Philosophy_13_14 Phi.. - Trinity College Dublin

Philosophy at Trinity College Dublin

2013–2014

TR014

PHILOSOPHY & POLITICAL SCIENCE

In the event of any conflict or inconsistency between the General Regulations published in the University Calendar and information contained in this handbook, the provisions of the General Regulations will prevail. The University Calendar is located here: http://www.tcd.ie/calendar/part1/

http://www.tcd.ie/calendar/part1/

2

Contents The History of the Department of Philosophy ......................................... 3

The Department’s Who’s Who ................................................................ 5

Undergraduate Studies in Philosophy at Trinity ..................................... 8

TR014 – Philosophy and Political Science ........................................... 11

Course Outlines .................................................................................... 12

Junior Sophisters .............................................................................. 12

Senior Sophisters ............................................................................. 23

Examination and Assessment .............................................................. 35

Junior Sophister ............................................................................... 36

Senior Sophister ............................................................................... 38

Tutorials and Departmental Teaching Assistants ................................. 44

Guidelines on Grades ........................................................................... 46

Note on Writing Essays ........................................................................ 54

Plagiarism ............................................................................................. 57

Conveners ............................................................................................ 59

College Tutors ...................................................................................... 60

Peer Mentoring ..................................................................................... 61

The Library ........................................................................................... 62

Prizes in Philosophy ............................................................................. 65

Computers ............................................................................................ 70

The Metaphysical Society ..................................................................... 73

Student Health Service ......................................................................... 75

Careers Advisory Service ..................................................................... 76

3

The History of the Department of Philosophy

The Department of Philosophy is one of four constituent departments of

the School of Social Sciences and Philosophy. The Chair of Moral

Philosophy was established in 1837, the (former) School of Mental and

Moral Science in 1904 and the Department of Philosophy in 1964, but

philosophy has been an important part of the Trinity College curriculum

since its foundation in 1592. Undoubtedly the College’s most significant

contribution to philosophy to date has come from George Berkeley

(1685 – 1753) who has a permanent place in any list of the great

philosophers. Most of his more famous works, such as, An Essay

Towards a New Theory of Vision (1709) and A Treatise Concerning the

Principles of Human Knowledge (1710) were written during his time as a

fellow of Trinity College Dublin. After Berkeley, the most significant

philosopher to come out of Trinity was the political philosopher, Edmund

Burke (1729 – 1797), who, while a student at Trinity, inaugurated a

debating society that, after merging with the Historical Club, became the

College Historical Society, the oldest undergraduate society in the

world. His most famous work is Reflections on the Revolution in

France (1790) and among his other texts is an influential book on

aesthetics A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of the

Sublime and Beautiful was written while Burke was reading for his B.A.

degree at Trinity.

In the 19th and 20th centuries the major influences on Trinity philosophy

were Platonism, German Idealism and Berkeley. These themes were

http://www.tcd.ie/ssp

4

propagated by a number of influential scholars who occupied the Chair

of Moral Philosophy during this period. Some of the more eminent

philosophers to hold the position were the noted Hegelian Henry S.

Macran and the great scholar of Berkeley and his philosophy, A. A.

Luce. In recent years the department has continued to maintain strong

interests in these areas, but has also broadened out to incorporate

contemporary analytic philosophy, continental philosophy,

psychoanalysis and a range of specialised interests in the history of

philosophy. In the current academic year we are seven full-time

members, supplemented by a number of associate and adjunct faculty

and graduate teaching assistants.

5

The Department’s Who’s Who Office hours will be posted on each staff member’s door, as well as on

the Department notice board, at the beginning of each term. In an

emergency, a student may seek an interview with any member of the

department by making an appointment through the Executive Officer,

Ms. Una Campbell.

Assistant Professor Lilian Alweiss holds a BA honours in psychology

and sociology from the University of Durham, a Diplôme d’Études

Approfondies from the University of Strasbourg and an MA and PhD in

philosophy from the University of Essex. Her research interests include

post-Kantian philosophy in particular transcendental idealism and

phenomenology. She is author of The World Unclaimed (2003) and has

published numerous articles, mainly in the field of phenomenology. Her

current research focuses on the problems of perception, self-reference

and self- knowledge. Her office is room no. 5007.

Professor David Berman obtained a BA at the New School for Social

Research in New York, an MA from the University of Denver, Colorado,

and a PhD from Trinity College. His main research interests are in

psychological philosophy. His publications include A History of Atheism

in Britain (1988), George Berkeley: Idealism and the Man (1994),

Berkeley: Experimental Philosophy (1997), Berkeley and Irish

Philosophy (2005) and the Everyman edition of Schopenhauer’s The

World as Will and Idea (1995). He is also interested in the history of

ideas, philosophy of religion, psychoanalysis and Irish philosophy. His

office is room no. 5005.

6

Ms Una Campbell is the Executive Officer for the Department of

Philosophy. Her office is the departmental office, room no. 5009, and

her office hours are on a notice on the door of the department office.

Assistant Professor Antti Kauppinen joined the department in

September 2010. He received his PhD from the University of Helsinki in

2008. From 2007 to 2009 he was a Teaching Fellow at the University of

St. Andrews and from 2008 also a Postdoctoral Researcher at the

University of Amsterdam. His research interests in ethics and political

philosophy include philosophical moral psychology, metaethics, well-

being, and the foundations of human rights. His publications include

‘Meaningfulness and Time’ (Philosophy and Phenomenological

Research, forthcoming), ‘What Makes a Sentiment Moral?’ (Oxford

Studies in Metaethics, 2010), and ‘The Rise and Fall of Experimental

Philosophy’ (Philosophical Explorations, 2007). He is currently working

on a monograph on sentimentalism in moral psychology.

Associate Professor James Levine has been in the Department since

1991 and was Head of Department from 2002–2006. He was an

undergraduate at Harvard, and a postgraduate student at the University

of California at Berkeley. His areas of research interest are Philosophy

of Language, Philosophical Logic, Epistemology, and especially the

History of Analytic Philosophy. He has recently published articles on

Bradley, Russell, Wittgenstein and Frege. His office is room no. 5004.

Assistant Professor Paul O’Grady has been in the department since

1997. He did his BA and MA at UCD, and received his Ph.D. from

Trinity in 1996 on the philosophies of Carnap and Quine. He was a

7

lecturer and tutor at St Catherine’s College, Oxford, 1996-97. His

interests include Epistemology and Philosophy of Religion and he has

published papers in both areas. He is the author of Relativism (2002),

Philosophical Theology (2008) and the editor of The Consolations of

Philosophy: Reflections in an Economic Downturn (2011). His office is

room no. 5017.

Associate Professor Vasilis Politis has been in the department since

1992 and is Head of Department since July 2012. He obtained his

education (B.A., B.Phil., and D. Phil.) in Oxford. His areas of research

interest are, especially, Ancient Philosophy, with special emphasis on

Plato and Aristotle. He also has an interest in Metaphysics, Ethics, Kant,

and Wittgenstein. Besides many articles on ancient philosophy, he has

published the Everyman Edition to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, The

Routledge guidebook to Aristotle’s Metaphysics, and an edition and

translation of Paul Natorp’s Plato’s Theory of Ideas. His office is room

no. 5006.

Professor Peter Simons joined the Department in 2009 and is Head

of School since July 2012. He studied Mathematics and Philosophy at

Manchester, before teaching at Bolton, Salzburg (Austria) and Leeds.

His research interests include metaphysics and ontology, philosophy of

language and logic, philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of

engineering, and the history of Central European and early analytic

philosophy, particularly in Austria and Poland. He is the author of Parts

(1987), Philosophy and Logic in Central Europe from Bolzano to Tarski

(1992) and over 200 articles. He is a Fellow of the British Academy and

a Member of the Academia Europaea. His current research centres on

topics in pure and applied metaphysics. His office is room no. 5008.

8

Undergraduate Studies in Philosophy at Trinity

Trinity's undergraduate programme is unique in taking four years, not

the usual three. This means that students have two whole years to find

their way and make themselves at home in their subject and university

life, before, in their final two years, things become serious and every

mark counts toward the final degree.

This structure is well suited to the study of philosophy. In their

first two years, students are introduced to a wide variety of philosophers

and topics through lectures and tutorials that are obligatory; whereas in

the third year each staff member concentrates on his or her specialised

area in relatively smaller seminars that students select. The final year is

made up of, first, a number of small work–in–progress seminars whose

teaching–and–learning is distinguished by a high level of student

participation and the openness to experimentation; and, second, the

writing of a dissertation in which students have the opportunity to work

closely and over a longer period with a supervisor of their choice on a

topic of their choice.

Our approach to the subject, in the Department of Philosophy,

stands out above all by its openness to a variety of approaches – for it is

a fact that philosophers argue, and disagree greatly, even about the

nature and content of their own subject. We teach both Analytic and

Continental Philosophy (and some of us deny the distinction), as well as

Ancient Philosophy. While we try to be on top of the latest

developments, and to contribute to them, we recognise that philosophy

has a long history, the study of which is itself philosophical and an

9

important part of the training; thus about half of the courses are

historical in emphasis.

We try to link together, as closely as possible, teaching and

research. All of us, most of the time, teach in the areas in which we do

our research and publish our publications; and this principle – that

teaching and scholarship go together – shapes the structure of our

programme.

Our teaching is delivered by three categories of staff, who try to

work together as closely as possible and to form a single, coherent

teaching body. First, the permanent staff, who are in charge of the

lectures and of putting together the programme. Secondly, a good

number of young Adjunct Lecturers, likewise in charge of lectures;

typically they will have recently finished their Ph.D. and be in the

process of finding a more permanent position. And third, a good number

of Teaching Assistants, who are in charge of the Tutorials that serve as

supplement to the Lectures and are an important part of the learning

process; generally they will be graduate students busily working on their

Ph.D.s.

How about the 'student experience'? Lectures, tutorials,

seminars, thesis supervision, not to mention long hours in the library …

these are only one part of the life of the Department. The other part is

the body–and–soul that the students bring to the whole thing: the

regular meetings of the student society, the Metaphysical Society

(popularly known as 'The Metafizz', their facebook page can be found

here), notorious also for their convivial side; the reading groups that

kindred students spontaneously organise; the countless discussions

with each other; the parties …

Why, then, study Philosophy? As Plato says somewhere, sight

is desirable both for its own sake and for its consequences: by training

http://metafizz.csc.tcdlife.ie/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/metafizz/

10

our eyes to see clearly and distinctly, we become better at navigating

the world and negotiating its obstacles; but we also become better at

distinguishing and appreciating things that are worth contemplating and

engage in an activity that is enjoyable in itself. At its best, the same can

be said of the study of Philosophy. Through the training in Philosophy,

we gain skills that are greatly useful in all areas of life, both professional

and private: to raise questions about things generally thought to be

obvious and unquestionable; to articulate our thoughts with clarity and

precision; to argue for our beliefs; to detect hidden assumptions in our

beliefs and those of others, and to be able to question them; to argue

against others, or indeed ourselves; to recognise nonsense for what it

is; to analyse our thoughts and the concepts we use in them; to

recognise confusions in our own thinking and that of others; etc.

However, all going well, this also helps us to recognise, articulate, and

become gripped by problems that are of real interest and significance in

their own right – basic philosophical problems – and this is an ability

that, though of course it too is useful, may affect radically who we are

and what we come to be.

11

TR014 – Philosophy and Political Science

(Phil. Pol. for short)

In the first two years, called Junior Freshman (JF) and Senior Freshman

(SF), students study foundational courses in the history of philosophy,

as well as engaging with certain fundamental philosophical problems;

for example, the debates about free will and determinism, the nature of

morality, the nature of language, the existence of God and the scope

and limits of human knowledge. In the final two years, called Junior

Sophister (JS) and Senior Sophister (SS), students are able to select

courses from a reasonably wide choice. In this way, students can

specialise in the areas of philosophy that they have found most

interesting and most suitable to their skills. Students take 8 course

components in the SF (second) year, and in the JS (third) year choose 3

courses to take. In SS (fourth) year, students choosing to major in

Philosophy will choose 6 courses to take, while those that choose to

study both subjects equally have a choice between taking 4 courses or

taking 2 courses and writing a thesis.

12

Course Outlines

Junior Sophisters 1st Semester/Michaelmas Term Title: PI3002 Political Philosophy (10 ECTS credits) Lecturer(s): Dr. Alice Walla

Contact Hours: Lectures: 22 lecture hours

Module Content/Outline:

Is there a right to private property? Is the notion of private property

compatible with political values such as liberty, equality and social

justice? Do states have property rights to their territories and natural

resources? This course will focus on influential theories of property,

from Ancient philosophy to contemporary approaches, as well

philosophical issues concerning the notion of property and ownership.

Learning Outcomes:

At the end of this course students will be able to:

• Understand influential theories of property in the history of political

philosophy and in the contemporary debate.

• Engage critically with the theories and assess their strengths and

weaknesses. Recommended Texts/Key Reading:

As advised/circulated by lecturers during their lecture series

Assessment and Examination:

Assessment: Essays x 2 — 50%

Examination: 1 x 3 hour examination — 50%

13

Title: PI3007 Moral Philosophy (10 ECTS/5 ECTS credits for each component) Michaelmas Term/1st Semester/ Dr. Alice Pinheiro Walla

Hilary Term/2nd Semester/Prof. Antti Kauppinen Michaelmas Term/1st Semester/ Dr. Alice Pinheiro Walla

Lecturer(s): Dr. Alice Pinheiro Walla


Module Content/Outline: What makes an action right or wrong? Are there any moral truths? The

course will cover the major positions in normative theory and

metaethics. We shall discuss moral issues from a philosophical

perspective and inquiry about the “nature” of morality and moral

demands.

Learning Outcomes:


• understand representative theories in the domain of meta-ethics

and normative ethics;

• critically analyse the theories presented in class

• evaluate and offer their own views on applied issues in ethics

Recommended Texts/Key Reading:



Assessment: Essay x 1 (in each term) — 50%


Title: PI3008 Philosophy of Religion (10 ECTS credits)

Lecturer(s): Prof. Paul O’Grady


14


This course develops the introductory material on philosophy of religion

from the freshman years. Its focus is the philosophy of religion of

Aquinas. He is treated as an exemplar of classical theism whose

approach is amenable to analytical philosophical analysis. Topics

include whether he is classifiable as a philosopher of religion, his

account of faith and reason, his positive arguments for God’s existence,

the problem of evil, the problem of naturalism, perfect-being theology,

God’s nature, including simplicity, existence, eternity, omnipotence,

omniscience and omnibenevolence. In the process Aquinas’s work is

brought into engagement with Kant, Hume, Darwin, Wittgenstein, Quine,

Russell and a range of contemporary philosophers of religion.

Learning Outcomes:


• Describe and evaluate the distinction between theistic and

nontheistic religion

• Assess the significance of the existence of many religions • Critically discuss theism and its relationship to modern science Recommended Texts/Key Reading: As advised/circulated by lecturers during their lecture series




Title: PI3009 Logic and Philosophy

(10 ECTS credits)

Lecturer(s): Prof. James Levine



15

Topics addressed include: Aristotelian logic and its differences with

contemporary logic and modal logic—the logic of necessity, possibility,

and impossibility. One central theme will be how issues concerning

existence and non–existence arise and how they are addressed.

Throughout, we will attempt to consider both technical and philosophical

aspects of the topics covered.

Learning Outcomes:


• distinguish technical and philosophical issues arising in logic

• understand the syntax and semantics of various systems of logic

• critically evaluate the extent to which logic is relevant for

addressing philosophical issues






2nd Semester/Hilary Term Title: PI3003 Topics in Ancient Philosophy

(10 ECTS credits)

Lecturer(s): Prof. Vasilis Politis


Module Content/Outline: Plato and Aristotle: Epistemology and Metaphysics There is much to the epistemology and metaphysics of Plato and

Aristotle. We shall concentrate on three great works.

16

1. Plato’s Theaetetus. Socrates asks ‘What is knowledge?’, and the

young mathematician Theaetetus proposes that knowledge is sense-

perception. This proposal is then subjected to extended examination, in

the course of which the thesis that knowledge is perception is

associated with relativism and subjectivism. The thesis is ultimately

rejected on two grounds: it makes rational discourse impossible; and it

misses the crucial point about knowledge, namely, that it grasps being.

The proposal that knowledge is sense-perception, and Plato’s

arguments against it, are as interesting and important today as when

this masterpiece came out.

2. Plato’s Timaeus. There is much in this dialogue, but we shall

concentrate on Plato’s cosmology and physics, that is, his science of

the physical (spatio-temporal) universe – his science of nature. Plato’s

science of nature is shot through with metaphysics; in this regard it

resembles the more speculative side of current physics. Plato argues,

among other things, that nature is an image of super-sensible essences,

and that this is the only way to explain the orderliness and intelligibility

of nature; and that these essences can be operative in nature, and so

provide a foundation for its orderliness, only if we suppose that nature is

not only intelligible (i.e. subject to explanation), but intelligent – it is a

huge embodied mind.

3. Aristotle’s Metaphysics.

A. In the third book of the Metaphysics Aristotle argues that the starting-

point of primary philosophy cannot be anything else but: basic

philosophical problems, or aporiai. And he goes on two articulate some

fifteen such aporiai. We shall consider this method of philosophy, and

some of the aporiai – which are not only questions in metaphysics, but

questions about the very nature and possibility of metaphysics.

B. One such question is whether primary philosophy is to be identified

17

with logic (i.e. the science of the principles of reasoning) or ontology (i.e.

the science of being). We know that Aristotle will defend the latter view,

but how does he do so and what does he think is wrong with thinking

that logic is the basis of philosophy and indeed of all science?

C. Finally, what exactly is ontology for Aristotle? Why does he think

there is a science of being, over and above the various specialized

sciences which treat of some kind of being or other: mathematics of

countable and measurable beings; physics of moving beings; biology of

living beings, etc. How can there be anything more to study about being,

or what there is? Aristotle owes us an answer, if we are not to end up

with Quine and the view that metaphysics and the question ‘What is

there?’ is adequately and fully dealt with by the specialized sciences.

Learning Outcomes:


• Describe and assess key concepts and methods of Plato and

Aristotle

• Outline their principal metaphysical doctrines

• Critically discuss the role of aporia in ancient metaphysics

Recommended Texts/Key Reading: As advised/circulated by lecturers during their lecture series




Title: PI3006 Topics in Analytic Philosophy (10 ECTS credits)

Lecturer(s): Prof. Peter Simons


Module Content/Outline: The focus on this course will be on problems about language, thought

18

and the world, as framed and grappled with by philosophers working in

the analytic tradition, including Bolzano, Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein,

Carnap, Tarski, Quine, Davidson, Kripke and Lewis. Specifically we

shall examine the theories of and interconnections between the notions

of meaning, truth, and modality.

Learning Outcomes:


• Describe and critically evaluate the principal analytic theories of

meaning, truth and modality

• Assess the contributions to modern philosophy of the major

analytic philosophers discussed

• Articulate the distinguishing characteristics of analytic philosophy Recommended Texts/Key Reading:





Title: PI3007 Moral Philosophy (10 ECTS/5 ECTS credits for each component) continued from Michaelmas Term/1st Semester

Lecturer(s): Prof. Antti Kauppinen

Contact Hours: Lectures: 11 lectures in each semester.

Module Content/Outline: On this course, we examine contemporary moral issues from a

philosophical perspective. We begin with a quick look at the theoretical

foundations of ethics, and then move to concrete issues to do with life-

and-death decisions, personal life, and business.

Learning Outcomes:


19

• Understand the main theories in normative ethics and metaethics

• Critically assess arguments for influential moral principles

• Discuss contemporary ethical issues from a philosophical

perspective



Assessment: Essay x 1 (in each term) 50%

Examination: 1 x 3 hour examination 50%

Title: PI3013 Topics in Continental Philosophy (10 ECTS credits)

Lecturer(s): Prof. Lilian Alweiss



This course focuses on the nature of perception by drawing on the

writings of Husserl. The aim is to show that the traditional (Cartesian)

model of perception is out of tune with the way we actually perceive the

world. The course will explore the extent to which phenomenology

provides a different account of the nature of perceptual consciousness

which has a bearing on how we understand our relation to the world and

our knowledge of the world around us.

Learning Outcomes:


• To give students an understanding of the core aspects Husserl’s

phenomenology.

• To encourage students to think about the role of perception in

cognition

• To provide students with an understanding of crucial but difficult

primary texts in the history of philosophy

20

• To demonstrate the nature of key interpretive controversies relating

to Husserl’s phenomenology, such as the problem of

consciousness, embodiment, psychologism and scepticism

• To enable students to understand Husserl’s thought in relation to

contemporary philosophical problems.






Title: PI3016 Philosophy of Fiction (10 ECTS credits)

Lecturer(s): Paal Antonsen


Module Content/Outline: Reflecting on our ordinary practice of engaging with fictions quickly

leads us into conundrums. In this course we will tackle three issues that

emerge, drawing on examples from literature, comics, video games,

movies, and theatre plays. Here are the main questions we will pursue:

Part I Semantics “Kaidan is on Mars,” Clara says to her little brother. Of course, Kaidan

isn’t actually. In fact, he is nowhere in the whole Universe, Mars or

otherwise. Kaidan is a fictional character from the video game series

Mass Effect. But, given that Clara made her utterance in a discourse

about that fiction, she may intuitively have said something true. Can we

make sense of the idea that sentences can be true because of how

things are with respect to some fiction? How should we provide the

semantics for sentences uttered in fiction discourse?

Part II Emotions.

21

Legend has it that Aeschylus’s tragedies were so horrific that women in

the audience would spontaneously miscarry. It is doubtful that this has

happened to you, but fictions do affect our emotions. We are frightened

by the murderer hiding in the dark; we cry when our favourite characters

suffer hardships; we rejoice when things go their way. Thousands,

maybe millions, have crushes on various fictional characters from films

and videogames – many of them even have their own fan clubs. How

can fictions move us to tears, frighten us, or make us happy, when we

know that the events occurring in the fiction didn’t actually happen?

Since none of this is real, why on Earth do we care what happens with

fictional characters?

Part III Epistemology

In an interview Noam Chomsky speculated that maybe the sciences will

never develop to the point that we can learn more about human

psychology from them than from literature. It’s obvious enough that

fictions can affect us emotionally, but how can we learn anything from

them? How can fictions be a source, or transmitter, or knowledge? If

they can at all, it’s not straightforward. We don’t acquire any knowledge

by reading that a young boy named Pip was born of a smith, helped a

fugitive, and in the end melted the heart of a girl bent on humiliating

male suitors. None of that happened, so trivially we cannot know that it

happened. What kind of knowledge, then, could we possibly gain by

reading Dickens’ Great Expectations? Learning Outcomes:


• Provide different analyses of the semantics of sentences uttered in

discussions about fictions.

• Assess the philosophical significance of the psychological literature

on fiction.

22

• Being able to discuss fictions from a philosophical point of view, in

particular the epistemological and metaphysical status of fictions.





23

Senior Sophisters

1st Semester/Michaelmas Term

Title: PI4028 Philosophy of Language (5 ECTS credits) Lecturer(s): Prof. James Levine


Module Content/Outline: Throughout the history of philosophy, the charge has often been made

that a given position is “self-refuting” or that it cannot be coherently

thought or stated. Such a criticism is often made, for example, against

certain forms of relativism; but it is also made by Berkeley against the

“realism” he opposes, as well as by critics of Kant, who claim it is “self-

refuting” for him to hold that we can know nothing about things “as they

are in themselves”. The purpose of this seminar is to examine such

“self-refutation” arguments—in particular, to consider if they have a

common structure and to examine what, if anything, they establish. To

do so, we will look at a number of sources, including recent writings of

such philosophers as Donald Davidson (“On the Very Idea of a

Conceptual Scheme”), Thomas Nagel (The View from Nowhere. The

Last Word), Paul Boghossian (Fear of Knowledge), Barry Stroud

(Engagement and Metaphysical Dissatisfaction) and Graham Priest

(Beyond the Limits of Thought) as well as earlier writings from

Parmenides, Plato, Berkeley, Kant, Russell, Wittgenstein, A. N. Prior, J.

L. Mackie, and John Anderson, the influential Australian philosopher.

Some of the readings we will look at will attempt to articulate the

structure of self-refutation arguments; others either use such arguments

against others or defend themselves against the charge that their own

position is self-refuting.

24

Learning Outcomes:


• Identify similarities and differences in different uses of self-

refutation arguments.

• Critically assess whether metaphysical conclusions can be drawn

from self-refutation arguments.

• Describe and assess the role of self-refutation arguments in this

history of philosophy.




Assessment: Seminar paper x 1

Examination: 1 x 1 hour examination

Title: PI4029 Ethics Well-Being and Happiness (5 ECTS credits) Lecturer(s): Dr. Alice Pinheiro Walla



The course offers an analysis of Immanuel Kant’s Ethical Theory,

focusing on his three major ethical works: the Groundwork to the

Metaphysics of Morals, the Critique of Practical Reason and the

Doctrine of Virtue, the second part of the Metaphysics of Morals. We

shall discuss Kant’s conception of practical reason, his account of moral

psychology and conception of the normative force of morality. We shall

also engage with contemporary “Kantian Ethics.”

Learning Outcomes:


• outline the central ideas of Kant’s ethical theory;

25

• explore different ways of interpreting primary texts;

• engage with relevant secondary literature;

• understand some of the current debates in Kantian Ethics;

• critically analyse the central arguments and claims of Kant’s

ethics.






Title: PI4040 Epistemology (5 ECTS credits) Lecturer(s): Prof. Paul O’Grady



This course examines the phenomenon of cognitive relativism using the

model presented in O'Grady Relativism 2002 as a basis. From this

starting place, recent work by Kolbel, MacFarlane and Boghossian will

be assessed

Learning Outcomes:


• Describe, analyse and critically assess the principal theories of

modern cognitive relativist






26

Title: PI4043 Wittgenstein’s Later Philosophy (5 ECTS credits) Lecturer(s): Dr. Thomas McNally


Module Content/Outline: The course will address the central themes in Wittgenstein’s later

philosophy, with particular emphasis on his Philosophical Investigations.

The seminars will begin with an analysis of Wittgenstein’s philosophical

development from 1929 to the writing of the Investigations, including the

steps he took in rejecting the philosophical framework of his early work,

the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. The bulk of the course will be

devoted to the following issues that are treated at length in the

Investigations: naming and ostensive definition (§§1-136); meaning and

rule-following (§§137-242); and the so-called private language argument

(§§243-315). In the final seminars, Wittgenstein’s later reflections on

necessity and the nature of mathematical truth (in his posthumously

published Remarks on the Foundations of Mathematics) will be

considered in light of these issues. Throughout the course, there will be

consideration of many of the most significant interpretations of

Wittgenstein’s later philosophy, which have been very influential in

shaping contemporary debates in analytic philosophy concerning such

issues as the nature of language, realism and anti-realism, and the

relation between the mind and the body. Of these interpretations, the

focus will be on Saul Kripke’s sceptical reading of Wittgenstein on

meaning and rule-following, and Michael Dummett’s conventionalist

reading of Wittgenstein on necessity.

Learning Outcomes:


27

• Describe and critically assess Wittgenstein’s later conception of

language, and how it shapes his philosophy of mathematics.

• Discuss the main changes in his philosophical outlook leading up

to the Philosophical Investigations.

• Engage with the question of Wittgenstein’s importance for

contemporary analytic philosophy.





Title: PI4045 Philosophies of the Body (5 ECTS credits) Lecturer(s): Dr. Luna Dolezal


Module Content/Outline: The status of the body with respect to consciousness, identity and social

life has been a central concern for philosophers since the inception of

Western philosophy. In the present day, embodiment theory

increasingly plays a central role in interdisciplinary scholarship and is, in

its own right, an important field of inquiry in contemporary philosophy.

This module will trace philosophies of the body from ancient Greek

thought to the present day. A historical context for philosophies of the

body will be established through the work of Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas

and Descartes. The primary focus of the module will be 20th century

philosophies of the body. The work of Edmund Husserl, Maurice

Merleau-Ponty, Jean-Paul Sartre and Michel Foucault will be

considered at length in order to familiarize students with the descriptions

and theories of embodiment arising from phenomenology, social

28

constructionism and existentialism. Themes that will be critically

explored will include: the relationship between the body and

consciousness; perception and action; embodied identity;

intersubjectivity; and intercorporeality. The module will conclude with

reflections on the interdisciplinary applicability of philosophy of the body,

in particular looking at contemporary scholarship in feminist theory,

disability studies and cognitive science.

Learning Outcomes:


• Critically reflect on the relationship between the body and

consciousness and engage with contemporary debates about

dualism

• Understand the relevance of philosophies of the body today

• Be familiar with leading 20th century accounts of the body in

European philosophy

• Have an understanding of the history of the body in Western

thought





2nd Semester/Hilary Term Title: PI4007 Psychology/Philosophy (5 ECTS credits) Lecturer(s): Dr. Meredith Plug


Module Content/Outline: This course examines issues that cut across the disciplines of

29

Psychology: the empirical study of the mind, and the Philosophy of

Mind. Is the mind a computer; is thought computation? Does the mind

have different modules (e.g. a language module, a moral module)...?

Are our mental states located completely inside our heads or do they

extend into the world? Are descriptions of our mental life that invoke

concepts like 'belief' and 'desire' radically false; should they be replaced

with talk of neural firings? The course examines philosophical

questions about the status, methodology and basic concepts of

Psychology (including the status, methodology and key concepts of

Psychoanalysis). Finally the course investigates the bearing of

empirical psychological research on traditional philosophical questions.

Does research on autism refute philosophical accounts of what it is for

people to understand each others' utterances? Has psychological

research shown that we lack Free Will?

Learning Outcomes:


• Critically analyse theories of the nature of mind/mental states.

• Assess the bearing of empirical psychological data on questions in

philosophy.

• Pose and answer philosophical questions about psychology






Title: PI4024 Ancient Philosophy (5 ECTS credits) Lecturer(s): Prof. Vasilis Politis


30


Plato: Dialectician or Visionary?

It is generally supposed that, for Plato, the highest knowledge that we

aspire to, and may be capable of, is the knowledge of the essence of

things that is spelled out in a general definition – it being the task of

dialectic, in Plato’s sense of the term, to search for this. Such

knowledge consists in knowing the truth of certain kinds of propositions,

those that articulate general definitions; it is, therefore, propositional

knowledge.

This view of Plato was not always as orthodox as it is today, and it has

come under renewed criticism in the past decade or so. Those who

challenge it come in two varieties. Some argue that (at least in the early

dialogues) Plato did not think it is possible for us to attain knowledge of

the essence of things, and that this is what he intended us to recognize.

We may call their Plato: ‘Plato-the-Sceptic’.

Others, however, while holding on to the view that, for Plato, knowledge

of essence is what we need to aim at, argue that this knowledge is not

propositional but in some way intuitive. This means that essence is

something we must try to grasp directly, in the way in which vision is

naturally thought to be direct and non-propositional or certainly non-

rational; though, for Plato, this intuitive knowledge is not simply sensory

– my cat, excellent eyesight though it has, is not capable of anything like

it. Their Plato is, as we may say: ‘Plato-the-Visionary’ – or, as people

used to say, ‘The-Mystic’.

The aim of the seminar is to take up the debate between Plato-the-

Demander-of-Definitions and Plato-the-Visionary. A major objective will

be to consider the very idea of intuitive knowledge, and the analogy

between sensory and intellectual intuitive knowledge. And to consider

how such knowledge may be related to propositional knowledge.

31

To address this topic, we will need to study closely some of the most

fascinating passages in the Platonic corpus; especially from the central

books of the Republic (V-VII): the Sun Analogy; the Line; the Cave; and

the account of Dialectic.

Learning Outcomes:


• To be confirmed





Title: PI4041 Post Kantian Philosophy (5 ECTS credits) Lecturer(s): Prof. Lilian Alweiss



When we speak or think we cannot avoid making use of the personal

pronoun. We say 'I think' 'I am in pain', 'I am hungry' or 'I was born in the

last century'. In all these instances reference to a bearer of thought

seem inevitable. Yet there are many who wish to convince us that what

seems unavoidable, in everyday talk, is nothing other than a linguistic

convention. The words ‘I’ and ‘my’ are mere adornments of speech.

There is a ‘necessity of syntax’ which compels us to speak of a

positional self, however as soon as we have a closer look we come to

realise that the pronoun ‘I’ is not a place holder for anything in particular.

Indeed, without much trouble we can replace the phrase ‘I was thinking’

with ‘there was thinking going on’, and ‘I am in pain with ‘there is pain’

since there is no self separable from the thought or the sensation of

32

pain. Proof for this lies in the fact that we cannot perceive such a self

but if at all only our objects of thoughts, feelings, sensations or

impressions. This is why Hume already concluded that no introspection

will ever yield a pure self. Against this view this course wishes to show

why we need to hold fast to the claim that ‘I’ is a referring expression.

There is something distinctive about the use of the first person pronoun.

No description, not even one containing indexicals (other than the first

person pronouns themselves) can be substituted for ‘I’. We shall do this

by focusing on the writings on Wittgenstein, Sartre, Kant and Husserl.

Learning Outcomes:


• To familiarise students with the problem of self-consciousness,

self-reference and the unity of consciousness.

• To learn how these problems have been addressed by Hume,

Locke, Kant, Husserl and Sartre

• To show how these problems are still relevant today.






Title: PI4042 Metaphysics (5 ECTS credits) Lecturer(s): Dr. Christopher Buckels, University of California,

Davis


Module Content/Outline: It seems that there are few more basic philosophical questions than this

one: what are things? E.g., what are tables and chairs? Even if one

33

breaks them into their physical constituents, atoms or quarks or

whatever physics determines their ultimate constituents to be, we can

still ask: what are those? Are they fundamental entities, or can we

distinguish between them and their properties? If we can, are they

composed of their properties? Or is there something else, a more basic

thing, that has the properties? These questions all concern the

metaphysics of particulars, sometimes called substances or concrete

particulars. In this seminar we will investigate these questions, starting

with contemporary answers and then moving back to ancient answers,

particularly from Plato and Aristotle. We will look at modern defenses of

substratum theory (the thesis that that particulars have, as constituents,

both properties and some particularizing entity in which the properties

inhere), bundle theory (the thesis that particulars have, as constituents,

only properties), and of what is sometimes called substance theory (the

thesis that particulars may instantiate properties but do not have them

as parts or constituents). Then we will read ancient contributions to this

discussion, and we will see if we can situate such authors as Plato and

Aristotle in this philosophical space.

Learning Outcomes:


• describe and critically assess contemporary theories of the

metaphysics of particulars

• discuss Plato and Aristotle's views regarding sensible

particulars

• situate Plato and Aristotle in relation to contemporary theories

of the metaphysics of particulars




34



Title: PI4044 Advanced Logic & Philosophy (5 ECTS credits) Lecturer(s): Prof. Peter Simons


Module Content/Outline: The relationship between logic and philosophy has become complicated

by the massive plurality of logical systems investigated since 1900. The

question therefore arises as to whether there is such a thing as “the

correct logic”, or whether we have to acquiesce in logical relativism. In

this course we will examine alternatives to classical logic, in particular

free logics, Lesniewskian logics, intuitionistic logic, many-valued logics

and relevance logics, and consider their various claims to be

improvements on classical logic.

Learning Outcomes:


• Give the principal distinguishing characteristics of alternative logics

• Critically assess their claims to be in some sense “better” than

classical logic or its extensions.






35

Examination and Assessment

The Marking (or Grading) System

Each essay will be marked out of 100. Each examination script also will

be marked out of 100. The marks will correspond to percentages and

classes as follows:

ESSAY MARK EXAM. MARK

70 – 100

60 – 69

70 – 100

60 – 69

First Class

Second Class-1st Division

50 – 59

40 – 49

PASS

50 – 59

40 – 49

Second Class-2nd Division

Third Class

FAILURE

30 – 39 30 – 39

F1

0 – 29 0 – 29 F2

For further explanation of grades see section on Guidelines on Grades (click here).

36

Junior Sophister

GENERAL STATEMENT

The Junior Sophister year is Part I of the Moderatorship or degree of BA

at Trinity College. For this reason, the final grade in your Junior Sophister year counts towards your final degree grade and so class of degree.

RULES CONCERNING ESSAYS IN THE JS YEAR

(A) Essays must not exceed 2500 words in length. Going beyond that

limit will render essays liable to a deduction of marks.

(B) All essays must be typed or word processed. Students are also

required to submit their essays via Turn-it-in with a hard copy being

submitted to the Departmental Office.

(C) PHIL/POL students are required to submit TWO essays for each of

the THREE courses as listed on the Junior Sophister Course

Choice Form (i.e. a total of SIX ESSAYS in the year as a whole).

(D) In the case of those courses which have two parts taught by

different lecturers, students are required to submit one essay from

each of the two parts.

(E) In regard to late essays, extensions may be granted only by the

written agreement of the JS Convener (which must be obtained

before the regular date of submission), and may be granted only

for medical or ad misericordiam reasons. Essays must be handed

into the Philosophy Department and stamped. Essays received up

to seven days late will be marked with the deduction of ten marks. Essays received more than seven days late will receive no marks in the assessment unless accompanied by written prior

37

extension granted by the JS Convener.

(F) There are no supplemental essays in the JS year.

(G) At the end of teaching term, students who have not fulfilled the

requirements for their year’s work (i.e. who have not submitted the

requisite number of essays) may be returned to the Senior Lecturer

as unsatisfactory.

RULES CONCERNING EXAMS IN THE JS YEAR

(A) All students are required to sit one three hour examination paper (April/May) in each of the courses they have chosen to study.

(B) For every examination, each paper will typically contain nine

questions, and students must answer three questions. How the

exam papers are laid out will vary from course to course.

(C) JS examination results are usually published around mid-June.

(D) All moderatorship exams, including Junior Sophister ones, are

liable to be marked by both internal and external examiners.

(E) The grading (or marking) scheme is the same as for the

Freshman years, see above (click here).

(F) Students may not repeat material from essays in examinations i.e.

you cannot be assessed twice on the same material. To do so is to

be liable to be penalised.

SUPPLEMENTAL EXAMINATIONS IN THE JS YEAR

(A) There are supplemental examinations in the JS year

PHIL/POL students.

38

Senior Sophister

GENERAL STATEMENT

The Senior Sophister year, or Moderatorship Part II, is the final year of

the BA degree and is the second of the years whose results count

towards the final degree grade and so class of degree.

RULES IN REGARD TO THE THESIS (DISSERTATION) FOR THE SS YEAR

(A) PHIL/POL students who are required to write a THESIS during the

year will do so on some philosophically acceptable subject for

which a supervisor is available.

(B) The limitations on length – of between 4,000 and 7,000 words (or

in the case of formal logic, something of equal weight) – are part of

the assessment regulations and failure to observe them will be

penalized in the marking.

(C) Before the year begins you should at least have decided upon the

general area of your thesis and preferably have settled on a title.

You should then consult the members(s) of the Department most

likely to be able to advise you further and request one of them to

be your thesis supervisor. (Consult the “Departmental Whoʼs Who”

at the front of this Handbook.)

(D) Students should check the class notice board for the exact date by

which the thesis must be handed in.

(E) When submitting their theses, students should hand in two copies to the Departmental office; these must be accompanied by a

completed declaration form, which is obtainable from the

Departmental office. Students should note theses are not returned

39

as they form part of the examinable material.

RULES IN REGARD TO THE ESSAYS FOR THE SS YEAR

(A) Students are required to attend, and submit essays on the topics of

the research seminars they take. Essays should be typed or word-

processed and between 2,000 and 2,500 words. Students are also

required to submit their seminar papers via Turn-it-in with a hard

copy being submitted to the Departmental Office.

(B) The limitations on length are part of the assessment regulations and

failure to observe them will be penalized in the marking.

(C) Essays submitted for research seminars in Michaelmas Term/1st

Semester must be handed in by a date usually set for early

January, but students should check the class notice board for the

exact date.

(D) Essays submitted for research seminars in the second term or

Hilary Term/2nd Semester must be handed in by a date usually set

after the last week of Hilary Term, but students should check the

class notice board for the exact date.

(E) Being part of the examining process, essays cannot be returned to

students.

(F) At the end of teaching term, students who have not fulfilled the

requirements for their year’s work (i.e. who have not submitted the

requisite number of essays and a thesis) may be returned to the

Senior Lecturer as unsatisfactory.

RULES FOR EXAMINATIONS IN THE SS YEAR

(A) Students are required to sit two types of examination papers at the

end of the year:

40

(i) A general paper, Problems in Philosophy, which is not aimed at

testing the knowledge or understanding of any specific course, but

at testing the range and depth of your reading and thinking in

philosophy over your four years in College, and your ability to write

clearly, cogently and imaginatively.

(ii) Seminar Papers examining material covered in the seminars

the student has taken. Seminar Paper 1 will cover material from

the Michaelmas Term seminars; Seminar Paper 2 will cover

material from the Hilary Term seminars.

(B) The grading or marking scheme for these examinations (as for the

essays and thesis) is the same as for the Freshman years; see

above (click here).

(C) There will be seminars before the end of Hilary Term/2nd semester

to help students prepare for these exams.

(D) Students may not repeat material from essays in examinations i.e.

you cannot be assessed twice on the same material. To do so is to

be liable to be penalised.

HOW THE ABOVE RULES APPLY TO SS STUDENTS

1. PHIL/POL students who are majoring in Philosophy will sit two three–

hour papers covering the material from the six seminars they have

taken. (each seminar worth 5 ECTS, totalling 30 ECTS). Seminar Paper

1 paper will cover the material from the Michaelmas Term seminars;

Seminar Paper 2 will cover material from the Hilary Term seminars.

They will write a thesis (worth 20 ECTS).

They will sit a general philosophy paper (worth 10 ECTS).

41

2. PHIL/POL students taking both subjects equally have a choice.

They may attend, submit assessment and be examined in four seminars

(at least one in each term totalling 20 ECTS) and a general paper (10

ECTS) (similar to TSM pattern A).

Alternatively they may choose to attend, submit assessment and be

examined in two seminars (one from each term, totalling 10 ECTS) and

write a thesis (20 ECTS).

ALL SENIOR SOPHISTER STUDENTS NOTE:

1. The University Regulations forbid (a) any supplementary "retake" of the S.S. examinations and other written requirements for Moderatorship and (b) any repeats of the S.S. year. 2. Any seminar essay or thesis handed in after the published

submission dates will be treated as follows:

(a) up to seven days late the work will be accepted with a deduction of

10 marks.

(b) work submitted eight or more days late WILL RECEIVE NO MARK

WHATEVER and will be returned unexamined to the candidate.

42

BREAKDOWN OF FINAL EXAM MARKS

PHIL/POL (Major) Marks carried forward from Junior Sophister 150

Six seminars (exam paper + essay) 240

(Each seminar assessment = 20 Exam = 20)

Problems Paper 110

Thesis 150

Total mark Philosophy 650

PHIL/POL (Minor)

Marks carried forward from Junior Sophister 350

---------------------------------------------------------------------


PHIL/POL (with thesis option) Marks carried forward from Junior Sophister 150

Two seminars (exam paper + essay) 150


Thesis 200

---------------------------------------------------------------------


43

PHIL/POL (with exam option)

Marks carried forward from Junior Sophister 150

Four seminars (exam paper + essay) 240


Thesis 110

---------------------------------------------------------------------


44

Tutorials and Departmental Teaching Assistants

Tutorials are mandatory and attendance is recorded. Failure to attend at least 50% of tutorials will result in a penalty being imposed on your final mark for the year.

Tutorials are held weekly from Week 2 of Michaelmas term/1st

semester; and Hilary term/2nd semester, in the JF (first) and SF (second)

years. Please check the Department’s noticeboard for details of your tutorial group(s). There is one tutorial, in JF year, covering the

PI1001 & PI1002 courses. Similarly, in the SF year there is one tutorial

covering PI2006 & PI2002.

Tutorials are where a small group of students (usually about 8 to 12)

meet with a departmental Teaching Assistant (TA) to discuss topics on

the course. Although students may ask questions during lectures, that is

not the main purpose of the lectures. Tutorials, on the other hand, are

specifically for the purpose of discussion. You will be assigned one

departmental TA for the academic year. TA’s may ask individual

students to prepare a short presentation for the beginning of each

tutorial, for the purpose of getting the discussion started.

Departmental TA’s mark all Junior Freshman and most Senior

Freshman essays. In the first term, your own TA will mark your essays,

and thereafter the essay-marking will be rotated among the different

TA’s. This should eliminate any bias students may fear a TA has.

45

Essays are returned by TA’s to students on a confidential, one-to-one

basis (i.e., not at tutorials in front of the other students). On returning the

essay, the TA will spend some time discussing it with the student.

46

Guidelines on Grades First Class (70-100)

First class work represents an excellent to outstanding performance

demonstrating a thorough understanding of the subject. In addition to a

mastery of a wide to full range of the standard literature and/or methods

and techniques of the subject, work at this level shows independence of

judgement and evidence of attainment beyond the standard material. It

will frequently demonstrate characteristics such as insight, imagination,

originality and creativity. A first class answer will represent a

comprehensive and accurate answer to the question, which will exhibit a

detailed knowledge of the relevant material as well as a broad base of

knowledge. Theory and evidence will be well integrated and the

selection of sources, ideas, methods or techniques will be well judged

and appropriately organised to address the relevant issue or problem. It

will demonstrate a high level of ability to evaluate and integrate

information and ideas, to deal with knowledge in a critical way, and to

reason and argue in a logical way. Where relevant it will also

demonstrate a high level of ability to analyse information, to make sense

of material, to solve problems, to generate new ideas and concepts and

to apply knowledge to new situations. The presentation of information,

arguments and conclusions will be fluent and clearly written and may

also show particular lucidity in expression appropriate to the subject.

What differentiates a first class piece of work from one awarded an

upper second is a greater lucidity, a greater independence of

judgement, a greater depth of insight and degree of originality, more

47

evidence of an ability to integrate material, and evidence of a greater

breadth of reading and research in the first that is not present in the

upper second.

Thus a first class piece of work shows positive characteristics such as:

• Answers the question clearly and comprehensively, in a focused

way

• Has an excellent structure and organization

• Demonstrates characteristics such as insight, imagination,

originality and creativity

• Demonstrates the ability to integrate information

• Exhibits sound critical thinking

• Exhibits independence of judgement

• Clearly explains relevant theory and cites relevant evidence

• Contains reasoned argument and comes to a logical conclusion

• Gives evidence of wide relevant reading

• Includes a number of appropriate examples

• Demonstrates a clear comprehension of the subject

• Demonstrates the ability to apply learning to new situations and to

solves new problems

• Is lucid and well written

• Lacks errors of any significant kind

All pieces of first class work may not have all of the characteristics

above, but all such work will have few, if any, negative characteristics.

Upper Second Class (60-69) Work at upper second class level displays a sound and clear

48

understanding of the subject and demonstrates a good grasp of a wide

range of the standard literature and /or methods and techniques of the

subject. An upper second class answer constitutes a well-organised and

structured answer to the question that is reasonably comprehensive,

generally accurate and well-informed. It will normally demonstrate a

greater breadth of knowledge than would be gained merely from the

lecture notes and basic required reading. It will demonstrate some

ability to evaluate and integrate information and ideas, to deal with

knowledge in a critical way, and to reason and argue in a logical way.

Where relevant it will also demonstrate an ability to analyse information,

to make sense of material, to solve problems, to generate new ideas

and concepts and to apply knowledge to new situations. The

presentation of information, arguments and conclusions will be clear

and well written.

What differentiates an upper second class piece of work from one

awarded a lower second is the greater success in answering the

question, the additional understanding displayed, the greater evidence

of additional reading, the improved structure and organization, the

superior quality of the argument, and the level of critical thinking

displayed.

Thus an upper second class piece of work shows positive

characteristics such as:

• Answers the question clearly and fully

• Has a good structure and organization

• Shows evidence of a very good understanding of the topic

• Show clear evidence of relevant reading and research

• Clearly explains relevant theory and cites relevant evidence

• Contains reasoned argument and comes to a logical conclusion

49

• Includes highly relevant ideas

• Uses relevant examples

• Demonstrates the ability to apply learning to new situations and to

solve problems

• Is well written

• Lacks errors of any significant kind

Upper second class work usually has a few negative characteristics, but

may be limited in the sense that it:

• Could demonstrate more in the way of critical insight, imagination,

originality or creativity

• Does not answer the question as fully and comprehensively as

would be possible

• Could demonstrate more ability to integrate information

• Could exhibit more critical thinking

• Could exhibit more independence of thought

Lower second class (50-59)

Work at lower second class level displays knowledge of the standard

material and approaches of the subject and a familiarity with much of

the standard literature and/or methods. A lower second class answer

may constitute a relatively simplistic answer to the question, and is likely

to be based on a narrow range of sources, such as lecture notes and

the basic required reading, rather than being indicative of wider reading.

It usually displays a basic ability to use relevant sources, methods or

techniques normally applied in the subject to achieve some success in

solving problems or marshalling arguments to reach a conclusion. The

work may show some inconsistency in standard, may contain

50

occasional technical or factual flaws, and may exhibit some difficulties

with the organization of material or with the full understanding of a

problem or issue, but it is adequately presented and may include some

critical judgement applied to analysis or the application of standard

ideas or methods. What differentiates a lower second class piece or

work from one awarded a third class grade is the greater success of the

lower second in answering the question, together with the possession of

more relevant information, a more coherent argument and an improved

structure, although neither the answer to the question nor the structure

nay be incapable of improvement.

Work at Lower second class level will tend to possess some or all of the

following positive characteristics:

• Attempts to answer the question

• Shows evidence of a basic to good understanding of the topic

• Shows evidence of some relevant reading and research

• Includes some relevant ideas

• Includes some relevant examples

Work at Lower second class level will tend to possess some or all of the

following negative characteristics:

• The attempt to answer the question may not be completely

successful

• Does not contain a sufficiently well-structured argument

• Does not offer sufficient evidence to justify assertions

• Does not include sufficient relevant examples

• The style of writing could be improved

51

• Lacks lucidity

• May contain some minor errors

Third Class (40-49)

Work at this level contains evidence of study of the appropriate material

and displays a level of presentation at least minimally commensurate

with the award of an honours degree, but it often reflects only a limited

familiarity with the standard literature and/or methods of the subject. A

third class answer constitutes at least a minimal attempt to answer the

question posed, but the answer may omit key points and/or contain

assertions not supported by appropriate evidence. It may display

superficiality in understanding and/or the use of material, an over

reliance on knowledge at the expense of development or argument,

analysis or discussion, and it may lack continuity, or be inadequately

organised. Nonetheless, the work at this level does show an ability to

refer to some standard sources, ideas, methods or techniques applied

in the subject and to achieve some success in solving problems or

marshalling an argument to reach a conclusion.

What differentiates a third class piece of work from one that fails is that

a third comprises an attempt to answer the question in formed by some

relevant information while a fail either does not contain an adequate

attempt to answer the question, or does not contain sufficient relevant

information.

Work at Third class level will tend to possess some or all of the following

positive characteristics:

• Attempts to answer the question

52

• Shows modest evidence of understanding of the topic

• Shows modest evidence of relevant reading and research

• Includes a few relevant ideas

• May include some relevant examples

Work at Third class level will tend to possess some or all of the following

negative characteristics:

• The attempt to answer the question may not be very successful

• Does not contain a sufficiently well-structured argument

• Does not offer sufficient evidence to justify assertions

• Does not include sufficient relevant examples

• Lacks lucidity

• Contains one or more important errors

Fail (0-39) The fail grade is sometimes broken down into two bands: F1 and F2. An

answer at the F1 level (30-39) represents a failure to answer the

question adequately, but the possession of at least some relevant

information. The failure to provide an appropriate answer may be due to

a misunderstanding of the question, or to one or more of the following

deficiencies: it may contain only a small amount of relevant information,

the material itself may have been misunderstood, the answer may be

poorly or incoherently presented, or the answer may not relate to the

question asked. An answer at the F2 level (0-29) normally contains no

or only the most minimal amount of information relating to the question,

or may demonstrate a complete misunderstanding of the question, or a

misunderstanding of the material irrelevant to its answer such as to

render the answer meaningless. Work at fail level tends to have few

53

positive characteristics, except possibly when the grade has been

awarded because of the inclusion of a major error, the presence of

which is sufficiently important to outweigh any positive features of the

answer. It is also possible for an otherwise good piece of work to be

awarded a fail grade because it fails to answer the question posed. The

absence of positive characteristics could also result from the fact that

the answer is short (e.g. when a student runs out of time in an

examination and writes very little).

Work awarded a fail grade tends to possesses some or all of the

following negative characteristics:

• Represents a failure to answer the question (though may be an

answer to a different question)

• Shows no or only a little evidence of understanding of the topic

• Shows no or only a little evidence of relevant reading and research

• Includes no or very few relevant ideas

• Does not contain a structured argument

• Does not offer evidence to justify assertions

• Does not include relevant examples

54

Note on Writing Essays PREPARATION

1. Allow yourself enough time. When the topic is set, try to do some

preliminary reading as soon as possible. Give yourself time to write both

a rough copy and a final neat finished copy, (with wide margins to allow

for detailed, and so more useful, comments from your tutor or marker.)

Make a point of having the essay ready by the required date. 2. Use book lists intelligently (and remember that books have

indices). Decide whether the book is one to be read right through or

whether sections will meet your purpose. When the essay topic

concerns a text or an author’s views, read the original text, not merely

someone else’s comments upon it.

3. You will find discussion with others, particularly of your rough copy,

to be very useful. Indeed it is part of the purpose of a university, and in

particular of the degree in philosophy, to give students opportunities for

argument and the exchange of ideas.

4. Plan your essay carefully beforehand. Read over the topic

carefully and decide what exactly it means. Then consider what thesis

or view you are trying to present in regard to the topic. Finally try to work

out what your arguments are for your view. In this way, when you come

to write your essay, you will be less likely to write unphilosophically or

beside the point.

WRITING THE ESSAY

5. The introduction to your essay should mirror your plan by succinctly

stating your overall strategy. Do not give enormous vague meandering

introductions; get down quickly to the set topic.

55

6. The core of philosophy is learning how to argue your case coherently

and validly, and the core of a philosophy essay is its arguments. Those

who mark your work (in both essays and examinations) are more likely

to be interested in the reasons you give them than in the truth of your

conclusions, (though, of course, we hope that you also aim at the truth).

If, however, you feel you must offer a conclusion and cannot give

reasons for it, give reasons why you feel that it is impossible to give

reasons.

A good way to ensure that you are arguing your case in the essay, is to

imagine an objector looking over your shoulder who continually

says to you each time you make some assertion, “Yes, but why?” So,

avoid mere dogmatic assertion, wild generalizations, unargued

moralizing or pure invective. These are not philosophy.

7. You cannot be too clear in a difficult subject like philosophy. Write

your essay (or exam paper, for that matter) as if you were explaining

your position, and the arguments for it, to someone much younger than

yourself who knows nothing about philosophy.

A good maxim in philosophical writing is “Argue only one point per paragraph”. Do not try and do everything in one long paragraph. (In

your rough copy, it may help if you actually number the points, and

hence paragraphs, as I have tended to do here.)

Of course, though I am sure it is superfluous to mention it to university

students, accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar are all aids to clarity. Finally, we encourage students to present their essays in

‘word processed’ form, (as word processors are now available

throughout the College for student use.)

8. An indispensable tool for both good argument and clear expression is

a sensitivity to - for a philosopher concerned with careful distinctions

between words as part of his/her apparatus for arguing, perhaps I

56

should say ‘passion for’ - the correct use of words. Use words carefully. Do not use words about whose meaning you are uncertain. Do not adopt the vocabulary of some book you have just

consulted. Use your own vocabulary. Avoid jargon.

9. Avoid just stringing together quotations. Indeed you should be

extremely careful in your use of quotes. At most a quote can illustrate a

point for you; it cannot prove it, no matter what great thinker you are

quoting from.

Again, do not just paraphrase or summarise views without comment.

This is of no value. Anyone can read. If you refer to someone’s views on

the topic under discussion, you must critically assess the worth of that

person’s views. If your argument depends on facts, do not invent them.

Find out what really are the facts. Do not engage in economics or

sociology or history or psychology, without a licence. Do your

homework, by asking an economist, sociologist, etc., or by consulting a

reputable book on economics, sociology…and so on.

57

Plagiarism

Some students seem not to understand exactly what is and is not

plagiarism.

Plagiarism is taking another person’s actual sentences or theories and presenting them in your essay (or seminar paper or thesis etc.) as if they were your own sentences or theories.

To give some examples:

(a) To quote from Ryle’s The Concept of Mind p. 96, but to fail to put

quotation marks around Ryle’s words, is plagiarism.

(b) To paraphrase chapter VI of The Concept of Mind without mentioning in

any way (in the text or in a footnote) that the material is a paraphrase, is

plagiarism.

(c) To present Ryle’s distinction between ‘Knowing How’ and ‘Knowing That’

in your own words, and then to make an explicit or implicit claim that it is

an invention of your own, is plagiarism.

(d) To copy another student’s work is plagiarism.

(e) To enlist the help of another person to complete an assignment on your

58

behalf, is plagiarism.

It is accepted that all members of the academic community use and

build on the work of others. However, whenever this is done it should

always be acknowledged. The safe, honest, scholarly and generous

thing to do, is always to take great pains to document the sources of

your written work. This includes internet sources as well as books and

articles. A student who is found to have plagiarized work will be returned

to the Senior Lecturer as non-satisfactory for that term. This means

that the student may be refused permission to take the annual

examinations, and may be required by the Senior Lecturer to repeat the

year.

Note also students should not submit the same work for different

assignments. If they are uncertain whether their work for different

assignments overlaps too much, they should consult the convener for

their year.

For further details, see the General Regulations in the College Calendar

located here: http://www.tcd.ie/calendar/part1/.

http://www.tcd.ie/calendar/part1/

59

Conveners

For each year, there is an academic member of staff who has been

appointed as convener. The role of the convener includes helping

students with enquiries specifically relating to the work of that year. For

example, if a student wishes to clarify a matter relating to the layout of

exams or the content of the courses, the convener is the person to see.

Students should also go to the convener if they need an extension on

an essay. Essay extensions will only be granted in extreme

circumstances – usually on presentation of a medical certificate showing

that the student was ill and unable to complete the essay on time. Essay

extensions will not be granted retrospectively, i.e., if the student has

already passed the deadline, an extension cannot be granted.

Students will be advised of the names of the current conveners for each

year at the beginning of MT/1st semester.

60

College Tutors

Trinity College is the only university in Ireland to operate what is known

as the Tutorial system. Every student at Trinity is allocated a college

tutor. Your college tutor is an academic member of staff who has been

appointed to look after your general welfare and deal with queries in

confidence. At the start of the academic year, your tutor’s name will be

posted to you. It is advisable that you arrange a meeting with your tutor

as soon as possible after starting college.

The tutor’s role includes such relatively straightforward tasks as

answering queries in the early days, signing forms certifying that you

are a student at Trinity, or writing character references. Tutors are also

there to help with personal problems such as illness, domestic, financial

or emotional problems. They may not be able to help with every

problem, but they will put you in contact with someone who can.

If it turns out that you don’t get on with your tutor for whatever reason,

you can apply to the Senior Tutor for a change of tutor. The Senior

Tutor’s office is in House 27. If you wish to make an appointment,

please telephone 896-2004 or e-mail [email protected].

mailto:[email protected]

61

Peer Mentoring

Student 2 Student

From the moment you arrive in College right the way through to your

end of year exams Student 2 Student (S2S) is he re to make sure your

first year is fun, engaging and a great foundation for the rest of your

time in Trinity. You will me e t your two S2S mentors in Freshers’ Week

and they’ll make sure you know other people in your course before your

classes even start. They’ll keep in regular touch with you throughout

your first year and invite you to events on and off campus. They’ll also

give you useful information about your course and what to look out for.

Mentors are students who have be e n through first year and know

exactly what it feels like, so you never have to worry about asking the m

a question or talking to the m about anything that’s worrying you.

S2S also offers trained Peer Supporters if you want to talk confidentially

to another student or just to me e t a friendly face for a coffee and a

chat.

S2S is supported by the Senior Tutor’s Office and the Student

Counselling Service. http://student2student.tcd.ie,

E-mail: [email protected], Phone: + 353 1 896 2438

http://student2student.tcd.ie/

mailto:[email protected]

62

The Library

Trinity College Library is spread over a number of different buildings on

the campus - the names 'Berkeley Library’, ‘Hamilton Library’ and so

forth refer to these different locations. As philosophy students, what you

will be using for the most part is the Ussher Library.

Where Can I Find the Philosophy Books?

The main philosophy section is on the fourth floor of the Ussher Library. These books are arranged according to the Dewey Decimal

system, in which philosophy books are numbered 100-199. There are

multiple copies of some of the more important books on the courses

(although it is recommended that you buy the core texts - the library

could let you down in an emergency!). Some books on interdisciplinary

subjects (i.e. where two or more subjects overlap) are to be found in

other parts of the library. For example, some books on philosophy of

science are in the science section, which is in the Hamilton Library.

Many books are not on the open shelves, but in the Stacks or Santry

Book Depository. To obtain these books, you must look up a reference

number in the library catalogues (see below). You then fill in a (very

simple) form, and hand it in at the desk in the Berkeley or Hamilton

library.

63

The Library Catalogues

If you know your way around, you can sometimes find books you need

by just browsing on the shelves, but often you will need to use the

library catalogues. Most of the books you need can be found on the

online library catalogue. There are computer terminals throughout the

different parts of the library on which you can access this catalogue.

Books can be looked up under author, title, and title-keyword or subject-

keyword. The online catalogue can also be accessed on the web at

www.tcd.ie/Library. Some older books in the library are not yet on the

online catalogue, but can be found in the Accessions Catalogue, a set

of large, hardbound volumes located on the ground floor of the Ussher.

Even older books (pre-1870) are in the Printed Catalogue, in the same

place.

Reference Works and Periodicals

Reference works are shelved in the Berkeley following renovations.

Helpful reference works include the Routledge Encyclopedia of

Philosophy and the Philosopher’s Index. The latter is a quarter-yearly

guide to new books and articles published in philosophy; it is also

available online and can be accessed through the library website. You

can look up items by author or by subject, and brief summaries of most

items are provided.

Much useful material for study is to be found not in books but in articles

published in periodicals. This is especially true if one is interested in the

very latest developments in philosophy, or in new scholarship. The

library has many philosophy periodicals; the current year’s issues of a

periodical are to be found in the lower basement of the Ussher (i.e. two

floors below the ground floor), under PER

100. Back issues are either in the basement of the Ussher, or in the

http://www.tcd.ie/Library

64

Stacks or Santry. These latter are obtainable in the same way as books.

Inter-Library Loans

If you need a book or periodical which is not available in Trinity College

Library, you should be able to get it on Inter- Library Loan. This involves

our library borrowing the book or periodical from another library. All you

have to do is fill in a form and hand it in to the counter in either the

Berkeley or Hamilton. You can also, for a fee, obtain photocopies of

periodical articles which are not in the Trinity library.

Further Information

For further information, see the Library Guides, which can be found at

the library counters. The staff at the counters in the various libraries

should be able to help with most enquiries, but for enquiries specifically

concerning philosophy material in the library, you may need to consult

the Subject Librarian who can be reached by e-mail.

65

Prizes in Philosophy

A number of academic prizes are available for which philosophy

students can compete.

John Isaac Beare Prize in Philosophy

(JF, SF and JS essay prize)

This prize was founded in 1953 by a bequest from W.E.P. Cotter in

memory of John Isaac Beare, Fellow 1887-1918. It is divided into three

parts, and one part is awarded in each of the first three years of the

honours course in philosophy. Part I is awarded at the end of Trinity

Term in each year to the Junior Freshman student who has submitted

the best essays during the academic year. Similar regulations apply to

parts II and III in the Senior Freshman and Junior Sophister years

respectively. The prizewinners may select books to the value of €89 at

the University booksellers.

John Henry Bernard Prizes

(JF and JS exam prize; SF Foundation Scholarship exam prize)

These prizes were founded in 1929 by a subscription in memory of John

Henry Bernard, Provost 1919-27. A prize is awarded annually in the

Junior Freshman year and in the Junior Sophister year on the results of

the honours examinations in philosophy; in the Senior Freshman year

the prize is awarded to the candidate who performs best at the

Foundation Scholarship exam (see below, or click here). The prize is

open to candidates in (a) philosophy only, or (b) philosophy as part of a

combined honours programme. In the case of (b), only the candidate’s

66

performance in philosophy is taken into account. Value of each prize,

€108.

Madeleine Farrell Memorial Prize in Philosophy of Mind

(SS Philosophy of Mind Dissertation Prize)

A prize of €250 has been provided by a benefactor and former student

of philosophy and medicine at Trinity College, Dr. Thomas Farrell, in

honour of his mother, Madeleine Farrell. The prize will be awarded each

year to the person who gains the highest mark for a Senior Sophister

thesis in philosophy of mind, given that, according to the examiners, a

sufficiently high standard has been achieved.

Arthur Aston Luce Memorial Prize

(SS exam prize)

This prize was founded in 1977 from a general bequest to the college by

Arthur Aston Luce, Fellow 1912-77, Professor of Moral Philosophy

1934-47, Berkeley Professor of Metaphysics 1953-77. It is awarded

annually to the student who obtains the highest mark in the Problems in

Philosophy paper at part II (Senior Sophister) of the moderatorship

examination. Value, €166.

Lilian Mary Luce Memorial Prize

(Freshman years – prize for special exam on Berkeley)

This prize was founded in 1941 by a gift from the Rev. Arthur Aston

Luce, in memory of his wife, Lilian Mary Luce, gold medallist in Mental

and Moral Science. It is awarded on the result of a written examination

held annually at the beginning of Trinity Term conducted by two

examiners appointed from the honours examiners in philosophy. The

67

course consists in the main of portions of Berkeley’s philosophical

works, preferably those not specified in the honours course. Works

about Berkeley may also be included. The course, which may be varied

from year to year, is prescribed by the Head of the Department of

Philosophy. The examination is open only to students taking the single

honour course in philosophy or taking philosophy as part of a two-

subject moderatorship course. It may be taken in either the Junior

Freshman or the Senior Freshman year, but no student may be a

candidate on more than one occasion. Notice of intention to compete

must be sent to the Senior Lecturer by 15 February. In the case of a

close tie the Board may divide the prize, on the recommendation of the

examiners. Value, €381.

Henry Stewart Macran Prize

(Any year – prize for special Hegel exam and essay)

This prize was founded in 1941 by a bequest from Miss Eileen Frances

Gertrude McCutchan in memory of Henry Stewart Macran, Fellow 1892-

1937. It is awarded annually to the candidate who gains the best

aggregate of marks at a written examination on Hegel’s system of

philosophy and for an essay ‘on a subject of a metaphysical or ethical

and not merely psychological or logical character’.

Candidates must be under M.A. standing, and if undergraduates must

have their names on the College books. No candidate may win the prize

more than once, but an unsuccessful candidate may compete again.

The examination is held in Trinity Term. The course consists of (1) a

prescribed portion of Hegel’s works (100 marks) and (2) a critical or

expository work on Hegel (100 marks). Notice of intention to compete

must be given to the Senior Lecturer at the beginning of Hilary Term.

The subject of the essay (200 marks) is one of a number of topics

68

prescribed annually by the Professor of Philosophy and two other

examiners appointed by the Board, or else a topic proposed by the

candidate at least three weeks before the end of Hilary Term and

approved by the examiners. It must be 8,000-9,000 words in length. It

must be handed to the Head of Department on the morning of the first

day of the examination, and must be signed by the candidate and

accompanied by a list of authorities consulted, and by a statement that

the essay is the candidate’s own work. Value, €318.

George McCutchan Prize

(SS prize for Hegel exam – not presently available)

This prize was founded in 1941 by a bequest from Miss Eileen Frances

Gertrude McCutchan, in memory of her father, George McCutchan. It is

awarded annually by the Board on the recommendation of the Professor

of Philosophy and moderatorship examiners to the candidate for

moderatorship in philosophy, or for a two-subject moderatorship in

which philosophy is included, who obtains a first or second class

moderatorship, and shows the best knowledge of Hegel in an essay

relating to some aspect of his system of philosophy, as agreed by the

candidate and the Head of Department. Value, €508.

Wray Prize

(SS dissertation prize)

This prize was founded in 1848 by a gift from Mrs Catherine Wray,

widow of Henry Wray, fellow 1800-47, to encourage metaphysical

studies. This prize is awarded annually to the student who submits the

best thesis at the moderatorship exam in philosophy. Value, €445.

69

Wray Travelling Scholarship

(SS exam prize)

This prize was founded in 1977 out of funds accumulated through the

gift from Mrs Catherine Wray described above. The purpose of this prize

is to enable a student to spend time abroad visiting or studying at some

centre of philosophical learning (to be chosen in consultation with the

Head of the Philosophy Department); and it is awarded to a student who

achieves a very high standard at the moderatorship examination. To

qualify, a student must submit evidence of having been admitted to an

overseas university to study on an approved postgraduate course in

philosophy. The prize will not necessarily be awarded annually. Value,

€3,175.

70

Computers As all course assessment work must be submitted in typewritten form, it

is in your interest to familiarise yourself with the computers in college

and their use. The college has both PC’s and Macintoshes.

Where are they?

Computers which are available for undergraduate students to use can

be found at the following locations:

• Beckett Rooms 1 and 2 – Lower ground floor, Arts Building.

• Áras an Phiarsaigh – at the Pearse Street side of the campus

beside Players’ Theatre. Access from inside campus, not from

Pearse Street.

• 201 Pearse Street (PC’s only) – to the right of Áras an Phiarsaigh.

Access from inside campus.

• ‘The Arches’ – under the railway line in the northeast corner of the

campus.

• The Hamilton Building – at the Westland Row end of the campus.

Access from inside campus.

All the above locations also have printers. Up-to-date information about

printing is available here:

http://isservices.tcd.ie/facilities/printing.php

http://isservices.tcd.ie/facilities/printing.php

71

Getting Started

When you register, you will be given a login ID and a password, both

of which you will need to access the college’s computers. You will also

be given a college e-mail account. Brief starter courses in computer

use will also be offered during the week of registration.

Every student will also be provided with personal filestorage. This

means that you can save material on the college network, so you can

access this material on any computer in any of the above locations, and

not have to rely entirely on fragile floppy discs. It is of course

recommended that you save all your work onto floppy discs as well.

Anything you save on your personal filestorage will be safe from prying

eyes, as it can only be opened using your own password.

Any problems you have with computers should be brought to

Information Systems Services (IS Services). Their helpdesk is in

Áras an Phiarsaigh, contact information is located here

http://isservices.tcd.ie/help/helpdesk_contact.php. For further

information, see the IS Services Handbook, which is available from the

helpdesk, or consult their website that is located at:

http://isservices.tcd.ie/

Some Useful Websites

Philosophy resources can be accessed at the following sites:

• http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/archives/philos-l.html

(“Philos-L”, c/o the University of Liverpool Philosophy Department)

http://isservices.tcd.ie/help/helpdesk_contact.php

http://isservices.tcd.ie/

http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/archives/philos-l.html

http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/archives/philos-l.html

72

• http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/philinks.htm

(Guide to philosophy on the web, no longer being updated since

2003)

• http://www.epistemelinks.com/index.asp

(Episteme links, no longer being updated since 2011)

• http://www.philosophers.co.uk/index.htm

(The Philosopher’s Magazine)

http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/philinks.htm

http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/philinks.htm

http://www.epistemelinks.com/index.asp

http://www.epistemelinks.com/index.asp

http://www.philosophers.co.uk/index.htm

http://www.philosophers.co.uk/index.htm

73

The Metaphysical Society

The Metaphysical Society is a student society whose purpose is to allow

students to discuss philosophical issues in an informal setting. It should

not be confused with the Philosophical Society (also called ‘The Phil.’),

which is a general debating society, and not particularly philosophical in

orientation.

The Early Years...

The Society was founded in 1929 under the guidance of Professor A.A.

Luce. In its early years, students read papers to the society to have

them discussed by their peers. The society’s activities also included

debates, discussions and Question Times. The last were panel

discussions on questions of philosophical interest, such as ‘Is war

inevitable?’, ‘Is the rose red in the dark?’ or ‘Is philosophy the talk of idle

old men to ignorant youth?’ Guest speakers were also invited, and the

society was addressed by such eminent figures as C.E.M. Joad, Erwin

Schrödinger, Gilbert Ryle (twice), J.L. Austin, John Mackie, Anthony

Flew and Bernard Williams. Academic gowns were compulsory at

meetings, but the proceedings were probably not excessively formal, as

one early report on the society’s activities tells us that the society

purchased ‘a liberal supply of best Donegal poitín.’

... to the Present

The society seems to have been less active in the 1980’s and early

74

90’s, but it underwent something of a renaissance from 1997 onwards.

A new addition to the society’s activities is the Philosophy Café. The

members of the society meet once a week or so to discuss a topic of

philosophical interest, which is briefly introduced by one person. Topics

have included ‘Good God or God Awful?’ (the relationship between

religion and morality), ‘The Mind’s “I”‘ (the nature of personal identity),

and ’Me, Myself and I’ (egoism and altruism). Although the society no

longer supplies poitín, it does supply coffee and wine. Guest Speakers

are still invited by the society, and recent speakers have included the

philosopher Robert Solomon and the physicist Julian Barbour. The

society also organises excursions to places of philosophical interest,

such as Berkeley’s birthplace of Thomastown, Co. Kilkenny. They also

sometimes show films of broadly philosophical interest - including,

recently, Ingmar Bergman’s allegorical The Seventh Seal and Derek

Jarman’s Wittgenstein. Academic gowns are no longer compulsory at

these events.

The society possesses its own ever-growing library of

philosophical texts, which the members can borrow. This can be very

useful for study purposes, as the college library can sometimes be

overstretched.

The Metaphysical Society has a noticeboard just outside the

Philosophy Department office. This board gives news of forthcoming

events as well as the society’s library opening hours.

75

Student Health Service

Student Clinics

The Health Centre is open during term and non-term time. The hours of

attendance for students are as follows:

10.30am – 1.00pm

2.00pm – 4.40pm

Consultations are normally by prior appointment only, but emergencies

are accommodated.

General practitioner clinics are held daily, these include:

• Minor psychiatry

• Contraception

• Smears

• Vaccinations

• Eye Testing

• Sexual Health Clinic

• Confidential H.I.V. Counselling and Testing

• Ante-Natal care

Please see http://www.tcd.ie/collegehealth for further information.

http://www.tcd.ie/collegehealth

76

Careers Advisory Service

TCD Careers Advisory Service helps students and recent graduates of

the College make and implement informed decisions about their future.

A full range of services are available on http://www.tcd.ie/Careers/ and

in the Careers Library, East Chapel, Front Square.

http://www.tcd.ie/Careers/

Documents

Philosophy_13_14 Phi.. - Trinity College Dublin