1 KING S COLLEGE LONDON DEPARTMENT OF THEOLOGY AND RELIGIOUS STUDIES ACADEMIC YEAR 2015-16 MODULE SYLLABUS 6AAT3044: Special Questions in Social Ethics 1. Basic Information Module Level: 6 Credit Value: 15 credits Semester: 1 Lecturer: Dr Tony Milligan Email: Anthony.milligan@kcl.ac.uk Office: Room 3.42, Virginia Woof Building Office Hours: Tuesday 10:00-11:00; Wednesday 12:00-13:00. No appointment necessary. Lecture/Seminar time and location: Wednesday 09:00-11;00, Room K2.40, King s Building, Strand Campus. (Check the online timetable via the coursepage for changes of time or location) 2. Weekly Schedule Week 1 23 rd September Introducing Social Ethics Week 2 30 th October Theories of the Social World Week 3 7 th October Theories of Justice Week 4 14 th October Theories of Poverty, Social Inequality and Exclusion Week 5 21 st October Racism, Discrimination and Disability READING WEEK (NO LECTURE/SEMINAR) Week 6 4 th November Social Ethics and Pluralism, Feminist Philosophy Week 7 11 th November Terrorism Week 8 18 th November Health Justice Week 9 25 th November The Social Ethics of Ageing Week 10 2nd December Social Ethics and Economics (See section for weekly reading.) 3. What to Bring to Lectures Bring printouts of the primary sources made available through KEATS. 4. Reading The Reading for Week 1 is as follows: (1) Required Reading: Garrett Hardin, The Tragedy of the Commons, Science, New Series, Vol. 162, No. 3859 (Dec. 13, 1968), pp. 1243-1248. AVAILABLE ON KEATS.
2 (2) Required Reading: Baylor L. Johnson, Ethical Obligations in a Tragedy of the Commons, Environmental Values 12 (2003): 271-287. AVAILABLE ON KEATS (3) Optional/Additional Reading: David Hollenbach, The Common Good and Christian Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge UP 2000, Chapter 1 [AVAILABLE IN LIBRARY Franklin-Wilkins BJ1249 HOL], Reading for the Course as a Whole: SECTION A: BACKGROUND AND GENERAL READING Important Note: Prioritizing your Reading Works which are particularly recommended are asterisked (*). It should be beneficial for you to read some of these items. * Stanley Hauwerwas, A Community of Character: Toward a Constructive Christian Social Ethic. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press: 1981 [Maughan Library BJ1251 H28] David Hollenbach, The Common Good and Christian Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge UP 2000 [Franklin-Wilkins BJ1249 HOL] * Jenny Teichman, Social Ethics: a student s guide. Oxford: Blackwell 1996 [Maughan Library HM216 TEI] * The Blackwell Companion to Christian Ethics: Second edition. Edited by: Stanley Hauerwas and Samuel Wells (e-book available through library catalogue: eisbn: 9781444331349) Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Ethics. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress 2009 [Maughan Library PT2603.O62 BON] George Forell, Christian Social Teachings: a reader in Christian social ethics from the Bible to the present. Minneapolis, MN: Augsberg 1971 [Maughan Library BT738 F76] H. LaFollette, (Ed.), Ethics in Practice Oxford: Blackwell 2002 J. Horton, & S. Mendus, (Eds.) (1996) After MacIntyre: Critical Perspectives on the Work of Alasdair MacIntyre Oxford: Polity Press W Merkel, Social Democracy in Power. London: Routledge 2008 Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue University of Notre Dame Press, 1981. Alasdair MacIntyre, Whose Justice? Which Rationality? University of Notre Dame Press, 1988. SECTION B: SESSION TOPICS AND SUGGESTED READING Suggested readings for each topic will be put up on KEATS. Week (1) Required Reading: Garrett Hardin, The Tragedy of the Commons, Science, New Series, Vol. 162, No. 3859 (Dec. 13, 1968), pp. 1243-1248. AVAILABLE ON KEATS. Baylor L. Johnson Ethical Obligations in a Tragedy of the Commons, Environmental Values 12 (2003): 271-287. AVAILABLE ON KEATS. Optional Reading:
David Hollenbach, The Common Good and Christian Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge UP 2000, Chapter 1 [AVAILABLE IN LIBRARY Franklin-Wilkins BJ1249 HOL], 3 Week (2) Theories of the Social World Required Reading: Seyla Benhabib, Feminist theory and Hannah Arendt's concept of public space, History of the Human Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 2 (1993), pp. 97-114. Pierre Bourdieu, The Social Space and the Genesis of Groups, Theory and Society, Vol. 14, No. 6. (1985), pp. 723-744. Week (3) Theories of Justice Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Basic Books, 1974. John Rawls, A Theory of Justice Revised Edition, Harvard University Press, 1999 D Miller, Social Justice. Oxford UP 1076 D Miller, Principles of Social Justice. Harvard UP 1999 Susan Moller Okin, Justice, Gender, and the Family, Basic Books, 1989. Michael Sandel, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice Cambridge University Press, 1982. Michael Walzer, Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. Basic Books, 1984. Brian Barry, Theories of Justice. University of California Press, 1989. Samuel Freeman, The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Cambridge University Press, 2002. Norman Daniels, Reading Rawls: Critical Studies on Rawls A Theory of Justice. Stanford University Press 1989. Chandran Kukathas and Philip Pettit, Rawls: A Theory of Justice and its Critics. Stanford University Press, 1990. Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom. Anchor Press, 2000. Week (4) Theories of Poverty, Social Inequality and Social Exclusion D. Brady, Rethinking the Sociological Measurement of Poverty. Social Forces 81,3 (2003)715-751 B. Barry, Social exclusion, Social Isolation and the Distribution of Income, CASE paper 12, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, London School of Economics 1998 A. Bhalla, F. Lapeyre, Poverty and exclusion in a global world New York: St.Martin's Press; London: Macmillan Press 1999 C. Clert, Evaluating the Concept of Social Exclusion in Development Discourse, European Journal of Development Research, 11, 2 (1999): 176-199 P. Littlewood et al. (eds.), Social exclusion in Europe: Problems and Paradigms, Ashgate: Aldershot, England 1999 S. Paugam, Poverty and Social Disqualification: A Comparative Analysis of Cumulative Social Disadvantage in Europe, Journal of European Social Policy, 6,4 (1996):287-303 R. Saith, Social Exclusion. QEH House Working Paper 72. Oxford 2003 A.K. Sen, Commodities and Capabilities, Amsterdam: Elsevier and reprinted (1999), New Delhi: Oxford University Press 1985 P. Unger, Living High and Letting Die. New York: OUP 1996 Week (5) Racism, discrimination and the challenge of disability Appiah, Kwame Anthony 2002 Racisms, in LaFollette (Ed.) pp. 389 399. LaFollette, Hugh (Ed.) 2002 Ethics in Practice: An Anthology, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Gardner, John, Discrimination as Injustice. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 16,3 (1996) 353-367 Goldman, Alan, Affirmative Action. Philosophy and Public Affairs 5,2 (1976) 178-195 Leach, Robert 2002 Political Ideology in Britain, Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Miles, R. 1989 Racism, London: Routledge. Mill, J. S. 1859 On Liberty, Indianapolis: Hackett. Sher, George, Justifying Reverse Discrimination in Employment. Philosophy and Public Affairs 4,2 (1975) 159-170 4 Week (6) Social Ethics and Pluralism, Feminist Philosophy Jonathan Sacks, The Dignity of Difference: How to Avoid the Clash of Civilisations, London: Continuum 2003 Fletcher, G. 1996: The Instability of Tolerance, in D. Heyd (ed.), Toleration, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 158 172 Forst, R. 2003: Toleration, Justice and Reason, in C. McKinnon and D. Castiglione (eds.), The Culture of Toleration in Diverse Societies, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 71-85 Forst, R. 2004: The Limits of Toleration, Constellations 11:3, 312-325 Galeotti, A. E. 1993: Citizenship and Equality: The Place for Toleration, Political Theory 21, 585 605 Horton, J. 1994: Three (Apparent) Paradoxes of Toleration, Synthesis Philosophica 17, 7-20 Horton, J. 1996: Toleration as a Virtue, in D. Heyd (ed.), Toleration, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 28-43 John Locke, A Letter Concerning Toleration ed. Tully, Indianapolis: Hackett, 1983 Mendus, S. 1989: Toleration and the Limits of Liberalism, Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press Raz, J. 1988: Autonomy, Toleration, and the Harm Principle, in S. Mendus (ed.), Justifying Toleration. Conceptual and Historical Perspectives, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 155 175 Scanlon, T. 1996: The Difficulty of Tolerance, in D. Heyd (ed.), Toleration. An Elusive Virtue, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 226 239. Week (7) Terrorism T. Coady, Tony and M. O'Keefe, eds., Terrorism and Justice: Moral Argument in a Threatened World, Melbourne: Melbourne University Press 2002 Robert Goodin, What's Wrong with Terrorism? Oxford: Polity 2006 Ted Honderich, After the Terror, 2nd edn., Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press 2003 Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations, 3rd edn., New York: Basic Books 2000 Michael Walzer, Michael, Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands, Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 2, no. 2, 1973, pp. 160 180 Week (8) Health Justice Beauchamp, D. E., & Steinbock, B. (Eds). (1999). New ethics for the public's health. New York: Oxford University Press Beauchamp, T. (2010). The concept of paternalism in biomedical ethics. In Beauchamp, T., Standing on principles. (pp. 101 119). New York: Oxford University Press Brock, D. W. (2002). Priority to the worse off in health-care resource prioritization. In Medicine and Social Justice: Essays on the Distribution of Health Care. (pp 362 372). New York: Oxford University Press Childress, J. F., Faden, R. R., Gaare, R. D., Gostin, L. O., Kahn, J., Bonnie, R. J., et al. (2002). Public health ethics: Mapping the terrain. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 30(2), 170 178 Daniels, N. (2008). Just health: Meeting health needs fairly. New York: Cambridge University Press
Holland, S. (2007). Public health ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press Pogge, T. W. (2002). Responsibilities for poverty-related ill health. Ethics & International Affairs, 16(2), 71 81. 5 Week (9) The social ethics of ageing C.A. O Boyle, Measuring the Quality of Later life. Philosophical Transactions 352/1363 (1997) 1871-1879 World Bank, Averting the Old-Age Crisis: Policies to Protect the Old and Promote Growth, New York (Oxford University Press 1994) A. Ai, Spiritual well-being, population aging, and a need for improving practice with the elderly: A psychosocial account. Social Thought, 19,3 (2000) 1-21 R.C. Atchley, Everday Mysticism: Spiritual development in later life. Journal of Adult Develoment 4 (1997) 123-134 D. Blazer, Spirituality and aging well. Generations, xv,1 (1991) 61-66 P. Coleman, A. O Hanlon, Ageing and development. London: Arnold 2004 M.A. Kimble et al. (eds.), Aging, spirituality and religion: A handbook. Minneapolis: Fortress Press 1995 Week (10) Social Ethics and Economics D. Satz, Why some Things Should not be for Sale. The Moral Limits of Markets. Oxford: OUP 2010 M. Sandel, What Money Can t Buy. The Moral Limits of Markets. London: Allen Lane 2012. Tomas Sedláček, Economics of Good and Evil. The Quest for Economic Meaning From Gilgamesh to Wall Street. Oxford: OUP 2011 5. Outline of Module Educational Aims, Learning Outcomes (a) Module educational aims The aim of this module is to deal with special questions in social ethics. These special questions concern metaethical issues of social ethics and questions of the application of social ethics. Special attention will be given to the Christian perspective. (b) Module learning outcomes Generic skills: Ability to analyse texts and arguments Ability to summarise and present arguments Ability to research, plan and present essays to specified deadlines Module-specific skills: Students should be introduced to metaethical questions of social ethics become familiar with some key debates of applied social ethics develop a critical sense of the relevance of social ethics for urgent social problems develop a critical sense of the challenge of the Christian contribution to current debates in social ethics (c) Module content The educational aim of the course consists in providing students with a critical understanding of social ethics with its epistemological and metaethical dimension and its contexts of
6 application. A special focus will be laid on the Christian perspective. The approach will be a problem- and skill-oriented approach. Through lectures, students will be introduced to contemporary discussions of social ethics. Students will be provided with material that will help them to follow the key debates. Some time will be assigned to discussion in class. The interactive nature of this method of teaching will require a flexible approach to the amount of material covered in any single lecture. 6a. Assessment (Study Abroad Students should also see Section 6b below) Coursework assessment: Each student will be given a provisional mark and constructive feedback on the coursework essay and the end of session essay, both returned via KEATS, which may be followed up by a one-to-one tutorial in appointments to be advertised. (a) Nature of assessment There is no formative assessment (i.e. assessment that students are expected to submit, but which does not count towards the final module mark), but only two compulsory elements of summative assessment, both of which contribute to the final module mark: 1 x 3000-word coursework essay, the title to be chosen from the list provided at the end of this module syllabus (worth 40% of the overall module mark). Do not formulate your own essay title. 1 x 3500-word end of session essay, the title to be chosen from the list provided at the end of this module syllabus (worth 60% of the overall module mark). Do not formulate your own essay (b) Coursework essay deadline, end of session essay deadline The deadline for the submission of the assessed coursework essay is 4pm Monday 9 th November, 2015. You will then receive feedback on the submission on KEATS no later than Monday 30 th November, 2015. The deadline for the submission of the assessed final essay is 4pm on Monday, 18 th January 2016. You will then receive feedback on the submission on KEATS no later than Monday 8 th February, 2016. (c) Scope of assessment Coursework essay questions generally relate to some topics covered in the first half of the module. End of session essay questions normally deal with most of the remaining topics, but care is taken to avoid overlap across both sets of questions. (d) How to impress the examiners In the assessed essays, successful students will need to demonstrate a nuanced grasp of any topic, an awareness of its philosophical context and a capacity to develop a well-reasoned argument that is convincingly supported by reference to suitable evidence and is presented in a structured manner using clear English. Make sure that you consult the generic Undergraduate Marking Criteria document. Make sure that you follow the reference style that will be discussed in class: TRS has adopted the MHRA (Modern Humanities ResearchAssociation) style and Harvard. A Style Guide will be available to students, introducing them to MHRA and Harvard. The School/Faculty has set up a webpage which lists the styles adopted by individual Departments: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/artshums/study/handbook/sguides/assessment/refsys.aspx Poor English (e.g. grammar, punctuation and spelling) will lead to loss of marks. Inadequate scholarly presentation of the assessed coursework essay (e.g. over the styles of footnotes/endnotes and bibliography) will similarly be penalized. Discussion of the best approaches to meeting these requirements forms part of the teaching programme in the module. Students should seek advice if they are unsure of anything.
7 In preparing and submitting your assessed coursework essay, please note the following points: (i) It must not exceed the word limit. The limit includes all footnotes/endnotes, but excludes the bibliography, which you should provide. There is a 5% tolerance: no penalty will be incurred for essays that are up to 5% over the word limit. Beyond that tolerance band, two marks will be deducted for every 5% of excess words until 50% is reached. After 50%, three marks will normally be deducted for each further 5% of excess words. (ii) It must consistently be set out in accordance with a recognized citation system. You are strongly encouraged to follow the College s ISS Citing References guide, which can be accessed via the website. Accurate citation of sources, in such a manner as to enable a reader easily to identify and locate them, is very important in historical writing. Please note that the presentation of your work, including the standard of English and the quality of source referencing and bibliographical provision, has a strong bearing on the mark given for it. (iii) The first page of the submitted coursework essay must be a School of Arts & Humanities coversheet (downloadable via the departmental handbook), with the requisite information inserted completely and accurately. Pay careful attention when giving your candidate number, which changes for each academic year, as your work cannot be attributed to you on the College systems if this information is either incomplete or wrong. (iv) It must be submitted via the assessment submission section of the KEATS area for the module, by the published deadline. Late submissions will be treated as follows unless an extension has been granted by the Chair of the BA Programme Board of Examiners on the basis of an Extension Request Form (ERF), supplied with supporting evidence, or comes to be granted retrospectively: Work submitted within 24 hours after the original deadline will be marked, but the mark for this element will be capped at 40%. Work submitted more than 24 hours of the original deadline will not be marked, and the submission will receive a mark of zero. An extension may be granted retrospectively, providing the ERF and supporting documentation is submitted no later than 2 weeks after the published coursework submission deadline. Note that extensions cannot be granted by individual module teachers. ERFs and NEAs can be downloaded from the Policy Zone of the College website. Please also note the following points: (i) Check that you understand the rules for submitting assessed coursework. Be aware that the deadline for this submission is FINAL. (ii) Check that you understand College rules on plagiarism. Information about plagiarism is available via the College website, at: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/library/help/plagiarism/index.aspx, and you should also have been enrolled on a KEATS plagiarism module. Collusion also counts as misconduct. Think twice before circulating your work to other students. (e) Marking policy Work submitted for this module will be assessed according to Model 3, as modified by the BA Programme Board of Examiners. For a definition of this model, check the Marking Policy part of the departmental web pages, which can be found at: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/artshums/depts/trs/study/handbook/assessment/taught/markmodels.aspx The examiners following Model 3 will apply the generic Undergraduate Marking Criteria, which can be found at: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/artshums/study/handbook/sguides/assessment/ugmarkcrit.pdf. 6b. Assessment (Study Abroad Students only) You follow the same assessment regime as ordinary KCL undergraduates: see Section 3 above, even if you are only here for one term.
8 7. Provisional List of Essay Questions (THE ESSAY TOPICS BELOW ARE PROVISIONAL AND MAY BE MODIFIED DURING THE FIRST WEEK OF TEACHING.) SECTION C: ESSAY QUESTIONS (suggested readings for the essay question will be provided on KEATS after the first session) COURSE WORK ESSAY - CHOOSE ONE QUESTION 1) Is poverty always a matter of injustice? Are there no cases in which poverty and justice are compatible with one another? 2) Is there a tension between individual ethics and social ethics? Explain the reasons for your answer. 3) Which goods are basic requirements for a good life? Why? 4) How can a dialogue be established between Christian ethics and Rawls theory of justice? What might these approaches have to say to each other? 5) How can we best combine an attitude towards racism with a theory of social exclusion? Additional Questions (at the request of students): 2b) Is there a tension between between individual ethics and the social concerns of government? Explain the reasons for your answer. 5b) How can we best combine an attitude towards gender equality with a theory of social exclusion? END OF SESSION ESSAY CHOOSE ONE QUESTION 1) When ageing becomes connected to poverty what is the nature of the injustice which this involves? 2) Is it desirable for society as a whole to enhance people s life spans? 3) What are the key ethical challenges posed by terrorism 4) Is pluralism a value in itself? 5) What are the gravest injustices in our economic system? 6) Is there an ethically acceptable justification for terrorism? 7) Develop a critical account of age discrimination. Describe the connections between ageing and racism. Additional Question (at the request of students) 8) In what sense (if any) can inequalities in health be a matter of injustice?