1. The Nature of Skepticism
Skepticism has challenged philosophy since Pyrrho. Global skepticism doubts all knowledge; local skepticism targets specific domains. But can the skeptic coherently doubt everything — including the validity of doubt itself?
Compare Pyrrhonian and Cartesian skepticism. Can radical doubt be a livable position, or is it purely academic?
2. Epistemic Justice and Who Gets Believed
Miranda Fricker introduced "testimonial injustice" — when a speaker is less credible because of prejudice. Think of courtrooms, classrooms, and conversations where marginalized voices are dismissed.
Examine a real-world situation where epistemic injustice occurred. How does credibility excess and deficit shape knowledge?
3. Fake News and the Epistemology of the Internet
Misinformation spreads rapidly online. Algorithms curate our information environments, creating echo chambers and filter bubbles. But who is epistemically responsible — the individual, the platform, or the state?
Argue for or against the idea that social media companies bear a moral and epistemic duty to combat misinformation.
4. When Should You Believe Testimony?
We rely on others for most of what we know. But testimony is fallible — people lie, misremember, and are biased. How much should you trust others, and when is it reasonable to withhold belief?
Compare the "principle of credulity" with "epistemic vigilantism." When is healthy skepticism warranted?
5. Is Certainty the Enemy of Knowledge?
Descartes sought certainty as the foundation of knowledge. But Peirce argued that fallibilism — the willingness to revise any belief — is a virtue, not a weakness. Is the desire for absolute certainty an obstacle?
Argue whether certainty is necessary for knowledge, or whether fallible knowledge is sufficient.
6. The Trolley Problem and Its Variations
The trolley problem pits utilitarian and deontological intuitions against each other. But what happens when we change the details — the fat man, the loop, the transplant surgeon?
Construct your own variation of the trolley problem that exposes a tension between moral principles. What does it reveal?
7. Moral Responsibility in an Unjust World
If someone steals bread to feed their family, are they morally responsible? Moral responsibility seems to require freedom and knowledge — but how much freedom do we have in a world shaped by poverty, ideology, and social conditioning?
Explore how social determinism affects moral responsibility. Can we blame individuals for systemic failures?
8. The Moral Status of Animals
Peter Singer argues that speciesism — discriminating based on species membership — is as morally arbitrary as racism. Tom Regan claims animals have inherent value. But do animals have rights, or just interests?
Defend a position on the moral status of animals. What criteria determine moral consideration?
9. Ethics of Artificial Intelligence
AI systems make decisions about hiring, lending, and criminal justice. Algorithmic bias can perpetuate racial and gender discrimination. Should AI systems be held morally accountable, or only their creators?
Examine the ethical challenges of AI in a specific domain. Who is responsible when an AI system causes harm?
10. Cultural Relativism and Universal Morals
Cultural relativism holds that moral norms are culturally determined — there are no universal moral truths. But is this an empirical observation or a philosophical claim? Can relativism avoid self-refutation?
Argue for or against moral universalism. Can we respect cultural difference while maintaining that some things are simply wrong?
11. The Meaning of Life
If the universe is indifferent, can life have meaning? Camus said we must imagine Sisyphus happy. Frankl found meaning through suffering. Is meaning made, found, or an illusion?
Compare at least two philosophers on meaning. What is the relationship between meaning, purpose, and value?
12. Absurdity and Rebellion
Camus argued that life is absurd — there is a gap between our desire for meaning and the universe's silence. His response was not despair but rebellion: we must live fully in the face of the absurd.
What does it mean to "revolt" against absurdity? Is Camus's response more honest than religious or philosophical consolation?
13. Death and the Good Life
Epicurus argued that death is nothing to us: "Where death is, I am not; where I am, death is not." But does this argument succeed? Does death deprive us of future goods, and does that matter?
Evaluate Epicurus's argument against the deprivation account of death's harm. Would immortality be desirable?
14. Freedom and Authenticity
Sartre claimed we are "condemned to be free" — even refusing to choose is a choice. But are we free if our desires, beliefs, and characters are shaped by forces beyond our control?
What does it mean to live authentically? Can you be free while acknowledging social determinism?
15. Is There a Self?
Buddhist philosophy denies a permanent self; Hume described the self as a bundle of perceptions; Parfit argued personal identity is not what matters. Is the self an illusion — and if so, who is asking?
Compare Buddhist and Western accounts of selfhood. What are the practical and ethical implications of "no-self"?
16. Can AI Be Conscious?
Large language models process and generate text in ways that mimic understanding. But is there "something it is like" to be an AI? Can consciousness arise from computation alone?
Apply Chalmers's "hard problem" to AI. What would count as evidence of machine consciousness?
17. Personal Identity Over Time
Ship of Theseus: if you replace every plank, is it the same ship? Locke argued identity is continuity of memory; Parfit argued identity is not what matters in survival. What makes you the same person you were ten years ago?
Evaluate the memory criterion of personal identity. What happens to the criterion when memories are false?
18. Do Animals Have Minds?
Descartes denied consciousness to animals, calling them mere automates. Today, cognitive ethologists like Donald Griffin argue that many animals have rich mental lives. What evidence would settle the question?
Examine the criteria for attributing minds to other beings. How do we avoid both anthropomorphism and anthropocentrism?
19. Dreams and the Boundaries of Experience
In dreams, we have experiences that feel real — but are they? Descartes used dreams as a tool for radical doubt. Can dream experiences count as genuine knowledge or perception?
Explore the epistemology of dreaming. Do dreams reveal something about consciousness that waking life obscures?
20. Philosophical Zombies and the Hard Problem
Chalmers's "zombie argument" imagines beings physically identical to us but lacking conscious experience. If such beings are conceivable, consciousness is not identical with physical processes. But are zombies really conceivable?
Evaluate the zombie argument. Does conceivability entail possibility? What does this mean for physicalism?
21. Economic Inequality and Justice
Rawls argued that inequalities are just only if they benefit the least advantaged. Nozick countered that redistribution is theft. Piketty showed that inequality grows naturally in capitalist economies. Who is right?
Defend a theory of distributive justice. How should a just society balance equality, liberty, and efficiency?
22. Free Speech and Its Limits
Should speech that harms, offends, or silences others be protected? Mill's harm principle draws a line, but where? Is hate speech protected expression or incitement to violence?
Argue for a specific theory of free speech. When, if ever, should speech be restricted?
23. Punishment and the Ethics of Retribution
Should criminals be punished because they deserve it (retribution), because it deters others (consequentialism), or because it reforms them (rehabilitation)? Each theory conflicts with the others.
Defend one theory of punishment. What are the strongest objections, and how do you respond?
24. Democracy and Epistemic Authority
Epistocracy argues that those who know more should decide more. Democracy gives everyone an equal voice, regardless of knowledge. Who should rule — the wise or the many?
Compare epistocracy and democracy. Can democratic legitimacy survive if voters are systematically uninformed?
25. Global Justice and the Limits of Nationalism
Pogge argues that the global rich have negative duties toward the global poor. Cosmopolitanism challenges the moral significance of national borders. But does global justice require a world government?
Defend a position on global justice. Do national borders have moral significance, or are they arbitrary?
26. Environmental Ethics and Intrinsic Value
Does nature have value independent of its usefulness to humans? Leopold's "land ethic" extends moral consideration to ecosystems. Deep ecologists argue nature has intrinsic value. Critics call this "eco-fascism."
Should we extend moral rights to non-sentient entities like rivers, forests, or species? What criteria matter?
27. Art, Beauty, and the Sublime
Kant distinguished the beautiful from the sublime: beauty pleases while the sublime overwhelms. Is beauty objective (Plato) or subjective (Hume)? Does art have a duty to be beautiful, or is the avant-garde's challenge to beauty itself beautiful?
Define the sublime. What is the relationship between beauty, power, and awe?
28. Technology and Human Flourishing
Heidegger warned that technology "enframes" the world, reducing everything to standing reserve. Postman worried about television eroding public discourse. But technology also enables connection and creativity.
Is technology neutral, or does it shape us in morally significant ways? What does human flourishing require?
29. The Ethics of Digital Life
Social media algorithms are designed to maximize engagement, often by exploiting outrage and addiction. Digital surveillance is pervasive. Is the digital world a new kind of public sphere, or a new kind of prison?
Evaluate the moral landscape of digital technology. What rights do we have to privacy, attention, and autonomy online?
30. Climate Change and Intergenerational Justice
Current generations benefit from fossil fuels while future generations bear the costs. Parfit's "non-identity problem" complicates obligations to future people who would not exist under different policies.
Do we have moral obligations to future generations? If so, how strong are they, and what do they require of us now?