Students are not typically taught philosophy during their K-12 years, so few know what to expect when they sign up for my Introduction to Philosophy course. Philosophy is often derided as useless in the “real world”—almost every philosophy major, upon revealing their area of study, has heard, deridingly: “Philosophy?! What are you going to do with that?” At the opposite end of the spectrum, applied or public philosophy are often dismissed as not “real philosophy.” My goal for every Philosophy 101 is to emphasize the intersection of traditional “pure” philosophy and practical application. Here is how I teach two sections of my class—epistemology and philosophy of mind—to fulfill this objective.
Epistemology and Conspiracy Theories
My epistemology section consists of pretty standard fare: lectures and discussions on defining the nature of knowledge (Ayer and Narayan), rationalism (Plato and Descartes) vs. empiricism (Locke and Hume), and the ethics of belief acquisition (Clifford). For our last class for this section, we critically analyze some famous conspiracy theories, for example, PizzaGate, using the tools learned. A prominent theme is how empiricism can help us differentiate likely vs. unlikely claims. For example, when discussing PizzaGate, I start by an uncontroversial empirical fact: there were kids at a pizza shop. There are two possible explanations of this fact: (1) The kids were there because they wanted pizza or (2) The kids were there because they were part of a child-trafficking ring orchestrated by members of the Democratic Party headed by Hillary Clinton. Invoking Hume’s arguments in “On Miracles,” I ask the students what our experience tells us about the most likely explanation for why there are kids in a pizza parlor? Clearly, the simplest and most likely explanation is that they are there because they want pizza. As a response, a student may insist that we cannot know this to be true because it is possible that the child trafficking ring is well hidden. In response, I refresh the lesson of what are the standards of knowledge from both rationalist and empirical perspectives. If Cartesian rationalism is true, then yes, we cannot say we know that there is no child-trafficking ring because we cannot be certain of it. But if this is the standard of knowledge we insist upon, then we couldn’t claim to know much of anything, since there are very few things we can know with certainty. If this is one’s committed standard of knowledge, then we cannot know that we aren’t dreaming right now, or that we aren’t in a Matrix being deceived by malevolent forces.
We end the section by discussing the perils of passing on and reacting to something with false information. During the time the PizzaGate conspiracy theory was gaining traction on 4chan, a man named Edgar Maddison Welch stormed into Comet Ping Pong in Washington D.C., and shot off a gun in the restaurant in an attempt to “save the children” from being sex trafficked. Though no one died, someone very easily could have, and this affirms one of Clifford’s main points that we are morally responsible for evidential belief acquisition because our beliefs affect, and therefore can harm others.
Philosophy of Mind, Life After Death, and Dementia
My Philosophy of Mind section is broken up into two parts. First, we discuss three theories of the relationship between the mind and body: substance dualism (Descartes and Plato), property dualism (Chalmers and Jackson), and materialism (Churchland). This section lends itself to incorporating popular culture insofar as there are many movies that assume some sort of substance dualism as part of their plot; for example, Dr. Strange and Ghost. This leads to a conversation on the plausibility of life after death, and how each theory proposes a different answer. Because so many of my students are, unsurprisingly, substance dualists, this effectively segues into the next section: personal identity. For example, if your grandparent dies, and you believe they subsist in an afterlife, then what is the essence (the “substance-sortal”—yes I teach them that term) of your grandparent that lives on? We then go over three main theories of personal identity: The Biological Account (Olson and DeGrazia), the Embodied Mind Account (McMahan), and the Psychological Account (Locke). We then assess medical issues, like dissociative identity disorder and dementia, and apply each theory to specific cases to see what each one says about whether there is a numerical identity relationship between the pre- and post-disease human being. I then share with them that by the time my dementia-afflicted father died, I didn’t really mourn, since it felt like he had died already. At the end of that week, I ask them to write a short half-page essay regarding which theory of identity most justifies my reaction, and I ask them to think about how our metaphysical assumptions about abstract topics influence how we live in the world, including how we mourn our loved ones.
Philosophy and Creativity
For their final project, I encourage my students to explore how philosophy can fit in and be incorporated into other aspects of their lives. While I do offer the option of writing a traditional paper, I also give students the option to visually depict issues in philosophy of mind, epistemology, philosophy of religion, or the meaning of life using mediums such as painting, sketching, sculpting, sewing, or crocheting. Additionally, students must turn in a short paper (3–5 pages) where they detail how their chosen medium illustrates the selected class topic. The assignment not only requires that students to think about philosophy on a wider scale and relate it to aspects outside the classroom, it also gives them a respite from the pressures of their other classes, and an opportunity to do something they love. This, I hope, helps them associate philosophy with joy rather than stress. Here are three of the most creative ones students turned in the last time I taught intro.
Ultimately, I want my students to be able to answer the often-condescending question about what they can possibly do with a philosophy degree in a way that satisfies their own voices (and if it gets other people to respect philosophy majors more that’s a great perk). After my students finish my class, they are able to assess the legitimacy of a conspiracy theory, consider different ways of thinking about the possibility of personal survival after the death of the body, approach mental health issues in a more critical way, and expand their understanding of philosophy as it applies in the “real world.” Philosophy should not be relegated to the armchair or the ivory tower, but rather it is a dynamic activity that has the potential to add depth, wonder, and beauty to human lives.
Bertha Alvarez Manninen
Dr. Bertha Alvarez Manninen is a professor of philosophy at Arizona State University’s School of Humanities, Arts, and Cultural Studies. Her primary areas of research are ethics, applied ethics, philosophy of religion, philosophy and film, and philosophy and popular culture. She is the author of several books on reproductive ethics, and her work has appeared in journals including the American Journal of Bioethics, Hypatia, Journal of Medical Ethics, and Journal of Religious Ethics. Her main passion is teaching and introducing her students to philosophy and how it permeates so much of our everyday lives – even in kids’ shows!
