience", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2021/entries/civil-disobedience/>. Lamont, Julian and Christi Favor, "Distributive Justice", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/justice-distributive/>. Peter, Fabienne, "Political Legitimacy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/legitimacy/>. Renzo, Massimo and Leslie Green, "Legal Obligation and Authority", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2022 Edition), Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (eds.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2022/entries/legal-obligation/>. Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter, "Consequentialism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2022 Edition), Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (eds.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2022/entries/consequentialism/>.

Lectures, guided discussions, assignments

The final assessment for this class will be based on: 20%: attendance and active participation. Attendance will be checked. No absences will be excused, except for certified health reasons, supported by an official statement (e.g., a written statement from a physician or another certified health care provider), or for official exemptions allowed by the university. To foster problem-based learning in a collaborative work environment, you may opt to submit a short video as group work. If you are successful in presenting the central issues, arguments, disagreements on the topic your group has chosen, you will as member of the group benefit from a slight increase in your overall grade following the final exam. 35%: pro-and-cons commentaries. Students will be asked to write and present 300-350 words-commentaries concerning issues and readings discussed during the seminar. 45%: final take-home paper a. the paper may (although it should not necessarily) be a more extended version of a short commentary; b. the paper should deal with at least one claim and one item in the reading list; d. The length of the paper should be between 2,000 and 4,000 words, footnotes and bibliography included. e. you must use the Chicago reference style, author-date: see here: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide/citation-guide-2.html; f. A good paper must have: i. an explicit and clearly stated philosophical thesis; ii. an explicit argument that supports the thesis; iii. possibly, non-trivial objections to the thesis and/or arguments, showing how these objections might undermine the main thesis.

None