Of the many things I plan to do this summer, one of them is to work on lesson plans for Introduction to Philosophy. This post is to solicit stories, examples and/or references from other philosophy TA’s, professors and students.
What I am looking for most particularly are stories or examples you use (if you happen to be an instructor) that you think work well or stories or examples that made you “get it” (if you are a student).
Here’s a basic list of thinkers, ideas and areas of philosophy I’d like to collect examples for, but if you have a good one that does not fit below (or if you’re not sure whether or not it fits), by all means share it!
- Informal Logic and Fallacies (I’d love to collect more examples of informal fallacies!)
- Aquinas (Five Ways)
- Anselm (Ontological Argument)
- Pascal (The Wager)
- Descartes, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Kant (epistemology/metaphysics/mind)
- Kant, Hobbes, Mill, Bentham, Aristotle (ethics)
I am looking specifically for examples and stories that (a) show the force of an argument, (b) show problems in an argument or (c) make a position or argument clear and/or relevant.
A great example was posted by Dr Vitz here:
http://unfspb.wordpress.com/2007/01/24/the-checkershadow-illusion/
Don’t be shy! Post away! I’ll even supply the first example, dedicated to you Trekkies out there:
The good of the one does not outweigh the good of the many. — Spock. (Utilitarianism)
Well, my first actual Philosophy class was an upper level one, so I didn’t get a lot of the stuff…at no fault of the instructor, but just that it was a little intense for the first time. We only read Descartes, Berkeley, Kant, Reid, and Hume, so those are philosophers that I will be referring to.
I think the best thing that you can do, although it may not always be possible with the short time that you are teaching in, is to outline every aspect of each of the arguments because a lot of the language used by the Philosophers in their day in addition to the eloquent structure of their sentences can be difficult to decipher and get the true meaning of what the philosophers are trying to explain. That’s one thing that our instructor did which made it easier on me to understand. His outlines were very concise, he wrote them out with us, and labeled where to find each of the arguments and examples within the actual text. If these outlines were not given, I feel like I would be totally in the dark, not only with the philosophers, but also when it came time to study for the finals.
Here are two examples I like to use with my intro to philosophy students that they all seem to like.
1) When discussing validity and soundness, I like to tell them the Descartes’ joke (after giving them the necessary background on the cogito) that runs as follows. “Descartes is drinking at a bar, and the bartender comes up and asks, ‘Would you like another?’ Descartes says ‘I think not’, and poof! He vanishes into thin air.” They all groan (of course) and then I say, “Pretty funny, eh?” They all nod, and then I say, “No! It’s not funny. It’s invalid.” It’s a good example of the fallacy of denying the antecedent.
2) On the first day of class, I always start with the following example (which I’ll have to update at some point). Lord Voldemort wants to kill Harry Potter dead, so Harry and his friend Hermione come up with a brilliant plan to foil Voldemort. They perform an irreversible spell that makes Harry’s old brain end up in Hermione’s old body and Hermione’s old brain end up in Harry’s old body. Now, you are Voldemort’s advisor and he comes to you to ask which brain-body pair he should kill. The students always say, “Just kill both!”, of course, but here’s the twist. For reasons to be revealed in the seventh book, Voldemort cannot kill Hermione without killing himself in the process. So he wants to be very careful *not* to kill Hermione, but he wants to still kill Harry. Which brain-body pair does he kill? This usually gets the class started with a pretty lively discussion. And then at the end of the discussion, I point out the consequences certain views about this puzzle may have for ethical issues like abortion and euthanasia (just to make sure they know we’re not just speculating idly, though that is fun too).
In keeping with the theme of Neal’s logic puzzles, here’s one that might be useful to get your students to think about how different philosophical traditions view ethics, and as such, the world.
A Railroad Bridge Tender takes his eight year old son to work one day. He shows his son around the control room, around the bridge, and the “point of no return” (the place which, if the bridge is not down once the train passes, the train will crash), and around the gears. His son is facinated by the huge gears and wants to climb on them, but the Bridge Tender tells him not to do so because they could crush him if they started to move.
He and his son sit in the office and the Bridge Tender, as he often did, fell asleep.
He was awakened by the alarm telling him a train was approaching. He picked up his binoculars and saw a passinger train coming down the tracks, and almost to the “point of no return”. He looks around and his son is missing.
He grabs his binoculars and looks on the bridge, near the water, and at the gears. His son is climbing on the gears. The Bridge Tender cannot call to his son – its too far away for him to hear. And he cannot stop the train.
If he lets the bridge down he will save the lives of 200 strangers, but lose his son. If he leaves the bridge up his son will live, but 200 people will die.
You can then ask your students some questions to test their knowledge: “What would a Utilitarian do? What would a Cartesian do? A positivist? A Christian? A Stoic?”
Then you ask your students “What would you do?”
I hope that is useful to you. Good luck!
I know that this one is way overused, and I hate to clutter up your board with stuff that you’re not looking for. So feel free to delete this entry. But I can’t help it; I LOVE THE MATRIX!
It seems that in art there are ways of communicating/learning without the downside of the normal vehicles: reading for comprehension, listening to lectures, analyzing arguments, all of which are very useful and necessary but can also be grueling and, frankly, boring. One of my favorite passages in literature is an obscure one which says, “…you can’t understand [the world], but you can feel.” I believe that art taps into a channel for understanding in the human mind/soul by way of an emotional inlet which delivers a strong message. Movies are a good example such art.
The Matrix is particularly a propos to the topic of teaching/learning philosophy. When anyone watches the Matrix, they are exposed to a rich philosophical environment which can teach (or be very useful aids to teaching) certain concepts. The upside is that it’s entertainment, and, therefore, it is an easy and fun way to learn.
The viewer gains knowledge of philosophical topics and issues without all the work, or at least in conjunction with all the work. The movie covers all sorts of issues from questions like, “Is it better to know the truth or to be happy.” I believe it can be used to demonstrate the representational theory of the mind, which could be useful when covering Berkeley and others. It definitely covers and adds depth to the evil genius scenario presented by Descartes and others. It is useful in discussing innate vs. learned ideas. It could be used to help explain Plato’s “The Allegory of the Cave.” These are a few examples of the many which possibilities which can be harvested from the movie.
It doesn’t help anyone learn how to analyze or evaluate an argument, however, which is one of the most important aspects of learning philosophy, but it is very useful to demonstrate certain topics and issues in philosophy. It is also helpful as a starter for new learners.
So, as I said earlier, feel free to delete or edit this entry as you like. I do feel that the Matrix in particular, and movies in general, could be used as a powerful teaching aid.
My opinion may not be helpful, since I have not taught this specific course, and I want to share some thoughts I have about technique versus tactics, which may not answer the specific question you asked. But your posting is a great idea, and I want to share what I have learned and learn what others are willing to share. I have always wondered why teaching strategies are not discussed more often, because teaching is very different than philosophy. Philosophy is about loving wisdom, and teaching is about sharing that love.
For example, how I talk about my beloved friends, whether it be the operating nurse or a philosophical treatise, is very different than the actual feelings that I hold for them. I also find that when I talk about my friends, I tell different stories to different audiences.
I think philosophers often confuse general education students with students desiring to major in the humanities. I have some common bond with philosophers, just as I have a common bond with my sister. I think there is some level of understanding with philosophers that encourages me and challenges me at the same time, and like my sister, we share enough common background that she appreciates the complexities of my relationships with others. While I may find it difficult to agree upon anything with either my sister or a philosophy major, I never seem to have a problem communicating my thoughts and ideas with them.
General education students are more like trapped passengers stuck next to you on an overbooked flight, quietly shuffling thoughts about how soon the plane will take off with worries about turbulence and mechanical failures. They are passerbys, looking to pass time with the mask of a polite listener, and hoping that you do not talk the entire flight. These students have to be in your course, and I can sometimes feel the subtle resentment they hold for having to endure a course not of their own choosing. As an independent thinker, I find I cannot blame them, because I know they are not fellow philosophers; they are the passerbys.
Not only is there a difference in common understanding, there is a difference in common goals. It is helpful for me to remember that the general education audience is not here to learn about your love, philosophy; you are simply the the best of a group of undesirable choices. For this type of student, just like the airplane passerby, you were the quiet one more attentive to an open book in your lap than the last passenger’s loud complaints about the lack of overhead storage space; you did not have a screaming, sticky toddler violently nearing freedom from your tightest grip, and you were not the suit with an earphone speaking loudly into the air, rummaging through your oversized briefcase and instant messaging him with your body language threats of a miserable flight if he dared to inconvenience you with his presence. Yes, you were selected, but in his mind, it was the only other seat that he could possibly take.
I will tell a passerby different stories about my friend than I would to my sister. I will tell him stories that don’t need as much background about the complexities in our relationship; and I tell the passerby stories about my friend knowing that he has never and will likely never meet her.
But that does not mean I do not want to convey a longlasting message. I know that stories I have heard from strangers changed my life, and stories about friendship to a passerby can either consume his moments like the sounds of repetitive, resonant raindrops on a lonely heart’s night, or they can leave him a better person, even if he never meets your friend, philosophy, face-to-face and even if you never see him again.
Believe that you can make a meaningful difference in the education of your students, and never give up. Accept every suggestion offered and work it through from beginning to end in your mind. Keep what works and throw out what doesn’t. If you can’t work it out in your mind, it will not work in class. Then try the mentally successful ones on your friends that are not philosophers, or your pet’s vet if you lack non-philosophy friends. These are all tools to help you with your teaching craft, and you must test them somehow to see if they function well for you.
Your art-to-be is both malleable and fragile, requiring your artistic skills, tools and talent in every single class. Remain aware of your goals and the desires of your captive audience in order to captivate them. What stories about friendship could capture the attention of a passerby? If the love stories about philosophy you choose to share in introductory courses have the same elements, you can earn their interest and in return they will, without hesitation, offer you problems that are meaningful to them and ask for your help in learning how to solve them.
When you have captured the curiosity and respect of the passerby, teaching becomes easy because you can now openly share what you love with someone that earnestly listens.
Thank you for opening the discussion.
Jared: Thanks so much for this valuable advice! Do you think those outlines helped you engage with the course texts?
Neal: What a great way to start class. And now you got me thinking…I bet there’s tons of Potter examples one could use. I can see it now: Polyjuice Potion and the Nature of the Mind. Thanks!
Tom: This is terrific a dilemma to use for class discussions and is just the sort of thing I have trouble making up on my own. Your thought about having students “try out” different positions on it is very good, too. Thanks so much.
Andrew: I think it is against the law in some states to suggest the deletion of a post on The Matrix. If it isn’t, it should be.
You are right, I think, about the many positions and problems exemplified in the movie. And you may be right, too, that these types of things might not necessarily improve other skills, like reading difficult texts, which is important as well. I am inclined to agree that various arts can be useful teaching tools.
Optimist: Your opinion is very helpful, indeed. One of the things I am trying to do in gathering stories and examples here, actually, is to find many ways to talk about philosophy to the wide variety of students; students who not only, as you say, have different aims, but also have different learning styles. Thanks for your advice. You sound like an excellent teacher.
Here’s an example of my own:
The semester now ending was the first time I aided in teaching the Turing Test and Chinese Room. Another TA and I both decided to incorporate ALICE (link below) into our breakout sessions. After the students understood the arguments and issues, I introduced them to ALICE and conversed with her to show them her language skills. Some of the questions I then asked them are: Does ALICE pass the Turing Test? If not, why not? Do you think you could tell the difference between ALICE and a human using an Instant Messenger? Why or why not? Do you think ALICE understands language? Do you think ALICE has a mind?
http://www.pandorabots.com/pandora/talk?botid=f5d922d97e345aa1
Here is another link for the Artificial Intelligence Foundation which has links for teaching similar things—Turing, AI, etc.
http://www.alicebot.org/Scholarly.html
I am always impressed by the stories and examples more experienced teachers use. Thanks again, all, this is really great.
-Jennifer
Dear Jennifer,
Teaching Intro to Philosophy sounds exiting. Good on you girl! Spending the whole summer working on a lesson plan rather than going to the beach, tan, and eat ice cream, sounds even better. lol
Just kidding…
I am an Undergraduate at UNF, set to graduate and join the Masters program at UNF in August. Interestingly, when I began my college career a year and a half ago, I wanted to get into I.O. Psych, thinking that this was the path to my goals. It was, in large part, my teacher of Into to Phil, who indirectly steered me in another direction.
I took Intro to Phil at BCC in Fort Lauderdale. My teacher was a male in his 50ies, who held a Masters in Phil and an interest in Epistemology. He has worked within Social Services for 30 years; a significant part of that time was spent within the prison system. I am telling you that, not only because it has inspired me to use my leisure time working on a “Philosophy Lesson Plan for Juvies” that I want to implement at the Juvenile Prison in Saint Augustine. I am also telling you that because, as a teacher, ‘the message’ that you send, the words that you teach, extend far beyond the classroom. If you do well, you can reach more that just the 30 or so students that might occasionally show up for lecture.
What I mean is, than more than just a fantastic lesson plan, it is you, as a person, as a whole being, who is teaching philosophy. Who you are and what your interests are, that , I think is what really is going to ‘get’ the students. All of us can straight memorize the ‘big names’ in Phil, but not all of us can ‘feel’ the pulse of the material. Not all of us will find that inner awareness that I think Phil requires. If you let your love of Phil really shine, make the material come alive, the students will pay attention. They will learn.
I was first introduced to philosophy in Denmark, when I attended 8th grade at a Latin Cathedral School. (Did you guys know by the way, to K-12 teachers in DK; Kierkegaard is GOD?!) haha. While philosophy can seem quite dry at that age, it was offset by the FUN FUN fact, that we had to read most of our material in Latin and German. I am telling you that, because, by the time I graduated high school, I am sure you can imagine that I threw philosophy and all that came with it, out the window as boring and dusty stuff that had nothing to do with my life. (I kept Socrates, only because the image of a little contrary chatty round guy in Athens wearing nothing but his sandals, was too pleasing and always good for a giggle at the cafes – besides, I liked his courage!).
In my early twenties, a book came out that was ‘all the rave’ in Scandinavia. It is called “Sofie’s World”, written by Jostein Gaarder. Get it here in the English version: . (It is only $8.)
It was so great, because it made philosophy come alive. Suddenly it did not seem as such a punishment to re-encounter Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, and Hegel. A lot of us girls could follow Sofie and relate to her wondering dreamy nature. We were all young girls ourselves doing the same thing…all wondering “why we were here”. The young men liked it too. The mystery of the letters required solving. The book was read quickly and with each letter that Sofie got, we all caught ourselves saying: “I had not thought about that before”.
I am telling our this to reiterate what I started out with. Philosophy can be a dry and dusty affair, or it can be an opportunity to open your heart the universe and ask: Why AM I here? What does that mean? What does it mean to me? What does it mean to the rest of the people in the world? (Oh..and of course….Is there a God?… Let’s not forget that one…lol)
According to William Perry’s theories in Psychology, freshmen will start college with a style of thinking called “duality”. In this style of thinking students look to their professor as all knowing oracles and everything that comes out of their mouths is true. Knowledge and morals have a dualistic nature. In that age group the ability to think has developed only to a stage where the world can be divided into either right or wrong. As we progress into college and mature, our ability to think more complex thoughts develop. We reach a stage called ‘multiplicity’. Knowledge and morals are relativistic and there is an awareness that there may not be a right or wrong. That truth depends on the one who beholds it. The next and final stage is “commitment”. At this stage it is evident to the now mature person that truth and knowledge is relativistic and that there may never be a truth found. Despite this, one also realizes that we sometimes have to make decisions based on incomplete information. We have to work with what we got. This theory, by the way, is supported by data that I collected in China over Spring Break. (Good stuff, I think… Let me know of you want my paper.)
I think this relates to you because you are making a lesson plan for freshmen. They are ‘fresh’ out of high school (at least the majority will be) and their style of thinking may just be as Perry and I think it is. It is in a way “immature”, and I do not mean that in a condescending way. So, when you teach, you are working with minds that are still developing their ability to decipher if what you are saying is true, or if it is bologna. More so than in any other field, it falls on the professor of Philosophy at do her or his very best to foster the growth of a critical mind. I think this may be best done by somehow ‘getting under the skin’ on the students.
So how did my teacher at BCC get ‘under my skin’ and get me back to the world of philosophy, where I belong?
He entered class with a big smile and open nature. He was friendly and jovial to all the students. He maintained eye contact with people when they were talking. He did not take attendance, telling the students that in college, attendance should be voluntary as education was not dependent on statistics but rather on personal effort, commitment, and sacrifice.Those who did not show would not be able to make a good grade, he said, as most of the exam would be on lecture, not on the book. (We almost always had a full classroom). He treated everyone with complete respect, and a sense of humbleness that he was even able to work with us. We felt important. We felt that what we had to say mattered. The atmosphere was ripe for learning.
Our textbook was ‘Does the Center Hold” by Donald Palmer. While I thought that the book was okay [I loved all the comic strips and the accessible easy-to-understand writing], the teacher thought otherwise. About half way through the semester, as he had caught his own stride, he tossed the book in the trash and told us we could do the same. As most other students, I paid $200 gazillion for my book, so I kept it. (Still have it, and you may want to take a look at it…let me know). What bothered our teacher was that he was losing us. After two months, the same students that had originally appeared eager, sat in the class room with blank stares and just took notes.
So…he said…what color are the walls? And as it turns out, a lot of people had different answers. Some said white. Others said opaque, light blue or gray. Why, he asked, are you all saying different things? Which one of you is right?
And so I think you see where I am going. Realizing that we could not even agree on the color of the walls (which were CLEARLY opaque…haha), us students began to realize that there may be more than one answer to the same truth. That while Intro to Philosophy was a survey course in philosophical history, it was so much more than that. It was an opportunity to lean how to think. An opportunity to disengage from being tourists in our own lives. We began to be aware.
Determined to remove philosophy from the dust of academia, our professor worked hard on applying the field in real life. We saw movies, read contemporary articles. We looked at skateboarding, music, sport, movies, life. We wrote thought papers, and participated in small group discussions. We presented topics of interest in class and we had to argue our cases before the class. We were living philosophy.
Now, I realize that I am coming from the angle of a student, and that constructing a lesson plan would also have to satisfy the requirements of the college. Still, I think that the building of a critical mind, is more important than ‘crash’ memorizing all the names and theories of the philosophers the night before the exams, only to forget all about it (I think statistics say) two years out of college.
Personally, I also think that us, who make philosophy our lives, have a responsibility to the field, to ensure that it stays alive and contemporary. We think about thinking and being. That, I believe, is what we should get (and give) from philosophy, not history lessons.
I hope this is a help to you, though I am not sure it was really what you asked for. Wishing you all of the best of luck (Success (f) = Luck (10%) x Hard work (90%), that is what they say, right?) with your lesson plan. And by the way, I still don’t know who this Dr. Spock person is, but he may be good to incorporate into your class? He sounds fun and most students like TV.
Happy summer!
Linda
Linda: I should probably clarify something. I am not teaching my own course. Rather, I am just now finishing up a year of TAing for Intro. And I figured this summer would be a great time for me to think about what I learned from this, find out where I need to improve, and lay down some groundwork for the future. Hopefully, one day I will teach my own course. And if this happens, I think it would be great to have something to build upon, such as rough lecture notes, PowerPoints and great examples, like the ones that have been shared above. This will also help me, I think, for future TAing.
Thanks for sharing how your teacher made you fall in love with philosophy. That’s a really terrific story.
Congratulations on getting into the grad program here. Perhaps I will be seeing you around.
Just for you, a link to Mr Spock of the Starship Enterprise. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spock
(Not to be confused with Dr Spock http://www.drspock.com/)
And don’t worry, I will most definitely be getting a tan over the summer. Trust me, I need one.
-Jennifer
Thank you Jennifer.
Just cheked out Spock. Wow…not pretty, was he? But…he sounds like he has a sensitive nature.
I will try and catch him on a rerun one of these days. The show is still on air right?
Looking forward to running into you in the halls of academia. All the best,
Lin
Ps. Good for you for wanting to teach! That is awesome!
Jennifer,
When I took Intro. to Philosophy, one philosopher that really stuck out to me was Diogenes. His cynicism reminds me of an old version of George Carlin. The example of the best life one could live was the “life of a dog” put a lot of things in perspective for me. Although I did not really agree with a whole lot Diogenes or cynics had to say, Diogenes attitude toward people and life, and the fact that he would masturbate in public certainly kept me laughing and interested in the course. I did not experience any sort of enlightenment, but if it weren’t for Socrates and Diogenes, I probably would have never chosen philosophy as my minor. -David
David: I suppose what you speak of is something like the interest (something like a curious mixture of disgust and amusement) that arises in class when I unveil Jeremy Bentham—as he is now!—and point out his real head and his wax head.
Incidentally, I told my students this semester a story about Diogenes that I got from one of my own professors. It is about the conversation between Diogenes and Alexander the Great. Diogenes told Alexander to get out of his light. I thought it was pretty gutsy. A version of this story can be found at the link below, third full paragraph beneath the bullets.
http://helleniccomserve.com/alexander.html
I actually really like telling biographical information about the philosophers I discuss in class. It interests me–and it usually also interests the students!
(Note to self: If all else fails, start talking about Diogenes.
)
Thanks!
-Jennifer
Jeneifer,
I was in the PHI 3400 class and it was very interesting. I believe a Teaching Assistant would have been every helpful. The class was very hard but not because the material was too hard to understand, but because it is hard to be a full-time student. Other people, I believe had to endure this same problem. I enjoyed it though. It looks like the way he grades will even out. I would have liked if we could have went more in depth with Reid and maybe Spinoza. I don’t know if Aristotle is considered to be in the modern philosophy era but I would have enjoyed to study him. Anyways these are my opinions on this philosophy class!!!!!
One thing I have found difficult to do is to convince students that Descartes is not an idiot when he says that the evil demon may decieve us into thinking that 2+2=4 when it is really the case that 2+2=5 (or something)…this is important to Caretsian epistemology because the only thing that cannot be doubted is the cogito and so he needs to show that we can coherently doubt that 2+2=4…I talk about ordinary examples of making mathematical mistakes that you do not notice (e.g. when balancing a check book (does anyone do that anymore?) or FOILing) and that you can even check your work over and get the same (wrong) anwer again because you do not notice the mistake, but they still don’t buy that they might be mistaken about 2+2=4…so what I have found extraordinarily helpful is using a little trick that Quine talks about in ‘The Ways of Paradox’ in the form of a proof that 1+1=3…the proof is really simple and effective.
1. Let x=1
2. Then (X^2)=1
3. Subtract 1 from both sides
4. Then (X^2)-1=X-1
5. Factor left hand side
6. Then (X-1) (X+1)=X-1
7. Divide both sides by (x-1)
8. Then X+1=1 (you could get the contradiction 1=2 here by skipping to 11, but I have found it is better to add the next couple of steps )
9. Add 1 to both sides
10. Then X+2=2
11. But since (from 1.) X=1, we have 3=2
12. Another way to write ‘2′ is ‘1+1′
13. So, 1+1=3
Of course this ‘proof” is no good because it makes a simple mathematical error (in step 7), but usually few, if any, students come up with the error when I have done this in class…
Have you considered using thought experiments in your intro classes? Check out _What If?… Collected Thought Experiments in Philosophy_, published by Longman. Very stimulating, very thought-provoking…