Philosophy of economics is a topic I became interested in during the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. A lot of my post-PhD research before then had been in ethical theory, but I studied math as a graduate student before switching to philosophy, and I’ve retained an interest in the philosophy of mathematics. Opinion pieces in the news around 2009 were referring to “economic models,” and I thought not only would the philosophy of economics bring together my various interests, but it would also be a great subject to teach — both philosophically rich and relevant to contemporary social and political life.
Philosophy of economics is a small-ish subfield in the North American context, and I didn’t have a range of syllabi to consider in thinking about what to assign. The course is a second-year undergraduate course, and for the first syllabus in 2014, I drew on Dan Hausman’s entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy to get a sense of what were seen as the most central topics (such as methodology, rational choice theory, and normative issues) and used my own interests to choose readings and to add other topics (such as feminist philosophy of economics and the popular debate over “is economics a science?”). I generally assign readings that are original articles or chapters rather than textbooks, even if they are more challenging for the students. We spend a lot of time in class discussing what is going on in a given text as well as engaging with the ideas in a more complex way.
For the first offering of the course, I incorporated readings by women but fell short of producing a reading list with representational diversity along dimensions such as race and work reflecting non-western perspectives. I also was not satisfied with the readings on some topics — especially on normative issues. I’ve taught the class roughly every two years since then and continue to update the topics and readings. With respect to diversity, an idea that has been useful for me has been to consider that if my readings end up being mostly by white men, it may be partly because the topic has been framed in my thinking in a mistakenly narrow kind of way. I have found anthologies such as Toward a Feminist Philosophy of Economics useful for finding apt new readings on topics such as perspectives on labor beyond the western context.
Philosophy of Economics attracts students with a wide range of educational backgrounds. From the beginning, my university’s Economics Department has been supportive and encouraging, and as of 2016 the course is cross-listed as both a Philosophy course and an Econ course; students can take the course toward their major in both programs. The University of Waterloo is a large public university in Canada, known especially for its programs in STEM subjects such as math and computer science, and the course also attracts a lot of students from those programs for whom it is an elective. I try to emphasize to my students that it’s not a problem if they are coming to class with backgrounds different from those of other students; students without preparation in either philosophy or economics can learn as we go. A lot of writing on topics in the philosophy of economics is done by economists as well as philosophers; adding these readings helps make the course feel like familiar territory to a wider range of students. To make it work, I craft assignments giving a choice of topics, and for the first paper, I have an optional rewrite: any student can rewrite the first paper in response to my feedback and improve their grade. The optional rewrite works well for a range of students. Some who do the rewrite are new to philosophy and benefit from an extra learning phase; others are philosophy majors who want to hone their skills to improve from good papers to writing excellent ones.
For each reading, I post a list of discussion questions about a week in advance. These include “reading questions” and “reflection/discussion questions” Reading questions are questions such as “What is the distinction Milton Friedman draws between ‘positive’ and ‘normative’ economics?” They focus the student’s attention on a particular part of the reading and ask the student to pay close attention to what an author is saying or arguing. Roughly speaking, they have right and wrong answers. In contrast, the “reflection and discussion questions” are questions such as “Do S. Charusheela’s arguments challenge the conclusions of Ann Cudd about the usefulness of game theory in feminist theorizing about household dynamics? Why or why not?” They are open-ended and invite students to form their own ideas and perspectives. During class time, I use both the reading and the discussion/reflection questions to structure lectures and discussions.
One purpose of study questions is to push students to think as they read. A second purpose is to help them not feel overwhelmed: I tell them the study questions focus on the parts of the reading we will concentrate on in class and in assessments, so they do not have to master an entire reading. A third purpose is to help students who want to contribute to class discussion but feel more confident having had a chance to prepare in advance.
Where possible, I have a smallish component of the grade for participation, mostly to incentivize students to stay engaged. I used to base that component on speaking up in class, but I came to believe that was not a good system, as students vary a lot with respect to feeling comfortable speaking in front of a group. I now count a wide range of additional activities as “participation” including speaking with me one-on-one, emailing me their ideas or contributions, or posting to the online discussion. Still, a continuing challenge is that a minority of the students do the majority of the talking; that is something I am still working on.
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. Smrutipriya Pattnaik via smrutipriya23@gmail.com, or Editor of the Teaching Beat, Dr. Nathan Eckstrand via eckstna@gmail.com with potential submissions.
Patricia Marino
Patricia Marino is a Professor of Philosophy at the University of Waterloo in Canada, where she works in ethics, philosophy of economics, epistemology, and philosophy of sex and love. She is the author of Moral Reasoning in a Pluralistic World (McGill-Queens University Press, 2015) and Philosophy of Sex and Love: An Opinionated Introduction (Routledge, 2019) as well as articles on moral dilemmas, ambivalence, and other topics. Her current research engages topics in formalization and quantification.
