Syllabus Showcase: Ethics in the Novel, Felicia Nimue Ackerman

One of my favorite courses that I have developed is Ethics in the Novel. Why organize an ethics course around novels?

Philosophy teachers are well aware that traditional ethics courses rely heavily on hypothetical situations, especially those that are what John Martin Fischer calls ‘streamlined,’ i.e, “schematized hypothetical scenarios in which only a few details are filled in, and all the other details are left out.”[1] Streamlined situations can be invaluable for exploring the boundaries of our moral intuitions. But they can also be so schematic and so alien to our experience that students lack sufficient emotional grasp of these situations to make moral judgments about them. Novels offer enhanced hypothetical situations involving richly detailed characters and circumstances that enable readers to enter imaginatively into the characters’ inner lives and grasp their viewpoints from the inside. Novels are also fun for students to read and discuss!

Here is what I tell students at the first meeting of my course on Ethics in the Novel.

“Today I’ll give you an overview of what this course is and what it isn’t, with special reference to the “isn’t.” Maybe because the word ‘philosophy’ comes from a Greek word meaning ‘love of wisdom,’ many newcomers hope philosophy will make them wise, give them inner peace, and enlighten them about the meaning of life.

This course is about as likely to do that as a course in number theory. Instead, it involves rigorous analysis of arguments and concepts. Moreover, although the course discusses ethics, the aim is to make you a better thinker about ethical issues, not a morally better person. If you start out writing poorly argued papers, end up writing terrifically well-argued ones, and then the day after this course is over, you go out and rob a bank, I have succeeded in my aim for the course. That doesn’t mean I hope you’ll rob a bank. I’ll be appalled if you do. I’ll also be appalled if my dentist robs a bank. But it’s not my job to get you not to rob a bank, any more than it’s my job to get my dentist not to.

This course has no trigger warnings or content warnings. It is a safe space for the freewheeling discussion of controversial views, including any criticisms you want to make of views put forth by your fellow students or by me. You’ll have many opportunities. You can’t refute your introductory chemistry teacher unless that teacher is incompetent, but philosophy has no large body of information you must assimilate before you can start using your critical judgment. Philosophy depends on reasoning. Don’t worry that your criticisms might hurt someone’s feelings. The feeling I want to prevent in this course is boredom. And here’s a course motto, the acronym ‘MYPAS,’ spelled ‘M.Y.P. A. S’. It’s intended to curb the long-windedness that students and I often fall prey to. So what does ‘MYPAS’ stand for? ‘Make Your Point And Stop.’

This course has no deadlines except those necessary for practical reasons, such as ensuring that papers can be graded in time for me to turn in course grades. In the interest of fairness, all papers are graded with the writer’s name deleted. Anyone who wants a course grade of Incomplete will get one, no questions asked. I also need no explanation for a missed class, late arrival, or early departure. I respect your privacy.

This course has one strict rule: we never, never — can you guess what we never do? We never talk about our personal lives. There are two reasons for this. First — let’s face it — everyone’s personal life is apt to be more fascinating to himself or herself than to others. (And, speaking of ‘himself or herself,’ whether to use the generic ‘he’ is a political decision, so I can’t make it for you, any more than I can decide whom you vote for.) The second reason is that we’ll be discussing such painful matters as the morality of a woman who is sexually assaulted but decides not to report it. If we know you’ve been in this dreadful situation, our reluctance to increase your pain by criticizing this decision might inhibit our critical discussion. Critical discussion is the lifeblood of this course, and I won’t risk inhibiting it.

All these course policies of mine are up for critical discussion, starting right now. How about it?”

Students often take me up on this invitation, and their critical assessments continue as the course progresses.  For example, some object at the outset that the ban on students’ personal stories risks depriving the class of a valuable source of insights. They are right. Virtually every policy has disadvantages as well as advantages. By the end of the course, many students say they were glad not to have our discussions bogged down by personal stories. Many but of course not all. Virtually no policy will satisfy everyone.

[1] John Martin Fischer, “Stories,” Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 20 (1996): 5.

The Syllabus Showcase of the APA Blog is designed to share insights into the syllabi of philosophy educators. We include syllabi in their original, unedited format that showcase a wide variety of philosophy classes.  We would love for you to be a part of this project. Please contact Series Editor, Dr. Matt Deaton via MattDeaton.com or Editor of the Teaching Beat, Dr. Sabrina D. MisirHiralall via sabrinamisirhiralall@apaonline.org with potential submissions.

Felicia Nimue Ackerman

Felicia Nimue Ackerman is professor of philosophy at Brown University. In addition to conventional philosophy, her publications include a monthly op-ed column as well as sixteen short stories and over 200 poems including this one about "Professor Superstar," which appeared as a letter in The Chronicle of Higher Education online: He values his peers, but he snubs lesser scholars / As if they could scarcely be seen / He thinks that this shows that his standards are lofty / It really just shows that he's mean.