hsDeath, Sex, and the Body:
Phenomenology and Foucault (PHIL-3330-01
[14943])
Prof. Edgar
Boedeker
Fall 2017, Tues. & Thur.,
12:30-1:45 Lang
211
Office hours: 2:15-3:15pm Tuesdays and Wednesdays in my office, 2099 Bartlett.
I would also be happy to meet with you at another time, to be arranged in
advance. If you would like to schedule such a meeting, just send me an e-mail
at edgar.boedeker@uni.edu or give me a call at 273-7487.
Required texts (available at University Book & Supply):
- Martin Heidegger, History of the Concept of
Time (Bloomington: University of Indiana Press, 1985; ISBN:
0-253-20717-7).
- Maurice Merleau-Ponty: Basic Writings, edited by
Thomas Baldwin (Routledge, 2004; ISBN 0-415-31587-5)
- The Foucault Reader, edited by Paul Rabinow (New
York: Pantheon, 1984; ISBN: 0-394-71340-0).
- Course packet of photocopied materials from Edmund Husserl and
Martin Heidegger: soon available at Copyworks, at the corner of
College and 23rd Streets.
Course description: What is a human being? What is human
freedom? What is consciousness, and how is it related to the
body? What is power, and how does it shape who we are? In
order to shed light on these questions, our course will
center around the philosophical movement known as phenomenology:
the attempt to describe the basic structures of human experience. We
will begin by studying the thought of the founder of phenomenology, Edmund
Husserl (1859-1938). Unfortunately, Husserl had trouble explaining
what phenomenology really was, and consequently spent an inordinate amount of
time trying to do so in rather confusing ways. We will thus read
only some of his writings – specifically, his description of the experience of
time. Instead, we will focus our study of Husserl on Martin
Heidegger’s (1889-1976) much clearer exposition and criticism of Husserl’s
so-called “transcendental phenomenology.” We will then move on to
Heidegger’s description – in the first Division of his magnum opus, Being
and Time (1927) – of how we deal practically with “equipment”, how we
encounter other people, and how our own selves are involved in both of these
“dimensions” of human experience. We will supplement this study of
Heidegger with readings from the phenomenologist Maurice Merleau-Ponty
(1908-1961), who showed the crucial role of the human body in all this –
something that Heidegger doesn’t discuss. We will then examine
Michel Foucault’s (1926-1984) analyses of modern forms of power – as embodied
in prisons, schools, psychoanalysis, and the social “sciences” – and how it
constitutes us as modern subjects. Although this is an unusual way
of understanding Foucault, I hope to show that his analyses of power can be
profitably understood through Merleau-Ponty’s notion of the
body. The course will conclude with a study of the most important
sections of Division Two of Heidegger’s Being and Time, where he
analyzes how in one way or another we are always relating ourselves to our own
death, and how this shapes the temporality of human experience.
Course goals: This course will acquaint you with two of the most important
movements in 20th-Century Continental European philosophy:
phenomenology and the later thought of Michel Foucault. In so doing,
it will provide you with illuminating ways of thinking about human nature,
consciousness, temporality, freedom, the body, modernity, and power.
Specific learning outcomes:
1. You will gain an understanding of the goals, methods, and
findings of phenomenology, i.e., the description of structures of human
experience.
2. You will become acquainted with the thought of four major 20th-Century
philosophers:
a. Edmund Husserl, founder of the phenomenological movement in
philosophy;
b. Martin Heidegger, phenomenologist, founder of “existential
phenomenology” (quite different from the “existentialism” that stemmed from
it), especially his early thought (1919-1930);
c. Maurice Merleau-Ponty, who synthesized phenomenology with
existentialism, psychoanalysis, behaviorism, and neuroscience;
and
d. Michel Foucault, leading “post-structuralist” philosopher, who
described and analyzed modern forms of power.
3. You will gain experience in reading and interpreting difficult
philosophical texts.
4. You will gain experience and guidance in writing philosophy.
Course format: Class meetings will consist of a mixture of lecture and
discussion. In order to benefit from both, it is essential that you
do all of the reading for each class. One
of the most important things that this course will offer you is the opportunity
to hone your interpretive, argumentative, and rhetorical skills by writing ten
brief papers and two longer papers on the often difficult texts we will be
reading.
In addition to the required reading, we will also be watching
Ingmar Bergman’s The Seventh Seal (1957) in connection with
Heidegger’s view of self-ownership (“authenticity”). We will view
this film outside of the class period, and arrange the viewing time
to fit in with the schedules of as many of us as possible.
Evaluation:
1. 40% of your final grade will come from 10 completed
worksheets (on the reading for a particular course meeting) and/or “analytic
response papers.” You may turn in any combination of worksheets and
analytic response papers. A worksheet
should completely answer all questions on one of the many attachments to this
syllabus. An analytic response paper should address just one question,
topic, or passage of your choosing. Worksheets and analytic response papers
will be graded with a check (full credit, i.e., 4 points toward the 100% total
final grade), check/check-plus (5 points toward final grade), check-plus
(credit-and-a-half, i.e., 6 points toward final grade), check/check-minus (3
points toward final grade), or check-minus (half credit, i.e., 2 points toward
final grade). Please adhere to the due-dates for worksheets or analytic
response papers given in the syllabus below. I will not accept them if they’re
late.
The main purposes of the
worksheets and analytic response papers are to encourage you to do each reading
assignment, and to come to class prepared to discuss it. They may be turned
after we have discussed the topic in question, but must be turned in on time.
If you choose to do a
worksheet, please answer each question on it. Generally, your answer should be
between two and five sentences. To do this, open the worksheet document, save
it on your computer, type in your answer below each question, and then print
out the whole document when you're done.
As an alternative to
worksheets, and as good preparation for writing your papers, you
may also write analytic response papers, which should usually run at least 500
words. In an analytic response paper, you will have the opportunity to delve
into more depth or detail on a single topic related to the
readings than you would in completing an entire worksheet. Generally, most
questions on the worksheets – and especially those with an asterisk – can serve
as topics for an analytic response paper. Make sure that you do not attempt
in an analytic response paper to summarize the entire reading
for a given class meeting – but rather to focus on a single topic,
issue, or particularly difficult or interesting bit of text in the readings.
Please submit hard copies
of the worksheets and/or analytic response papers; this makes it easier for me
to keep track of and comment on them. I’ll do my best to provide
ample comments on both worksheets and analytic response papers.
2. Class participation: I expect that all students will participate
actively and constructively in classroom discussions. Asking
questions and responding to what I or fellow students say are excellent ways
for you to learn. Doing so regularly will boost your final grade
by up to two-thirds of a letter-grade, for example, from a B+ to an
A. On the other hand, if your presence in class contributes to a
negative learning environment (for example, repeatedly coming to class late,
treating fellow students with disrespect, obviously not paying attention, texting,
whispering, etc.), this can reduce your final grade by one third of a letter
grade per episode.
3. Attendance: I reserve the right to take attendance at the
beginning of each class period. You are permitted two unexplained
absences during the semester. For each unexplained absence beyond
these two, your final grade will be reduced by one third of a letter
grade. For example, someone with a B+ average with 4 unexplained
absences (i.e., 2 more than the 2 allowed) will receive a B- in the
course. The only explanations I will accept are a doctor’s note or a
funeral announcement.
I realize that this is a fairly strict attendance
policy. I have instituted it mainly because much of the learning
that you will do in this course will take place in class. Asking
questions, raising objections, and listening to others are important skills
that you will get to practice in class discussions. In addition,
coming to class is necessary to doing well in this course.
4. Two papers on an important aspect of one of the texts we read. I
will give you paper topics in advance.
- The first paper should be around 6-7 pages in length and will be
worth 25% of your final grade. Suggested topics for this paper are linked to the due-date on the
syllabus. I invite you to discuss your paper with me as you
write it.
- The second paper should be around 7-9 pages in length, and will
be worth 35% of your final grade. (Please see the bottom of the
syllabus for the due-date.) Again, suggested topics for this paper are
linked to this due-date on the syllabus, and I invite you to discuss
your paper with me as you write it.
I don’t require – and don’t
recommend – that you use any secondary sources, i.e.,
anything but the texts assigned in class, but if you do use any you must cite
them.
I strongly encourage you
to co-write your paper with (just) one other
member of the class. Co-writing is an
increasingly important skill in such fields as business, science, teaching,
law, etc. Since I will hold a co-written paper to exactly the same standards as a single-authored paper, it is
very likely to be to your advantage to co-write a paper. After all, two heads
are (usually) better than one! If you
co-write a paper, however, please make
sure that you and your co-author both check
it for organization, consistency, avoidance of repetition, etc.
Note on the papers:
One thing that a philosophy
paper should not be is a “book report,” i.e., an attempt to
summarize an entire philosophical text. Instead, a good philosophy paper should
give a close and concise analysis of a single key argument in
a text. An “argument” in this sense isn’t a verbal fight (this isn’t the Jerry
Springer Show, after all!). Rather, an argument (as we’ll be using the term) is
a chain of reasoning from certain statements (called the “premises”) to another
statement (called the “conclusion”) that the argument claims is supported by
the premises.
A good philosophy
paper contains both a careful, concise, and accurate analysis of such an
argument; and some criticism of it. “Criticism”
here doesn’t mean disagreement (it’s fine to agree or
disagree with a philosopher!), but rather an examination of possible
objections to the argument you’ve analyzed. A good
criticism consists of giving reasons (1) why one or more of the premises
of the argument you’ve analyzed might be false (in which
case the conclusion still might be true, but just for different reasons); and (2)
why these premises, even if they were true, might not
support the conclusion (in which case the conclusion still
might be false even if the premises were true). If you end up finding the
philosopher’s argument faulty in either or both of these ways, then try to
“tinker” with the premises, conclusion, or chain of reasoning as charitably as
possible, to see if you can come up with a modification of the argument to make
it more cogent. What matters most is the quality of your reading,
writing, and argumentation.
Remember that the reasons you
give for or against an argument should be more than simply your beliefs or
opinions. Rather, they should be potentially convincing to someone else,
even if this person may not initially share your beliefs or opinions. After
all, are you convinced that something is true just because
someone else happens to believe it? So don’t just state whether or not you
agree with the author’s conclusion. Instead, try to give reasons for
or against the author’s argument for this conclusion.
In my experience, the
most common way for paper grades to suffer is due to a lack of documentation
in the texts. You should use direct citations sparingly – generally
only if the exact wording of the passage is either directly relevant to the
argument you’re making, or particularly clear and concise. Short direct
citations should be placed in quotation-marks; direct citations over 3 lines
long should be offset, indented, single-space, and without quotation-marks. In
other cases, use indirect citation – paraphrasing in your own words what the
author says, and telling the reader where he or she says it. Also, please number the
pages to make it easier to comment on them.
I strongly encourage you to
discuss your paper with me before you turn it in, and I’m happy to read drafts
and offer comments.
Website: The great majority of our course materials will be linked to
our online syllabus, which can be accessed via my teaching website: http://www.uni.edu/boedeker.
MAILSERV: From time to time, I will also send important announcements pertaining
to the class via e-mail, which I expect you to check prior to every
class meeting (in case I have to cancel a class). To
facilitate our electronic communication, a MAILSERV distribution list has been
created for this class using your
UNI e-mail addresses. The list members include myself and is supposed
to be continuously updated to include just those students who are registered
for the class at a given time. The Powers that Be allow only me, and not
students, to send to the list.
It will be your responsibility to check
your e-mail regularly, read the announcements, and print out all attachments. I
strongly recommend that you purchase a 3-ring binder to organize and store the
various handouts for this class.
Cheating and
plagiarism: It is your responsibility
to read UNI’s
Student Academic Ethics Policy (Chapter 3.01 of UNI’s Policies and Procedures Manual, available at https://www.uni.edu/policies/301), from which some of the following is borrowed. Using
the terminology defined in this document, please note the following:
Any student who commits a Level One violation will receive no credit for the entire assignment
in question.
Any student who commits a Level Two violation will receive no credit for the entire assignment
in question; and, in addition, a reduction in the course grade
by two full letter grades, i.e., 20% (e.g., from a B- to a D-).
Any
student who commits a Level Three violation is mandated by the University to
receive a disciplinary failure for the course. (This will automatically appear
on the student’s transcript.) As your professor, UNI also requires
me to reprimand the student in writing in the form of a letter addressed to the
student and copied to the Head of the Department of Philosophy and World Religions,
the student’s department head (if different) and the Office of the Executive
Vice President and Provost.
Disabilities: I will make every effort to accommodate disabilities. Please
contact me if I can be of assistance in this area. All qualified students with
disabilities are protected under the provisions of the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C.A., Section 12101. The ADA states
that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such
disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the
services, programs or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to
discrimination by any such entity.” Students who desire or need instructional
accommodations or assistance because of their disability should contact the
Office of Disability Services located in 213 Student Services Center (273-2676
Voice, or 273-3011 TTY).
Tentative course schedule:
I. Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology (c. 1900-1938)
22 Aug.: Introduction. Background
to phenomenology: Psychologism, Naturalism, and
neo-Kantianism. Read, prior to this first class meeting,
Heidegger, History of the Concept of Time (1925), pp. 3-26;
here’s a worksheet on the reading. I plan for us to use this handout in class.
24 Aug.: Heidegger, History
of the Concept of Time, pp. 29-47.
Here’s a worksheet and a handout. Merleau-Ponty reading on psychology, the
body, and lower and higher forms of behavior: from The Structure of
Behavior (1942), pp. 43-49.
29 Aug.: Intentionality: empty and
fulfilled intentions, and “truth” as “e-vidence”: HCT, pp. 47-72 Worksheet1 Worksheet2; Handout; Handout M.-P. reading on
the evidence of perception: from Phenomenology of Perception (1945);
hereafter “P.P.”: pp. 191-197.
31 Aug.: Perception,
synthesis, and ideation; and phenomenology as the analytic
description of intentionality in its a priori: HCT, pp.
72-94 Worksheet Handout. M.-P. reading
on the subject of perception and perceptual synthesis: from P.P.,
pp. 126-135.
5 Sept.: Internal time as
impression, flow, and retention: read Husserl, Phenomenology of the
Consciousness of Internal Time (1905); in course packet, pp. 3-36;
here’s the worksheet. Please make sure to print
out this diagram of Husserl’s view of
time-consciousness; I plan to use it in our discussions in class. By
this point, you must have submitted at least one worksheet and/or analytic response
paper.
7 Sept.: The constitution of
the transcendent objects of external time on the basis of the immanent objects
of internal time: Phenomenology of the Consciousness of Internal Time
(in course packet), pp. 37-43, 47-49, 51-52, 57-59, 66-73, 95-101 (in course
packet) Worksheet. M.-P. reading
on the body’s role in supplying the meaning in terms of which things serve as
norms for perception: from P.P., pp. 79-84, 135-145.
12 Sept.: Husserl’s method for
transcendental phenomenology: HCT, pp. 94-107; and selections from
Husserl’s Logical Investigations (1901): in course packet
and The Idea of Phenomenology (1907): in course packet. Worksheet Handout. M.-P. reading
on phenomenological method: from P.P., pp. 62-78. M.-P. Handout.
14 Sept.: Husserl’s neglect of the question of the being of
the intentional entity: HCT, pp. 108-131 Worksheet. M.-P. reading
on thinking (the “cogito”) as infinite or finite: from P.P., pp.
166-173. By this point, you must have submitted at least two worksheets and/or analytic response
papers.
II. Heidegger’s phenomenological ontology (1920-1930)
19 Sept.: The question of
being: HCT, pp. 135-144; and Being and Time (1927),
BT sections 1-5. (Important) explanation of translations of terms, Worksheet, Handout.
21 Sept.: Heidegger’s
phenomenological method and the project of Being and Time: BT sections 6-9 and the
selection from Basic Problems of Phenomenology (1927): in
course packet. Worksheet.
26 Sept.: Dasein’s encounters
of “handy” intraworldly entities; BT sections
10-14; and M.-P. reading on the behavioral environment as not represented by a
thinking subject: from The Structure of Behavior, pp. 49-52,
57-61 Handout. By this point,
you must have submitted the equivalent of at least three worksheets and/or analytic response
papers.
28 Sept.: Dasein as
being-in-the-world: BT sections
15-18. M.-P. on the lived body: from P.P., pp.
85-101 Handout.
3 Oct.: Heidegger’s
critique of Descartes’ view of the relation between mind and world, or subject
and object. (Note that this is also a major, but implicit, criticism
of Husserl’s view of the same thing): BT
sections 19-21. Important worksheet . By this point, you must have submitted the equivalent
of at least four analytic response papers.
5 Oct.: Dasein’s spatiality: BT sections 22-24, and selections from
“The Origin of the Work of Art” (to be handed out in class). Very
important M.-P. reading on “concrete” and “abstract”
movement: from P.P., pp. 101-125 Handout. Handout on “reliability” in “The Origin of the
Work of Art.”
10 Oct.: Being-with-others: BT sections 25-27; and M.P. on our
relations with other human beings: from The Structure of Behavior,
pp. 52-57; from P.P., pp 145-165, 171-173; Handout. optional but recommended: from “The Intertwining – the Chiasm”
(1959), pp. 247-271.
12 Oct.: Being-in: disposedness,
understanding, interpretation, language, BT sections 28-33. M.-P. reading on intentionality as
affective and projecting: from P.P., pp. 173-182 (optional: “The
algorithm and the mystery of language” from The Prose of the
World [1952], pp. 234-246) Handout. By this point,
you must have submitted the equivalent of at least five analytic
response papers.
17 Oct.: Discourse,
con-currence, de-clining, care, and anxiety: BT sections 34-41. Handout on
possibilities. M.-P. reading on
encountering things as scientific objects, and language: from P.P.,
pp. 182-191, 200-209. Handout
on sections 34-38. Handout
on sections 39-41.
19 Oct: Reality and
truth: BT Sections 43 and 44. M.-P. reading against
a skeptical solipsism of the thinking cogito: from P.P.,
pp. 166-170, 173-175, 198-199. Handout
on sections 43-44. By this point, you must have submitted the
equivalent of at least six worksheets and/or analytic response papers.
III. Foucault’s analyses of modern power
and the “constitution” of the modern subject (1971-1983)
24 Oct.: “The Body of the
Condemned,” “Docile Bodies,” and “The Means of Correct Training” from Discipline
and Punish (1975): The Foucault Reader, pp. 170-205); Handout.
26 Oct.: “Panopticism,”
“Complete and Austere Institutions”, “Illegalities and Delinquency”, and “The
Carceral” from Discipline and Punish (1975; FR,
pp. 206-238); and “The Politics of Health in the Eighteenth Century”
(1976): FR, pp. 273-289 Handout. (Helpful) additional handout. By this point, you must
have submitted the equivalent of at least seven worksheets and/or analytic response papers.
31 Oct.: “Space, Knowledge,
and Power” (1982): FR, pp. 239-256; and “Truth and Power” (1976/7): FR pp.
51-75. Handout.
2 Nov.: “Nietzsche,
Genealogy, History” (1971): FR, pp. 76-100. Handout.
7 Nov.: “Right of Death and Power
over Life”, “We ‘Other Victorians’” from History of Sexuality, Volume
I: The Will to Truth (1976): FR, pp. 258-272. Handout. First paper due.
9 Nov.: and “The Repressive
Hypothesis: The Incitement to Discourse” and “The Repressive Hypothesis: The
Perverse Implantation” from History of Sexuality, Volume I: The Will to
Truth (FR, pp. 292-329) Handout. By this
point, you must have submitted the equivalent of at least eight worksheets and/or analytic response
papers.
IV. Death, self-ownership (“authenticity”),
freedom, and temporality (1924-1945)
14 Nov.: Being-toward-death: BT sections 45-52. Handout.
16 Nov.: Existential “conscience”
and “owing” (or “guilt”): BT sections
53-57. Handout.
28 Nov.: Self-ownership (or “authenticity”) as responding to the call of
conscience by owning up to one’s ec-sistential owing: BT Sections
58, 60, and 62. Handout. By this
point, you must have submitted the equivalent of at least nine worksheets and/or analytic response
papers.
30 Nov.: Self-owning (or
“authentic”) temporality as Dasein’s freedom for its own
possibilities: Selections from On the Essence of Reasons (1928;
really “From the Presencing of the Ground”; in course packet); BT section 65. Handout. Worksheet on Bergman’s “The Seventh Seal.”
5 Dec.: Dasein’s temporality
and transmittedness (or historicity): BT
sections 68a, 69c, and 74. M.P. on freedom: from P.P.,
pp. 209-233 Handout.
7 Dec.: Intratimeliness and its foundation in Dasein’s
temporality: BT Sections 79-81 Handout.
By this point, you must have submitted the equivalent of all ten worksheets and/or analytic response
papers.
Tuesday, December 12: Final paper due by 3pm in my mailbox in the Department of Philosophy &
World Religions office, 1089 Bartlett.