Course syllabus

Jump to today

 

PHILOSOPHY 209: SCHOPENHAUER AND NIETZSCHE

General Information
2017 Lecture Schedule

Two-Hour Lecture:              Mondays, 2pm-4pm (Humanities Building, Rm 203)
Plus One-Hour Tutorial:       Mondays, 4pm-5pm (Humanities Building, Rm 216)
(immediately after lecture on Mondays)
[The 1-hr tutorial session begins in the second week]

Arthur Schopenhauer                          1788-1860
Friedrich Nietzsche                             1844-1900

 

Part One: Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)
 

  1. Mon., July 24 2pm-4pm                                 (1st meeting)
    Topics:
    (1) Philosophical Background:
              (a) John Locke: Ideas of Primary Qualities vs. Ideas of Secondary Qualities
              (b) Immanuel Kant: The Subjectivity of Space and Time
    (2) Administrative Details for Class
    Readings: The World as Will and Representation, Volume I (WWR I), pp. xii-xxviii, Sections 1-5

  2. Mon., July 31 2pm-4pm                                 (2nd meeting)
    Topics:
    (1) Immanuel Kant: The Subjectivity of Space and Time (cont.)
    (2) Arthur Schopenhauer – Life (1788-1860)
    (3) Schopenhauer’s Critique of Kant
    Readings: WWR I, Sections 6-8, 11-12, 14-15

  3. Mon., Aug. 7 2pm-4pm                                   (3rd meeting)
    Topics:
    (1) The Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason
    (2) The World as Representation vs. The World as Will
    Readings: WWR I, Sections 18-20, 22-25

  4. Mon., Aug. 14 2pm-4pm                                  (4th meeting)
    Topic: The World as Representation vs. The World as Will (cont.)
    Readings: WWR I, Sections 26-29
     

  5. Mon. Aug. 21   2pm-4pm                                 (5th meeting
    Topic: Redemption (I): Art; Aesthetic Experience, Platonic Ideas and Artistic Genius
    (Schopenhauer’s Aesthetic Theory)
    Readings: WWR I, Sections 30-40

  6. Mon., Aug. 28 2pm-4pm                                   (6th meeting)
    Topics:
    (1) Redemption (II): Schopenhauer’s Moral Theory
    (2) Redemption (III): Asceticism
    Readings: WWR I, Sections 53-60, 68-71 

     
    Mid-Semester Study Break: Monday 4 September - Saturday 16 September
     


                   Part Two: Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)

  7. Mon. Sept. 18   2pm-4pm                                  (7th meeting)
    Topic: Nietzsche’s Life; The Birth of Tragedy—Apollo and Dionysus
    Readings: Coursebook sections on Nietzsche and Tragedy
    Recommended: Beyond Good and Evil, Sections 294-6

  8. Mon., Sept 25 2pm-4pm                                    (8th meeting)       
    Topic: The Birth of Tragedy—Apollo and Dionysus (cont.)
    Readings: As above

  9. Mon., Oct. 2 2pm-4pm                                        (9th meeting)
    Topic: The Death of God and Nihilism
    Readings: Coursebook sections on the Death of God
    Recommended: Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Prologue and Book One

  10. Mon., Oct. 9 2pm-4pm                                        (10th meeting)
    Topic: Life-Affirmation and the Will to Power
    Readings: Coursebook sections on Life-affirmation
    Recommended: Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Prologue and Book Two, or Beyond Good and Evil, “The Free Spirit,” sections 24-44
     

        FRIDAY, Oct 13, 3:00 pm: ALL COURSEWORK ESSAYS DUE

  11. Mon., Oct 16 2pm-4pm                                      (11th meeting)
    Topic: The Superhuman (Übermensch), the Eternal Recurrence
    Readings: Coursebook sections on the Superhuman and Eternal Recurrence
    Recommended: Beyond Good and Evil, “What is Noble” sections 257-96, On the Genealogy of Morals, First Essay, §§1-17

  12. Mon., Oct. 23     No Class                               


    …………………………………………………………….

    Reading Assignments:

    Schopenhauer: Please read in its entirety, the “Schopenhauer” section of the coursebook (this is available on the Canvas course website in the “files” section). Also, please read the sections in The World as Will and Representation, as stated above in the lecture schedule.

    Nietzsche: For the required readings, please read in its entirety, the “Nietzsche” section of the coursebook. For the recommended readings (it is, however, required that one read some of these recommended assignments from the original texts, as desired, to have an exposure to Nietzsche’s own writings), see the sections in either Beyond Good and Evil [available on internet, see below] or Thus Spoke Zarathustra [also available on internet, see below], as stated in the lecture schedule above.


    The final exam questions will be formulated in significant part, in reference to the coursebook’s contents, so reading the coursebook carefully will help in preparation for the final examination.

    ………………………………………………………………………………………….

                              Administrative Information:

    Lecturer: Assoc. Prof. Robert Wicks

    Office Hours: 
                        For the first four weeks of the semester:
                            Wednesdays 10:00am-12:00pm, and by appointment

                        For the remainder of the semester:  
                            Mondays, 10:00:am-12:00pm, and by appointment
     
    Office Location:          Humanities Building, Level 4, Room 439
    Office Telephone:       373-7599, ext 88449
    e-mail:                      r.wicks@auckland.ac.nz

    Class Rep:
    Yustyna Klish
    ykli290@aucklanduni.ac.nz

    Tuaakana Philosophy Mentor:

    Nathan Rew  
    nrew454@aucklanduni.ac.nz


    Assessment: Exam 60%; Coursework 40%; no plussage

    The final mark for the course will be determined by the results of a 3-hour examination worth 60% and one 2,000-word essay worth 40%.

    There is no plussage.

     
    Coursework:
    One required 2,000-word essay centered upon Schopenhauer and/or Nietzsche;
     

    Coursework Essay Due Date: FRIDAY, October 13th, 2017, by 3:00pm 

    Please submit the coursework essay in hard copy to the Arts 1 Reception (no e-mail submissions) and an electronic copy to Canvas


    Cover sheets: It is important to sign the cover sheets when handing in the essay. Please include the essay’s precise word-count on the cover sheet. The cover sheets are available through the Canvas course website.

 
For the coursework essay assignment, you may choose between two options:

1.  Writing an essay on either Schopenhauer and/or Nietzsche by formulating a topic of your own choosing

 

2.  Writing an essay on one of the assigned topics, listed below

 
Structure of Final Examination

The final examination will last three hours and will have two parts: (1) Schopenhauer, (2) Nietzsche. There will be a choice of questions in each part. You will be required to answer one exam question from the part on Schopenhauer, and one exam question from the part on Nietzsche. The remaining exam question can be chosen from either part (i.e., it can be chosen from any of the remaining questions on the exam). Questions may include comparisons/contrasts between Schopenhauer and Nietzsche. 


Grading Scale:

Grade

 

Percentage

A+

 

90-100

A

 

85-89

A-

 

80-84

B+

 

75-79

B

 

70-74

B-

 

65-69

C+

 

60-64

C

 

55-59

C-

 

50-54

D+

 

45-49

D

 

40-44

D-

 

0-39



Prescribed Texts:

(1) Arthur Schopenhauer. The World as Will and Representation, Volume One (Dover), trans. E.F. Payne [other translations are ok]


BEFORE PURCHASING A HARD COPY:
Two translations of this text are available on the Internet:

Payne translation:     https://digitalseance.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/32288747-schopenhauer-the-world-as-will-and-representation-v1.pdf 

Haldane and Kemp translation: http://www.archive.org/details/theworldaswillan01schouoft

(2)  Either:

Friedrich Nietzsche. Thus Spoke Zarathustra (preferably in either the Walter Kaufmann or R.J. Hollingdale translations, but others are ok)

BEFORE PURCHASING A HARD COPY:

This text Thus Spoke Zarathustra is available free as an electronic text, although the translation (by Thomas Common) is not as accurate as the contemporary translations by Kaufmann, Hollingdale or Parkes.

Text version is at: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1998/1998-h/1998-h.htm

Audio book version at:

http://www.archive.org/details/zarathustra_0809_librivox

Or:

Friedrich Nietzsche. Beyond Good and Evil

[Walter Kaufmann translation preferably, but others are ok]


BEFORE PURCHASING A HARD COPY: 

This text (Beyond Good and Evil) is available free as an electronic text, again, in an older translation (by Helen Zimmern). 

Text version is at:
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/4363 

Audio book version at:
http://www.archive.org/details/beyond_good_and_evil_librivox

A newer translation is at:
http://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/Nietzsche-Beyond-Good-and-Evil.pdf
 

Recommended Texts:

Robert Wicks, Nietzsche (Oneworld, 2002) [main library, electronic resource] 
Robert Wicks, Schopenhauer (Blackwell, 2008) [on short-loan] 
Robert Wicks, Schopenhauer’s The World as Will and Representation – A
                       Reader’s Guide (Continuum, 2011) [on short-loan]

On Internet:
Robert Wicks, “Arthur Schopenhauer”
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:           http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/schopenhauer/ 

Robert Wicks, “Nietzsche’s Life and Works”
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:          
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nietzsche-life-works/
 

 


                                   COURSEWORK ESSAY GUIDELINES
 

Coursework Essay Lengths and Due Date

LENGTH:     2,000 words    (longer essays are acceptable) 

DUE DATE: Friday, Oct 13th, 2017 by 3:00 p.m. 

-- Early Essay Submission (optional): Please feel to submit your coursework essay at any time before the due date, if you would like to receive your coursework mark at a correspondingly earlier date.

TOPIC: The essay topic can be of one’s own choosing, with the lecturer’s (necessary) approval, or alternatively, it can be a topic chosen from the list of essay topics below.


ESSAY SUBMISSION: (Hard Copy to Arts 1 plus Canvas upload)

It is required to submit essays via CANVAS. (This checks for plagiarism and unacknowledged copying.) In addition, please submit your essay in hard copy to Arts 1 Reception. Be sure to use and to sign the cover sheets (available on the Canvas course website) when handing in the essay.


       Please note that there are no e-mail submissions to the instructors or tutors, etc.
  

Late Penalties for Coursework Essays: The coursework essay is due on Friday, October 13th, by 3pm. Please remember that the essays can be submitted earlier, if desired, to ensure that you know your coursework mark before taking the final exam.

If the essay is submitted after Friday, October 13th without an extension having been granted exclusively by the course supervisor (R. Wicks), then the essay mark will be reduced one grade (e.g., from A to A-, or from B+ to B, etc.) if it arrives before Friday, October 20th, 3pm (i.e., if it is late, but less than a week late), reduced two grades if it arrives before Friday, October 27th, 3pm (i.e., if it is more than a week late, but less than two weeks late), and reduced three grades if it arrives before Friday, November 3rd.

Friday November 10th, 3pm, is the very last day to submit coursework (viz. two weeks after lectures end), and it will involve a penalty of five grades (e.g., a “B” essay will receive a “D+”). After November 10th, the coursework mark will be recorded as a zero. E-mail submissions of coursework are not acceptable. Weekend submissions are not possible, since Arts1 is not open then.

This is provided the final exam is scheduled after November 10th. 

NOTE: If the final exam is scheduled on or before November 10th, then the last day to submit coursework will be two days before the final exam. After that date, the coursework mark will be recorded as zero.

Extensions: If an extension is granted for the submission of coursework, then the extension is valid only up until the day granted. If the coursework essay is submitted after the agreed upon extension date and the extension agreement is thereby broken, then the extension becomes invalid and ordinary penalties apply as if no extension had been granted

 

Coursework Essay Structuring Guidelines 

  1. Begin with an introductory paragraph(s) that briefly establishes the overall historical and/or intellectual context of your topic. The aim would be to stimulate the reader's interest in the topic, and to provide the reader with some relevant background information. Near the end of this introductory paragraph(s), it should be said specifically what the essay intends to accomplish. (For some topics, it might be necessary to wait until the essay is completed, to determine what should be written specifically at the end of the introductory segment.)

  2. Continue with an exposition of the argument(s) under consideration. This is a predominantly descriptive section, where one spells out the argument(s) in precise detail. It is probably best to formulate the argument(s) in its strongest and most convincing form. Casting doubt (using reason and argument, of course, rather than rhetorical appeals to emotion or authority) upon a position that is presented accurately, sympathetically and fairly, helps render one’s essay more convincing.

  3. Analysis of the argument(s)/position(s) as given by ONE (or more) commentators 
    For this important section of the paper, it is necessary to use the library’s resources. Go to either the section that contains the books on Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, and/or go to the Philosopher’s Index (use the “Databases” link on the Main Library’s webpage at https://www.library.auckland.ac.nz/databases/ and click on “P” that will lead to “Philosopher’s Index”), and find at least one article and/or section in a book on the subject that addresses the argument upon which you are focusing. This should be easy to find, but if you encounter any difficulties, please let me know.


    WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ACADEMIC JOURNALS THAT ARE ONLINE (which are ok), PLEASE DO NOT USE ANY INFORMAL INTERNET SOURCES (e.g., personal webpages) AS THE REQUIRED REFERENCE/COMMENTATOR.  Informal internet sources may be used as a second, or third source, if desired. This restriction stated here because -- at least at the present time -- the general quality of the Internet sources, aside from academic journals, is not as high as the regularly published articles and books, even though there are some useful Internet sources.


    Please read the relevant sections in this secondary source (checking the indexes and the tables of contents of the books is useful to find the relevant sections) and then describe in your essay the alternative way the commentator has understood the argument under consideration (or how the commentator has offered and alternative criticism of the argument, if the exposition of the argument is not controversial).

  4. Critical Discussion and Evaluation of the Commentator's Analysis

In this section you will discuss your own critical reactions to the commentator's analysis of the argument under consideration, along with your own critical reactions to the argument. To what extend do you agree with the commentator?  To what extent do you disagree?  Why?  Was there anything that you noticed about the argument under consideration that you feel the commentator overlooked?  In sum, this is the part of your essay where you offer your own reflections on the topic.

This is where one could point out, for example: 

-- Logical inconsistencies in the argument

-- Counterexamples that show certain statements within the argument to be false or doubtful 

-- Ambiguities or vagueness in the terms used in the argument

-- Alternative construals which cast doubt upon the argument's conclusion (e.g., when the argument was formulated, there were certain prevailing cultural assumptions that are now questionable in retrospect)

-- Any other critical considerations which reveal the limits of the argument (e.g., certain facts of human psychology or sociology might contradict what the argument is presupposing)

One can also discuss some of the virtues of the argument(s), such as the reasons why it appears to be persuasive (even though, upon examination, it is not as reasonable as it initially looks).

The main idea in this essential section is to develop your own critical, carefully considered reaction to the argument's strengths and weaknesses, in your own view and in the views of the commentator.

 

Coursework Essay Questions

 
OPTION ONE: Special Topic Essays – If one of the topics you would like to write about is not listed below, then you can formulate your own topic as the subject of your essay. It is necessary to confirm this topic with the Lecturer (R. Wicks).

To establish the parameters of this essay, please schedule an appointment to speak with me [Assoc. Prof. Wicks] during my office hours or during another time (ext. 88449), if my office hours (see above) are inconvenient. 

If might be useful to do some research in the library before speaking with me, and have a few essay alternatives semi-formulated before we speak, but it is fine if you do not go to the library before talking to me about your essay topic.


OPTION TWO: Assigned Essay Topics/Questions – Please write an essay on any one of the following topics. 

There are many topics listed below, not all of which will be discussed in class. If you are interested in some of the topics below and would like some extra help in finding relevant materials, please do not hesitate to stop by the lecturer’s office (Humanities Building, Level 4, Room 439) during office hours.

  1. A Critical examination of Schopenhauer’s Critique of Kant’s Theory of Knowledge

  2. A Critical examination of Schopenhauer’s Critique of Kant’s Moral Theory

  3. A Critical Examination of Schopenhauer’s Theory of the Beautiful

  4. A Critical Examination of Schopenhauer’s Theory of the Sublime

  5. A Critical Examination of the role of Compassion in Schopenhauer’s Moral Theory

  6. A Critical Examination of Schopenhauer’s Arguments that the World is “Will”

  7. A Critical Examination of Schopenhauer’s Relationship to Buddhism (or alternatively, to Hinduism, or some other religion)

  8. A Critical Examination of Schopenhauer’s Critique of Hegel

  9. A Critical Examination of Schopenhauer’s idea of the “denial of the will” (i.e., asceticism)

  10. A Critical Examination of Schopenhauer Critique of Optimism

  11. A Critical Examination of Schopenhauer’s Theory of Music

  12. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s Doctrine of Eternal Recurrence

  13. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s Idea of saying “Yes” to Life

  14. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s conception of the Superhuman (the Übermensch)

  15. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s idea of living “beyond good and evil”

  16. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s idea of the “will to power”

  17. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche and Nazism

  18. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s idea of the “Death of God”

  19. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s relationship to German Romanticism

  20. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s critique of Christianity

  21. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s conception of ancient Greece

  22. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s Theory of tragedy

  23. A Critical Examination of Richard Wagner’s Influence upon Nietzsche

  24. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s Political Views

  25. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s Distinction Between “Master Morality” vs. “Slave Morality”

  26. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s Critique of Utilitarianism

  27. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s views on the Value of Pain

  28. A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s Concept of “Perspectivism”

A Critical Examination of Nietzsche’s concept of “Genealogy" 


Useful information: A listing of most philosophical articles and books published since the 1940’s can be found in The Philosopher’s Index (see above). In the electronic database, one can type in a word, or set of words (subject, title, etc.), and all of the articles containing those words will then be listed on the screen.

Note: Some of the above essay questions may be very similar to ones that will appear on the final exam. Please choose your coursework essay question knowing that the exam will not allow substantial duplication from the essay assignment onto the exam. If a question very similar to your coursework essay appears on the final exam, the best course of action will be to write on a different question.

The final exam will have the following directives:

– When answering the exam questions, you may use material from your coursework essays on the condition that the essay contents are not used to answer an exam question(s) in its entirety. Every exam question answered should, in a significant and obvious way, have content that is not to be found substantially in your coursework essay.

– The phrase “critically discuss” appears on every question below. This phrase means that in addition to describing the philosophical position under consideration, you must also consider whether or not it makes good sense, and include these reflections in your answer.

– Please try not to duplicate, in any substantial way, material from one exam question in your answer on another question.

 

Common Pitfalls in Essay Composition:


Lack of Critical Discussion. Providing a purely expository account of a certain position or argument, without offering any critical discussion, is only the first step. If one were to end the essay here, then there would be a possibly excellent exposition of a philosophical position, but with one flaw: one would have left out the essential evaluative question of why anyone should or should not accept the view. Since the aim of the essay, ultimately, is to determine whether or not the view under consideration is seriously believable on rational grounds, a significant portion of the essay (at least 25%-30%) should be evaluative, critical discussion.


Dogmatism. One can disagree strongly with some position or argument, but to assert simply an opposing view without offering any substantial supporting reasons can undermine one’s philosophical credibility and weaken one’s essay dramatically. This situation can easily arise when one believes that the opposing view is so obvious or self-evident, that there is no need to defend one’s assertion. (i.e., It once might have been common to assert: “It is obvious to any clearly-thinking person that the earth is flat, that the sun revolves around the earth, and that the earth stands still.”) Given situations like this, where what appears to be obvious and true turns out to be false, it is essential to explain carefully, as clearly as one can, why one disagrees with some position or argument, even though the position might seem to be obviously implausible and incredible. Many well-argued philosophical views run contrary to “common sense,” often because many “common sense” views are inconsistent, so it is important to attend to the reasons that support one’s particular viewpoint.

It is probably worthwhile to check periodically within one’s writing, to see whether emotional and rhetorical expressions are tending to prevail over reasonable and logical ones. When this occurs, there is a chance that a properly coherent line of reasoning is absent, since the presence of strong emotions can lead a person to jump to conclusions or argue inconsistently.

 
Disorganization or Lack of Focus. This arises when the various segments of the essay do not yield a clear and specific conclusion or position. Often the essay moves from one point to another, without integrating the individual points or observations towards a logical end. Sometimes this happens because the writer is not sure which side of the issue is the more reasonable one.

To remain organized and focused in one’s essay, however, it is not always necessary to defend some particular view as opposed to another, as if one were engaged in a courtroom debate, committed to defending one’s client. It is also possible to achieve clarity by setting out the opposing views, the specific reasons in support of each view, and to conclude reasonably that although neither view is fully convincing, both views are plausible for different reasons.

Most philosophical questions are complicated and multidimensional, and sometimes the best one can do is set forth the complexities of the situation without arriving at some definitive, final answer. A rationally-balanced and insightful perspective does not always yield an “end-of-discussion” philosophical solution. Many philosophical issues have been under discussion for thousands of years, so the debate is most likely going to remain open.

 
Excessive use of Jargon. Some philosophers – as do Kant and Hegel – create their own vocabulary, or use familiar words in an unfamiliar or strange way. This is often because they are struggling to express an alternative view of the world that conflicts with our ordinary ways of understanding things. Although such non-standard language may sometimes be unavoidable within a philosophical discussion, it is often possible to express the views under consideration without too much reliance upon technical vocabulary. Whenever possible, it is advisable to formulate the arguments and views at hand in language which is straightforward, unambiguous, precise and familiar.


SUMMARY:

(1) Be sure to include a critical discussion of the topic 
(2) Give each side of the question a sympathetic hearing 
(3) Keep things well-organized; know where the essay is going 
(4) Avoid jargon; speak simply and straightforwardly

 

Detailed Guidelines for Essay Composition

Learning how to write well (e.g., logically, clearly, grammatically, imaginatively, originally, with intellectual sophistication and polish) is an important part of one’s university education.

Aside from the required parts immediately below, please try to embody the spirit of the following guidelines. The central requirement is that the essay is presented in a polished form, rather than in an obviously last-minute, shoddy and careless form. However this polished form is achieved is basically up to you.

An essay whose compositional presentation is profoundly unrefined (e.g., with numerous spelling and grammatical errors) renders it virtually impossible for the instructor to assign a mark in the A-range. Such problems, however, can be resolved with probably only an hour’s extra work on the essay’s formal presentation, after its “content” has been articulated to one’s satisfaction.
…………………………………………..


Required: 

  1. Double spaced

  2. Pages Numbered, at bottom of page, preferably

  3. Word-count on cover page, along with your Name and Title of the essay

  4. Please Spell-check your essays

  5. Please include a Bibliography at end of essay

  6. Please Proofread your essays before submission; if there is an uncertainty about proper grammatical forms, etc., it is often helpful to ask a linguistically-able friend to proofread your essay as well.

  7. Please include the complete addresses of any Internet sources used. If any Internet source cited cannot be traced by the examiner, then the author may then be called upon to explain the source of the texts cited, etc. Please be careful and exact in the citations of Internet sources.



Suggested: 

Typewritten, if possible (but not required)

If the essay is handwritten, then it must be handwritten in a way that is clear and readable. 


Punctuation/Grammar Recall:

(Please review these points carefully at some point immediately before writing your essay; it will take some extra time, but it will be worth it)

  1. Within a sentence, a comma (or more rarely, a colon, as below) introduces quotations; quotations within quotations are single-quoted; periods fall within, rather than outside of, the quotation mark at the end of the sentence:

    Nietzsche, in Beyond Good and Evil, said the following about Kant: “Kant was first and foremost proud of his table of categories; with that in his hand he said: ‘This is the most difficult thing that could ever be undertaken on behalf of metaphysics.’”

    In response to the Nietzsche passage, the reader murmured, “I don’t recall that Kant ever said that.”
     

  2. Longer quotes (more than three or four lines, as a rule) are indented. In this situation, quotation marks are not used; the indentation and separation from the main body of the text indicate the quotation:

 
Kant writes:

The beautiful in nature is connected with the form of the object, which consists in having [definite] boundaries. The sublime, on the other hand, is to be found in a formless object, so far in it or by occasion of it boundlessness is represented, and yet its totality is also present to thought. Thus the beautiful seems to be regarded as the presentation of an indefinite concept of understanding, the sublime as that of a like concept of reason.

[note that no quotation marks have been used in the above]

  1. Comma-splices are ungrammatical. A “comma-splice” is the misuse of a comma to separate full sentences. (e.g., "Georg wrote ungrammatically, he used comma-splices.") In the immediately preceding example, there should have been a period used instead of a comma, if the structure were to have presented itself as being properly grammatical. It should have read: “Georg wrote ungrammatically. He used comma-splices.”

 
If the two sentences are closely related in meaning, then a semi-colon can be used to connect them. (e.g., "Friedrich understood grammar well; he used semi-colons where appropriate.")
 

Usage/Grammar/Style:

  1. [“Its” vs. “It’s”]

As a general rule, it is best to avoid contractions and colloquial speech in academic writing, unless there is a specific rhetorical reason for this.

The word "it's" is a contraction of "it is," and does not designate a possessive pronoun. If one avoids using the word "it's" altogether, the problem of the misusage of "it's" will be automatically solved.

Try to avoid using the word “it’s” in your essays, unless you understand exactly how this word is properly used.

 

  1. Sentence fragments are ungrammatical. These are pieces of grammatically-correct sentences which are incorrectly set out as full sentences in their own right.

    (e.g., "The concepts of the sublime and beautiful from the theory." [no verb]; or "After thinking about it." [no subject])

  1. Run-on sentences are ungrammatical. These are two or more full sentences which are strung together into a single sentence. (e.g., "Kant lived in Königsberg he knew Herder.”) There should be either a period or a semi-colon after the word “Königsberg” in the previous sentence, if the structure is to be properly grammatical.
     

  1. [“And” and “But”]

Whenever possible, it is usually in better style to avoid beginning sentences with conjunctions such as "and" and "but."

  1. [“however”]

As a rule, the word, "however," is used in the most stylistically effective way, when it is placed in the middle of a sentence (as opposed to being placed at the beginning of a sentence).

  1. [splitting infinitives]

(This is a less pressing guideline, since the authorities at the Oxford English Dictionary have dictated that splitting infinitives is not ungrammatical.) Unless the result of splitting an infinitive is very awkward, it usually sounds more grammatically sophisticated when the infinitive is not split.


One would prefer: "To understand clearly Kant’s view . . ."

in contrast to: "To clearly understand Kant’s view. . ."

In the first example above, the infinitive-form of the verb "to understand" is kept intact.

 

General Conventions: 

  1. When mentioning an author for the first time within the body of the manuscript, both first and last names are stated. Afterwards, only the last name is used. All names should be spelled correctly.

    Sometimes it is appropriate to include the birth and death dates of the author in question.

     

  1. When a person who has already been referred to in the essay is mentioned within the first sentence of a later paragraph, then the last name is spelled out, as opposed to using the words, "she" or "he."

 

  1. Names of books, such as Critique of Judgment, and all foreign words, such as “Urteilskraft” (the power of judgment), are italicized or underlined.

 

  1. Journal titles, such as The Journal of the History of Philosophy, are italicized, similar to book titles. Individual journal articles, such as "Schelling’s Conception of the Unconscious," are cited in double-quotation marks ("   ") within the body of an essay.

 

  1. All German nouns are capitalized (and italicized, as foreign words); German adjectives are not capitalized (but are italicized, as foreign words). Note that the accent marks on French words can vary in angle: e.g., either, "è" or "é".

 

Bibliography and Endnotes/Footnotes: (these reference styles vary; whichever one you decide to use, please use it consistently and precisely

A typical bibliography entry: [author's last name goes first] 

Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Judgment, trans. J. H. Bernard. New York: Hafner Press, 1951.

A typical endnote/footnote entry: [author's first name goes first; publisher goes in parentheses; articles go in quotation marks, followed by the book in which the article is contained] 

Immanuel Kant. Critique of Judgment, trans. J. H. Bernard. (New York: Hafner Press, 1951), p. 23.

INTERNET BIBLIOGRAPHIC ENTRIES: These MUST contain the FULL Internet address, and not a partial address. The address cited must allow the reader to locate the web entry in question directly, quickly, without any misdirection, and without the need of any extended search of the website in question.

 

Final Procedures:

  1. As the very last thing that you do before printing the final version of the manuscript, run the spell-check for a last time. This will eliminate any typing errors (if any) that occurred during the rewriting/editing process.

 

  1. Scan the printed document to make sure that the printer has printed the essay correctly. (For example, section headings are sometimes left hanging alone at the bottom of a page, due to new spacing arrangements which have occurred in other parts of the manuscript.)

 

  1. PLEASE KEEP A COPY of your completed essay, and have this on hand in case the submitted copy gets lost. If you submit an essay, and it is ends up missing for some reason, then you will need to have a copy on hand to resubmit immediately.

 

Suggestion: Computer screens can be deceiving. Proofreading of your essays is best done on the hard copy, and not on the computer screen alone. What looks good and reads well on the computer screen does not usually look as good or read as well in non-electronic reality. Since your essays will be evaluated in the printed version, and not in the electronic version, it is a good idea to work primarily with the hard copy during the final stages of composition.


Suggestion: S T A R T   E A R L Y in your essay-writing, so that there is time to rewrite, reformulate, and render more precise the original draft.

…………………
…………………


Please Note:   

What now follows refers to some of the conditions when a person can receive a zero for a coursework essay, and be very likely to fail the course as a consequence. (This does not happen often, but it can happen.)


(1) On essay topics not approved:

Essays submitted on non-pre-assigned topics that have not been explicitly approved by the Lecturer (R. Wicks) will not be accepted. Essays of this kind will receive a zero. This is to avoid plagiarism situations, mainly.


(2) On plagiarism:   [Lecturer’s Statement] 

Plagiarism is dishonest. It is an offense to one’s better self. It is a form of theft. It is a mistake to plagiarize.

Provably plagiarized essays will receive at least a zero, and if the case is demonstrably outrageous, the plagiarizer is likely to be called to answer officially to charges of academic misconduct.

From the university’s administrative standpoint, plagiarism constitutes an examination violation (i.e., it is equal to being caught cheating on an exam) and the clear cases are referred to the Senate to determine whether the complaint should be investigated further. If the Senate determines that an investigation is warranted, then the student will be referred to the Discipline Committee. (See the relevant sections of the 2016 Calendar.)

The best course is consequently to avoid plagiarism, even if one is finding oneself in a desperate situation at the end of the semester, as sometimes happens. Speak to the instructor instead if there are personal problems, etc., because usually something can be worked out. This is a better option than finding oneself before a university discipline committee for, in a condition of desperation, having lost one’s perspective and sense of positive self, especially when one is a basically honest person to begin with.

 

 

 

Course summary:

Date Details Due