sign in sign up
<<
Home , Pragmatism, Shannon Sullivan

HMS 818 -- and 1920B January 1, 2020 to June 30, 2020

Instructor: Christopher J. Voparil Contact info: [email protected]; 954-829-2935

Zoom Meeting Room: 711-164-8743; https://myunion.zoom.us/j/7111648743

Seminar Description The question of American pragmatism’s contribution to the discourse of justice generates no easy answers. For some, the “American evasion of ,” in ’s phrase, with its critique of transcendental authority, metaphysical , and ahistorical , in favor of a contextualized, fallibilistic, melioristic, and -oriented engagement with what called “the social and moral strifes of their own day,” paves the way for a creative and inclusive mediation of diverse viewpoints and offers a of tools capable of making society more democratic and just. For others, including , the recognition that changing circumstances require changed , along with pragmatism’s embrace of flexibility and experimentation over fixed and abstract of justice, are precisely what contributes to the apparent failure of the classical pragmatists, notably , , and John Dewey, to offer more robust critique and opposition to post-Civil racial injustice in the . Indeed, the expansive bodies of work of these early thinkers is surprisingly inattentive to the issue of justice. At the same , they worked actively on behalf of important causes, both at home and abroad, as public and as citizens.

This seminar aims both to engage the work of the classical and contemporary pragmatists, with a focus on justice, and to bring a critical lens to it. After reading primary texts of the classical pragmatists, including , W.E.B. DuBois, and Alain Locke, and examining debates around their writings, we engage recent scholarship by those working in and around pragmatism, such as Robert Brandom, , Nancy Fraser, Jürgen Habermas, Eduardo Mendieta, , , and Cornel West. Assaying the possibility that pragmatism offers an alternative to dominant conceptions of justice, including the Platonic- Aristotelian and liberal/communitarian models, we consider the prospects of American pragmatism for addressing injustice in the areas of race, gender, ethnicity, nation, and empire, as

1 well as those generated by globalization, multinational , and transnational migration to which familiar liberal theories of justice have proved inadequate. Integration of Program Themes Cultivating a concern for social justice has been an abiding commitment of UI&U’s PhD program since its inception. In foregrounding both the theory and praxis of justice, this seminar offers an opportunity for students to explore and engage theoretical debates but also to critique these theoretical orientations from the perspective of concrete injustices in need of redress. Given the seminar's thesis of the radicalization of the of classical pragmatism as a result of taken up by thinkers of different social positions than the early founders, attention to issues of , power, and positionality are paramount in our into pragmatism's contribution to the contemporary theory and praxis of justice. The potential of these ideas for orienting us toward and remedying concrete injustices around race and gender is central to the seminar.

Individualized Learning An approach to learning grounded in the stream of individual has long been a hallmark of the PhD program. In keeping with this , this course attempts to support individual learning both in and in practice. The guiding philosophical principle of the course is that thinking about issues of justice is best understood as a reflective dialogue between one’s own and beliefs, and a series of complex and provocative theoretical and texts – that is, by starting from where learners now are as individuals with unique sets of beliefs and values. In practice, the assignments are structured to foster individual learning through the seminar paper. The critical responses and seminar paper offer opportunities for students to express their individual interpretations of the texts, as well as provide an avenue for students to advance their individual projects through an informed dialogue with the foundational thinkers, , and theories of the course. Particular attention will be given to the construction of theoretical frameworks that inform the dissertation projects of each student.

Learning Outcomes and Competencies HMS 818 foregrounds the following outcomes and competencies:

UI&U Doctoral Learning Outcome III: ETHICAL AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY Express ethical & social implications in one’s social, professional, artistic and/or scholarly practice.

PhD Program Outcomes: Vii) Demonstrate of theories and practices of the creative process, engaging difference, and social justice. PhD Program Competencies: Vii) 1. Explains theories and practices of the creative process, engaging difference, and/or social justice. Vii) 2. Appraises potential benefits and shortcomings of theories and practices of the creative process, engaging difference, and/or social justice.

Seminar Outcomes: By the end of this seminar, students will demonstrate fundamental of the major thinkers, texts, and debates surrounding classical pragmatism and its contemporary appropriations. The goal of this seminar is to provide students with a theoretical foundation capable of informing and enriching their socially-engaged individual projects. This overarching seminar goal will be assessed on the basis of the following Program and University Outcomes and Competencies: 2

 Summarize, interpret, and discuss each theoretical perspective through participation in forum discussions of the readings on Brightspace.  Distinguish, analyze, and critically assess competing theories and concepts, including the social justice implications, via the Seminar Paper.  Demonstrate individual and interpretive ability via the Critical Responses, the forum discussion, and the Seminar Paper.  Relate core theories and concepts to historical contexts and issues within their individual areas of concentration through the Seminar Paper.  Integrate core theories and concepts with their individual intellectual projects through the Seminar Paper.  Explain difference among individuals and the complex array of alternative identities and social groups.  Examine the to social justice of classical and contemporary pragmatism.

Assignments Critical Responses and Forum Discussion: The online discussion forum in Brightspace is the primary medium for students to express their seminar participation. Based on individual interests, students will serve on a rotating basis as Discussion Leaders during each unit. The discussion leaders will be responsible for posting a Critical Response to the designated readings, which entails sharing concerns, expressing criticisms, and raising questions. These critical responses will serve as the impetus for the Forum discussion of the reading. All students, including the discussion leaders, will compose a minimum of one post (either critical responses or responses to critical responses) on each week’s readings Each post should be at least 350 words and contain quotations from the reading(s) to support and illustrate one’s points (with page numbers from the text in parentheses). Rather than attempting to summarize an entire reading, the posts should focus on one or theme or issue from the reading and pursue it in depth, recording comments or criticisms, and raising questions (or both).

Seminar Paper: A vehicle for applying the core theories and concepts of the seminar to individual intellectual interests and concerns, the seminar paper affords the opportunity for students to advance their own research interests in dialogue with the thinkers, texts, and themes of the seminar. In the spirit of Dewey’s effort to reconstruct philosophy so that it “ceases to be a device for dealing with the problems of ” and is made relevant to “the social and moral strifes of their own day,” the seminar paper will use the resources of the pragmatist tradition to examine and engage a particular issue of justice or injustice relevant to the student’s research. The seminar paper will be composed via four stages of writing and revision informed by the instructor’s feedback and ongoing engagement with the seminar’s reading. Stages 2 and 3 will focus on direct engagement with particular thinkers, theories, and texts of the seminar, before returning to the particular issue in Stage 4. Please use the ‘Track Changes’ function in MS Word when revising drafts.

Stage 1 – Proposal. Students will submit via email a brief description of the issue of justice/injustice that they wish to examine in the seminar by February 8. Stage 2 - Draft 1. Students will submit a first draft of approximately 2000 – 2500 words in length that takes up a particular thinker, theory, text, or issue and engages it in depth. Specific textual from the readings should be supplied to support all interpretations and contentions. The essay should be written for a reader who is already familiar with the readings; therefore, summarizing and description should be omitted in 3

favor of analysis and interpretation. It should be organized around a specific thesis or point based on the student’s own reaction to the reading, and should make an . Due by March 7. Stage 3 – Draft 2. Based on the instructor’s feedback on Draft 1 and subsequent reading and reflection, students will rewrite Draft 1, adding 1500 words. Draft 2 should remain centered on the particular thinkers, theories, texts, and issues of the seminar and be 3500- 4000 words in length. Due by April 2. Stage 4 – Final Revision. Based on the instructor’s feedback on Draft 2 and subsequent reading and reflection, students will rewrite Draft 2, returning to the issues of justice or injustice identified in the proposal, as well as any relevant scholarship, adding 1500 words. The final version should be 5000-6000 words in length. Due by May 7.

Evaluation and Grading Final grades will follow the grading policy described in the Student Handbook and be determined in a manner outlined by the individual instructor. In this course your final grade will be determined based on the following:

Critical Responses & Forum Discussion 50% Seminar Paper Draft 1 10% Draft 2 10% Final Version 30%

Zoom Sessions and Individual Calls: During the residency we will establish a schedule for monthly live sessions via Zoom. Shortly after the midpoint of the term, each student will schedule an individual phone conversation with the instructor to discuss performance in the seminar to that point and to discuss strategies, if any, for improvement.

Criteria for “A”-level work comprise the following elements: 1) Demonstrate an understanding of the overall argument of the thinker being discussed 2) Possess clarity and focus in presenting a particular thesis or point, with an argument to support it, as opposed to stream of 3) Offer a critical interpretation rather than a mere summary or recapitulation, although establishing the thinker’s views before critiquing them is essential 4) Engage with the text via specific discussion of relevant quotes 5) Position own thinking in relation to claims and texts cited 6) Relate the thinker’s particular argument back to the larger themes of the course 7) Demonstrate a measure of originality or thoughtfulness of interpretation – i.e., an ability to think for oneself

The final deadline for all work is May 15.

The Writing Center Union Institute & University’s Writing Center offers self-help resources and free one-on-one tutoring sessions over the phone for all students. Tutoring sessions are available mornings, afternoons, evenings and weekends. Self-help resources are located at http://www.myunion.edu/writing-center. Appointments for tutoring by telephone can be scheduled through the writing center’s CampusWeb group or by contacting the center (phone: 513-487-1156 or toll free: 1-800-861-6400 ext. 1156 or email: [email protected]).

4

Course Communication Additional will be provided throughout the semester. You will want to check your Union email account regularly and responsibly (at least once a day).

ADA accommodations Union Institute & University is committed to providing equal access to its academic programs and resources for individuals with disabilities. Information on ADA policies and services is located on UI&U’s public website: https://myunion.edu/current-students/student- services/disability-services/

Academic Integrity Union Institute & University’s Academic Integrity policy can be found on Campus Web at https://campusweb.myunion.edu/ICS/icsfs/Academic_Integrity_Policy.pdf?target=9ccd7549- 1590-445f-876e-a959b1724c31

Grading Scale and Satisfactory Academic (SAP) (Grading, SAP and Financial Aid Policies can be found in the University Catalog http://myunion.edu/academics/catalog/)

Students in the Cohort PhD Program must make satisfactory academic progress every term. This means that students must earn at least a cumulative GPA of 3.0 or S. Students must also successfully complete at least 67% of cumulative credits attempted. For example, if a student has attempted 60 credit hours during enrollment, he/she must successfully complete 40 or more of those hours. Student completion rates are reviewed at the end of each term of attendance. Grades of U, W, I, V, NE and WIP adversely affect a student’s completion rate because they are calculated as attempted but not completed. This can cause a student’s completion rate to drop below 67%. This may result in the student not meeting the SAP requirement facing possible academic and financial aid probation and/or dismissal from the program. Grades of C or U adversely affect the student’s GPA and academic standing in the program. A special review will be initiated if a student receives a C, U or two or more incomplete (I) grades.

Grading Scale Grade Criteria A Academic work reflects impressively thorough and accurate knowledge of assigned material, including the complexities and nuances of major and minor theories, concepts, and intellectual frameworks; exceptional evidence of capability to compare, assess, and synthesize material; especially strong capability to logically critique extant theories and claims and to develop persuasive arguments based on original thinking. 4.0 Points A- Criteria for A work not fully met. 3.70 Quality Points B+ Criteria for B work is more fully met. 3.30 Quality Points B Academic work reflects accurate grasp of major concepts, theories, and prevailing knowledge; abundant evidence of capability to offer informed analysis of extant knowledge and ideas; clear capability to synthesize and apply key information 5

from prevailing knowledge; appropriate critiques of extant theories and knowledge; considerable demonstration of capability to develop and logically present own judgments. 3.0 Quality Points B- Criteria for B work is not fully met. 2.70 Quality Points C+ Criteria for C work is more fully met. 2.30 Quality Points C Academic work reflects adequate familiarity with key ideas and knowledge, although interpretations of key theories and concepts are occasionally incomplete and flawed; written and verbal accounts of information, theories, and concepts remain primarily at the level of description; critiques are present but not well developed with occasional interpretive errors. 2.0 Quality Points S Academic work reflects satisfactory completion of all prescribed learning and is equivalent to B or better at the doctoral level on a standard letter grading scale. The S grade is used only for ACS 897, ECL/HMS/PPS 841, 850, 860, MLK 800, MLK 890 and RSCH 900 Dissertation. 0.00 Quality Points and does not calculate into the GPA U Academic work reflects insufficient capability to comprehend and accurately present ideas and information; superficial and unpersuasive critiques; little evidence of capability for original thinking. Unsatisfactory performance is defined as any performance less than C at the doctoral level. A U grade should be given only on the basis of less than satisfactory work and should not be given because a student has not been present in a seminar (in such a case a V grade should be given). 0.0 Quality Points W Withdrawal: Student initiated withdrawal from a seminar or the program. Withdrawal from the program discontinues connection to university passwords and accounts. I Incomplete: Student completes at least 60% of work in a seminar but less than 100% of the required work in a seminar. NE Never Engaged: An NE grade will be assigned during the first 21 days of each term for a student who neither attends nor engages in a registered seminar (including the residency sessions). V Vanished: A V grade will be assigned six weeks after the beginning of a term by the Dean’s Office, or during end-of-term grading by a faculty member for a student who attends/engages in a registered seminar (including the residency sessions) but subsequently ceases to attend/engage in the seminar and does not officially withdraw from the seminar. WIP (No No Grade: Faculty member has not submitted a grade for a student. grade) Repeated Students are permitted to repeat any seminar once after receiving a U. The last Seminar grade earned is calculated in the GPA. Successful A grade of A through C or S is considered successful seminar completion. Completion

6

Special Note Regarding Incompletes: Students must have approval from the seminar faculty member to receive an incomplete for the term. If this approval is not requested and approved, the student will receive a W (withdrawal) or V (vanished), depending on the circumstances in regard to attendance in the seminar. In other words, incompletes are not automatic and students should not assume that they can take incompletes at will. All incomplete work for a current term must be submitted by November 15 of the following term. It is always best for students to stay in communication with faculty members and to try to get all the work done for the term by the deadline. Students and faculty members should explore all options together before deciding that the incomplete route is the one to take.

The information on this syllabus is subject to change. Please consult the electronic version posted on Brightspace for the most up to date version.

7

REQUIRED TEXT

The primary text for the course is available for eBook viewing via the UIU library:

Susan Dieleman, David Rondel, and Chris Voparil (eds.). Pragmatism and Justice. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2017).

[Anyone preferring a hard copy will have to acquire on their own.]

Recommended text:

Christopher J. Voparil and Richard J. Bernstein (eds.), The Rorty Reader. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010. ISBN# 140519832X.

General Resources on Pragmatism (not required):

Bacon, Michael. Pragmatism: An Introduction (Malden, MA: Polity Press, 2012). Bernstein, Richard J. The Pragmatic Turn (Malden, MA: Polity Press, 2010). Campbell, James. The Community Reconstructs: The of Pragmatic Social Thought. (Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1992). Dickstein, Morris (ed.), The Revival of Pragmatism: New Essays on Social Thought, , and . (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1998). Hollinger, David A. “The Problem of Pragmatism in American ,” The Journal of American History 67, no. 1 (1980): 88-107. Hollinger, Robert and David Depew. Pragmatism: From to . Westport, CT: Praeger, 1995.) Koopman, Colin. Pragmatism as Transition: Historicity and Hope in James, Dewey, and Rorty. (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010). McKenna, Erin and Scott L. Pratt, : From Wounded Knee to the Present (New York: Bloomsbury, 2015). Menand, Louis. “Pragmatisms,” (New York: Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux, 2001), pp. 337-75. West, Cornel. The American Evasion of Philosophy: A Genealogy of Pragmatism (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989). Westbrook, Robert B. Democratic Hope: Pragmatism and the Politics of (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005).

8

SEMINAR SCHEDULE

[* All readings below that do not have a link can be found under “Handouts” for that Unit ]

RESIDENCY

Session #1 – Introduction & Overview: The Revival of Pragmatism McDermott, John J. “The Renascence of Classical American Philosophy,” American Studies International 16, no. 3 (1978): 5-17. Kloppenberg, James T. “Pragmatism: An Old Name for Some New Ways of Thinking?” The Journal of American History83, no. 1 (1996): 100-138. Recommended: Richard J. Bernstein, “The Resurgence of Pragmatism,” 59, no. 4 (1992): 813-840.

Session #2 – Pragmatism, Classical and Contemporary Brandom, Robert B. “When Philosophy Paints its Blue on Gray: Irony and the Pragmatist Enlightenment,” boundary 2 29, no. 2 (2002): 1-28. Read only 8-16, 25-28. Pragmatism and Justice, “Introduction,” pp. 1-8.

Session #3 – Pragmatism and the Problem of Justice Manicus, Peter T. “John Dewey and the Problem of Justice,” The Journal of Inquiry 15 (1981): 279-91. Putnam, Ruth Anna. “Justice in ,” Pragmatism and Justice, pp. 115-128. Also: Southern California Law Review 63 (Sept. 1990): 1797-1810.

UNIT 1 – Contemporary Theories and Praxis of Justice

Assignments: 1/19 Discussion leaders post Critical Responses 1/20-1/25 Forum Discussion

Required readings: Read at least one from each Set:

Set 1 Dallmayr, Fred. “Justice and Global Democracy.” In Ron Bontekoe and Marietta Stepaniants (eds.), Justice and Democracy: Cross-Cultural Perspectives. (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1997), pp. 443-465. Fraser, Nancy. “Abnormal Justice,” Pragmatism and Justice, pp. 37-63. Lara, María Pía. “Justice and Solidarity: The Case of Recognition.” In Ron Bontekoe and Marietta Stepaniants (eds.), Justice and Democracy: Cross-Cultural Perspectives. (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1997), pp. 37-49. Set 2 Kurki, Leena. “Restorative and Community Justice in the United States.” Crime and Justice 27 (2000): 235-303. [focus on theoretical foundations, pp. 235-243; skim rest] Lundy, Patricia and Mark McGovern, “Whose Justice? Rethinking Transitional Justice from the Bottom Up,” Journal of Law and Society 35, no. 2 (2008): 265-92. Nussbaum, Martha. “Human and Human Capabilities.” Harvard Journal 20 (2007): 21-24. 9

Roberts, Rodney C. Roberts, "Justice and Rectification: A Taxonomy of Justice" in Rodney C. Roberts (ed.), Injustice and Rectification (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2002/2005), pp. 7-28. Zion, James W. “The Dynamics of Navajo Peacemaking,” Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 14:1 (1998): 58-74.

Further reading: Braithwaite, John. “Restorative Justice: Assessing Optimistic and Pessimistic Accounts.” Crime and Justice 25 (1999): 1-127. Crocker, David A. “Functioning and Capability: The Foundations of Sen’s and Nussbaum’s Development Ethic,” Political Theory 20:4 (1992): 584-612. Fischer, Marilyn. “A Pragmatist Cosmopolitan Moment: Reconfiguring Nussbaum’s Cosmopolitan Concentric Circles,” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 21, no. 3 (2007): 151-165. Fraser, Nancy. Scales of Justice: Reimagining Political Space in a Globalizing World. (New York: Columbia University Press, 2009). Fraser, Nancy and Axel Honneth. Redistribution or Recognition?: A Political-Philosophical Exchange. (London: Verso, 2003). Fricker, Miranda. Epistemic Injustice: Power and the of Knowing. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007). Gutmann, Amy. “Communitarian Critics of ,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 14:3 (1985): 308-322. Held, Virginia. “The Meshing of Care and Justice.” 10, no. 2 (1995): 128-32. Honneth, Axel. The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts, trans. Joel Anderson. (Polity Press, 1995). Jenkins, Morris. “Gullah Island Dispute Resolution: An Example of Afrocentric Restorative Justice.” Journal of Black Studies 37, no. 2 (2006): 299-319. MacIntyre, Alasdair. Whose Justice? Which ? (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1988). McReynolds, Phillip. “Nussbaum’s Capabilities Approach: A Pragmatist Critique,” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 16, no. 2 (2002): 142-150. Mills, Charles W. “Rawls on Race/Race in Rawls,” Southern Journal of Philosophy 47 (2009): 161-184. Nussbaum, Martha. Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006). Okin, Susan Moller. “Political Liberalism, Justice, and Gender.” Ethics 105 (1994): 23-43. Rawls, John. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2001). Shelby, Tommie. “Justice, Deviance, and the Black Ghetto.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 33, no. 2 (2007): 126-160. Sen, Amartya. “Human Rights and Capabilities.” Journal of Human Development 6, no. 2 (2005): 151-166. ———. The Idea of Justice. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009). Stout, Margaret and Joao Salm, “What Restorative Justice Might Learn from Administrative Theory,” Contemporary Justice Review 14, no. 2 (2011): 203-225. Wallach, John R. “Liberals, Communitarians, and the Tasks of Political Theory,” Political Theory15:4 (1987): 581-611. Willett, Cynthia. The of Justice: Social Bonds and Racial Hubris. (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2001). Williams, Melissa S. “Justice toward Groups: Political not Juridical,” Political Theory 23:1 10

(1995): 67-91. Wilson, Yolanda. “When is an Omission a Fault? Or, Maybe Rawls Just Isn’t That Into You,” Southern Journal of Philosophy 47 (2009): 185-190.

UNIT 2 – William James

Assignments:

1/26 Discussion leaders post Critical Responses

1/27-2/1 Forum Discussion A

2/2 Discussion B leaders post Critical Responses

2/3-2/8 Forum Discussion B

2/8 Seminar Paper Proposal Due

Required readings: Discussion A James, William. “What Pragmatism Means” (1907). The Writings of William James, ed. John J. McDermott (Chicago: Press, 1977), pp. 376-390. ———. “The Moral and the Moral Life” (1891). The Writings of William James, pp. 610-629.

At least one of the following: Campbell, James. “William James and the Ethics of Fulfillment,” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 17, no. 3 (1981): 224-240. Koopman, Colin. “Unruly and Inclusive Tolerance: The Contribution of Jamesian Pragmatism to Non-ideal Theory,” Political Studies Review 14:1 (2016): 27-38. ———. “William James’s Politics of Personal Freedom,” Journal of Speculative Philosophy19, no. 2 (2005): 175-186. Lekan, Todd. “Strenuous Moral Living,” William James Studies 2, no. 1 (2007): Putnam, Ruth Anna. “The Moral Life of a Pragmatist.” In , , and : Essays in Moral Psychology (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1993), pp. 67-89. Stuhr, John J., “Looking Toward Last Things: James’s Pragmatism beyond Its First Century.” In John J. Stuhr (ed.), 100 Years of Pragmatism: William James’s Revolutionary Philosophy (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2010), pp. 194-207. Tarver, Erin C. “Particulars, Practices, and Pragmatic : Breaking Rules and Rulings with William James,” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 21, no. 4 (2007): 275-290.

Discussion B James, William. “On a Certain Blindness in Human ” (1899). The Writings of William James, pp. 629-645. ———. “What Makes a Life Significant” (1899). The Writings of William James, pp. 645-660. ———. Writings on the Spanish-American War, Selections. Essays, Comments, and Reviews, ed. Burkhardt and Bowers (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987), pp. 81-181. ———. “Epidemic of ” (1903). Essays, Comments, and Reviews, pp. 170-176.

At least one of the following: Allison, Raphael C. “Walt Whitman, William James, and Pragmatist ,” Walt Whitman Quarterly Review 20, no. 1 (2002): 19-29. Edmonds, Jeff. “Toward an Ethics of Encounter: William James’s Push Beyond Tolerance,” 11

Journal of Speculative Philosophy 25, no. 2 (2011): 133-147. Fish, Stanley. “ about Belief,” The Trouble with Principle (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999), pp. 279-84. Livingston, Alexander. “Excited Subjects: William James and the Politics of Radical ,” Theory & 15:4 (2012): N.A. McKenna, Erin. “Women and William James.” In Feminist Interpretations of William James, edited by Erin C. Tarver and (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2015), pp. 79-97. Rondel, David. “William James on Justice and the Sacredness of Individuality,” Pragmatism and Justice, pp. 309-323. Shusterman, Richard. “The Pragmatist Aesthetics of William James,” British Journal of Aesthetics 51, no. 4 (2011): 347-361. [In Handouts] Smith, Andrew F. “Communication and Conviction: A Jamesian Contribution to Deliberative Democracy,” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 21, no. 4 (2007): 259-74. Voparil, Christopher J. “Jonquils and Wild Orchids: Rorty and James on Politics and Aesthetic Experience,” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 23, no. 2 (2009): 100-110.

UNIT 3 – John Dewey

Assignments: 2/9 Discussion A leaders post Critical Responses 2/10-2/15 Forum Discussion A 2/16 Discussion B leaders post Critical Responses 2/17-2/22 Forum Discussion B

Required readings: Discussion A Dewey, John. “The Need for a Recovery in Philosophy” (1917) [Sections I-III, V]. The Philosophy of John Dewey, ed. John J. McDermott (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981), pp. 58-97. ———. The Public and its Problems (1927), ed. Melvin Rogers (Athens, OH: Swallow Press, 2016): “The Search for the Great Community”; “The Problem of Method.”

At least one of the following: Eldridge, Michael. “Dewey’s in Democracy as Shared Experience,” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 32, no. 1 (1996): 11-30. Festenstein, Matthew. “Ideal and Actual in Dewey’s Political Theory,” Pragmatism and Justice, pp. 97-113. Honneth, Axel. “Democracy as Reflexive Cooperation: John Dewey and the Theory of Democracy Today,” Political Theory 26, no. 6 (1998): 763-783. Kosnoski, Jason. “John Dewey’s Social Aesthetics,” Polity 37, no. 2 (2005): 193-215. Putnam, Hilary. “Reconsidering Deweyan Democracy,” Pragmatism and Justice, pp. 249-263. Stuhr, John J. “Dewey’s Social and .” In Reading Dewey: Interpretations for a Postmodern Generation, edited by Larry A. Hickman (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1998), pp. 82-99.

Discussion B Dewey, John. “Racial Prejudice and Friction” (1922). The Middle Works of John Dewey, Vol. 13, ed. Jo Ann Boydston (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1983), pp. 242- 12

254. ———. “Address to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People” (1932). The Later Works of John Dewey, Vol. 6, ed. Jo Ann Boydston (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1985), pp. 224-230. ———. “Creative Democracy – The Task Before Us” (1940). The Later Works of John Dewey, Vol. 14, ed. Jo Ann Boydston (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1988), pp. 224-230.

At least one of the following: James, Denise V. “Pragmatism and Radical Social Justice: Dewey, Du Bois, and Davis,” Pragmatism and Justice, pp. 163-177. Pappas, Gregory Fernando. “Dewey’s Philosophical Approach to Racial Prejudice,” Social Theory and Practice 22, no. 1 (1996): 47-65. Seigfried, Charlene Haddock. “John Dewey’s Pragmatist Feminism.” In Reading Dewey: Interpretations for a Postmodern Generation, edited by Larry A. Hickman (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1998), pp. 187-216. Sullivan, Shannon. “Racialized Habits: Dewey on Race and Roma.” In Pragmatism and Values: The Central European Pragmatist Forum, Vol. 1 (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2004), pp. 139-150. Taylor, Paul C. “Dewey’s Whiteness: Silence and .” In What White Looks Like: African American Philosophers on the Whiteness Question, edited by George Yancy (New York: Routledge, 2004), pp. 227-241. ———. “An Aesthetics of Resistance: Deweyan Experimentalism and Epistemic Injustice,” Pragmatism and Justice, pp. 215-229.

UNIT 4 – Jane Addams

Assignments: 2/23 Discussion leaders post Critical Responses 2/24-2/29 Forum Discussion

Required readings: Addams, Jane. “The Subjective Necessity of Social Settlements” (1892). The Jane Addams Reader, ed. Jean Bethke Elshtain (New York: Basic Books, 2002), pp. 14-28. ———. Democracy and Social Ethics (1902). Introduction; chapters 1, 4, and 6. (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2002). ———.“The Devil Baby at Hull-House” (1916). The Jane Addams Reader, pp. 392-403.

At least one of the following: Fischer, Marilyn. “Interpretation’s Contrapuntal Pathways: Addams and the Averbuch Affair,” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 47, no. 4 (2011): 482-506. Hamington, Maurice. “Jane Addams and a Politics of Embodied Care,” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 15, no. 2 (2001): 105-121. Leffers, Regina M. “Pragmatists Jane Addams and John Dewey Inform the Ethic of Care,” Hypatia 8, no. 2 (1993): 64-77. Sarvasy, Wendy. “Engendering Democracy by Socializing It: Jane Addams’s Contribution to Feminist Political Theorizing.” In Feminist Interpretations of Jane Addams, edited by Maurice Hamington (University Park: Penn State University Press, 2010), pp. 292-310. Seigfried, Charlene Haddock. “Socializing Democracy: Jane Addams and John Dewey,” 13

Philosophy of the Social Sciences 29, no. 2 (1999): 207-30. Sullivan, Shannon. “Reciprocal Relations between Races: Jane Addams’ Ambiguous Legacy,” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 39, no. 1 (2003): 43-60. Voparil, Christopher. “Pragmatism’s Contribution to Nonideal Theorizing: Fraser, Addams, and Rorty,” Pragmatism and Justice, pp. 65-79. Whipps, Judy D. “Jane Addams’s Social Thought as a Model for a Pragmatist-Feminist ,” Hypatia 19:2 (2004): 118-133.

UNIT 5 – W.E.B. Du Bois

Assignments: Required3/1 readingsDiscussion: leaders post Critical Responses 3/2-3/7 Forum Discussion

3/7 Seminar Paper – Draft 1 Due

Required readings: Du Bois, W.E.B. The of Black Folk (New York: Penguin Books, 1989 [1903]), Chapters 1, 9, 10. ———. “The Souls of White Folk” (1910). In Darkwater: Voices from within the Veil (Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 1999 [1920]), pp. 17-29.

At least one of the following: Campbell, James. “Du Bois and James.” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 28, no. 3 (1992): 569-581. Koopman, Colin. “Contesting Injustice: Why Pragmatist Thought Needs Du Bois,” Pragmatism and Justice, pp. 179-197. Posnock, Ross. “Going Astray, Going Forward: Du Boisian Pragmatism and its Lineage.” In The Revival of Pragmatism: New Essays on Social Thought, Law, and Culture, edited by Morris Dickstein (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1998), pp. 176-189. Roberts, Rodney C. “Rectificatory Justice and the Philosophy of W.E.B. DuBois.” In Re- cognizing W.E.B. DuBois in the 21st Century: Essays on W.E.B. DuBois (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 2007), pp. 88-111. Rogers, Melvin L. “The People, , and Affect: On the Political Force of Du Bois’s The Souls of Black Folk.” American Review 106, no. 1 (2012): 188-203. Stikkers, Kenneth W. "An Outline of Methodological Afrocentrism, With Particular Application to the Thought of W.E.B. DuBois," Journal of Speculative Philosophy 22, no. 1 (2008): 40-49. Sullivan, Shannon. “Remembering the Gift: W.E.B. Du Bois on the Unconscious and Economic Operations of Racism,” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 39:2 (2003): 205- 225. Taylor, Paul C. “What’s the Use of Calling Du Bois a Pragmatist?” 35, no. 1/2 (2004): 99-114. West, Cornel. “W.E.B. Du Bois: The Jamesian Organic Intellectual.” The American Evasion of Philosophy: A Genealogy of Pragmatism (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989), pp. 138-150.

3/8-3/14 Mid-Semester Break

14

UNIT 6 – Alain Locke

Assignments: 3/15 Discussion leaders post Critical Responses 3/16-3/21 Forum Discussion

Required readings: Locke, Alain. “Values and Imperatives” (1935). The Philosophy of Alain Locke: Harlem Renaissance and Beyond, ed. Leonard Harris (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989), pp. 31-50. ———. “Pluralism and Intellectual Democracy” (1942). The Philosophy of Alain Locke, pp. 51- 66.

At least one of the following: Akam, Everett H. “Community and Cultural Crisis: The ‘Transfiguring Imagination’ of Alain Locke,” American Literary History 3:2 (1991): 255-276. Fraser, Nancy. “Another Pragmatism: Alain Locke, Critical ‘Race’ Theory, and the Politics of Culture.” In The Revival of Pragmatism: New Essays on Social Thought, Law, and Culture, edited by Morris Dickstein (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1998), pp. 157-75. MacMullan, Terrance. “Challenges to Cultural Diversity: Absolutism, Democracy, and Alain Locke’s Value ,” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 19, no. 2 (2005): 129- 139. Shusterman, Richard. “Pragmatist Aesthetics: Roots and Radicalism.” In The Critical Pragmatism of Alain Locke, edited by Leonard Harris (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999), pp. 97-110.

UNIT 7 – Anna Julia Cooper and Mary Parker Follett

Assignments: 3/22 Discussion leaders post Critical Responses 3/23-3/28 Forum Discussion 3/28 Virtual Mid-Semester Residency (MSR) Social Justice Speaker: 11:00a-1:00p ET Concentration meetings: 1:15-2:15p ET 4/2 Seminar Paper – Draft 2 Due

Required readings: Cooper, Anna Julia. “The Gain from a Belief.” In A Voice from the South. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988 [1892], pp. 286-304. Follett, Mary Parker. “Power: The Condition of its Validity,” in Creative Experience (New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1924), pp. 179-194 [Chapter X].

At least one of the following: Bailey, Cathryn. “Anna Julia Cooper: ‘Dedicated in the Name of My Slave Mother to the of Colored Working People,’” Hypatia 19:2 (2004): 56-72. 15

Banerjee, Amrita. “Follett’s Pragmatist of Relations: Potentials for a Feminist Perspective on Violence,” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 22:1 (2008): 3-11. Carby, Hazel V. “‘On the Threshold of the Woman’s Era’: Lynching, Empire, and Sexuality in Black Feminist Theory,” Critical Inquiry 12:1 (1985): 262-277. Giles, Mark S. “Dr. Anna Julia Cooper, 1858-1964: Teacher, Scholar, and Timeless Womanist Author,” Journal of Negro Education 75:4 (2006): 621-634. Kaag, John. “Women and Forgotten Movements in American Philosophy: The Work of Ella Lyman Cabot and Mary Parker Follett,” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 44:1 (2008): 134-157. Johnson, Karen A. “’In Service for the ’: Anna Julia Cooper and Adult Education,” African American Review 43:1 (2009): 45-56. May, Vivian M. “Thinking from the Margins, Acting at the Intersections: Anna Julia Cooper’s A Voice from the South,” Hypatia 19:2 (2004): 74-91. ———. “Writing the Self into Being: Anna Julia Cooper’s Textual Politics,” African American Review 43:1 (2009): 17-34. Pratt, Scott L. “American Power: Mary Parker Follett and Michel Foucault,” Foucault Studies 11 (2011): 76-91. Whipps, Judy. “A Pragmatist Reading of Mary Parker Follett’s Integrative Process,” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 50:3 (2014): 405-424.

UNIT 8 – Richard Rorty

Assignments: 4/5 Discussion leaders post Critical Responses 4/6-4/11 Forum Discussion

Required readings: Rorty, Richard. “The Priority of Democracy to Philosophy” (1988). The Rorty Reader, pp. 239- 258. ———. “Human Rights, Rationality, and Sentimentality” (1993). The Rorty Reader, pp. 351- 365. ———. “Justice as a Larger Loyalty” (1997), Pragmatism and Justice, pp. 21-35.

At least one of the following: Bernstein, Richard J. “Rorty’s Deep ,” New Literary History 39:1 (2008): 13-27. ———. “Rorty’s Liberal Utopia.” Social Research 57, no. 1 (1990): 31-72. Koopman, Colin. “Rorty’s Moral Philosophy for Liberal Democratic Culture,” Contemporary Pragmatism 4, no. 2 (2007): 45-64. Fish, Stanley. “Prologue: Taking Sides,” The Trouble with Principle (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999), pp. 1-15. Lara, María Pía. “Richard Rorty: Building Up Pragmatism as a Tool for Democracy.” In The Philosophy of Richard Rorty, edited by Randall E. Auxier and Lewis Edwin Hahn (Chicago: Open Court, 2010), pp. 197-223. Voparil, Christopher J. “General Introduction.” In The Rorty Reader, edited by Christopher J. Voparil and Richard J. Bernstein (Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010), pp. 1-52. ———. “Reading Rorty Politically,” Filozofia 66, no. 10 (2011): 963-70. West, Cornel. “The Limits of .” In The Cornel West Reader (New York: Basic Books, 1999), pp. 183-7. 16

Further readings: Bacon, Michael. Richard Rorty: Pragmatism and Political Liberalism (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2007). Gascoigne, Neil. Richard Rorty (Malden, MA: Polity Press, 2008). Gröschner, Alexander, Colin Koopman, and Mike Sandbothe (eds.). Richard Rorty: From Pragmatist Philosophy to Cultural Politics (New York: Bloomsbury, 2013). Voparil, Christopher J. Richard Rorty: Politics and Vision (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2006).

UNIT 9 – Pragmatism and Feminism

Assignments: 4/12 Discussion leaders post Critical Responses 4/13-4/18 Forum Discussion

Required readings: Seigfried, Charlene Haddock. “Where Are All the Pragmatist Feminists?” Hypatia (1991): 1- 20. Rorty, Richard. “Feminism and Pragmatism” (1991). The Rorty Reader, pp. 330-350. James, Denise. “Theorizing Black Feminist Pragmatism: Forethoughts on the Practice and Purpose of Philosophy as Envisioned by Black Feminists and John Dewey,” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 23, no. 2 (2009): 92-99.

At least one of the following: Carter, Jacoby Adeshei. “The Insurrectionist Challenge to Pragmatism and Maria W. Stewart’s Feminist Insurrectionist Ethics.” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 49, no. 1 (2013): 54-73. Fraser, Nancy. “From Irony to Prophecy to Politics: A Response to Richard Rorty,” Michigan Quarterly Review 30, no. 2 (1991): 259-66. Hamington, Maurice. “Feminist Prophetic Pragmatism,” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 23, no. 2 (2009): 83-91. Leffers, M. Regina. “Pragmatists Jane Addams and John Dewey Inform the Ethic of Care,” Hypatia 8, no. 2 (1993): 64-77. Pappas, Gregory Fernando. “Dewey and Feminism: The Affective and Relationships in Dewey’s Ethics,” Hypatia 8, no. 2 (1993): 78-95. Seigfried, Charlene Haddock. “Shared Communities of Interest: Feminism and Pragmatism,” Hypatia 8:2 (1993): 1-14. Upin, Jane S. “Charlotte Perkins Gilman: Beyond Dewey,” Hypatia 8, no. 2 (1993): 38-63. Voparil, Christopher J. “Rortyan Cultural Politics and the Problem of Speaking for Others,” Contemporary Pragmatism 8, no. 1 (2011): 115-131.

17

UNIT 10 – Pragmatism and Race

Assignments: 4/19 Discussion leaders post Critical Responses 4/20-4/25 Forum Discussion

Required readings: Collins, Patricia Hill. “Piecing Together a Genealogical Puzzle: Intersectionality and American Pragmatism,” European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy 3, no. 2 (2011): 88-112. Sullivan, Shannon. “Ignorance and Habit,” Revealing Whiteness: The Unconscious Habits of Racial Privilege (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2006), pp. 17-44. West, Cornel. “On Prophetic Pragmatism.” In The Cornel West Reader (New York: Basic Books, 1999), pp. 149-73.

At least one of the following: Cormier, Harvey. “William James on Nation and Race.” In Pragmatism, Nation, and Race: Community in the Age of Empire, edited by Chad Kautzer and Eduardo Mendieta (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2009), pp. 142-162. Glaude, Eddie S. “The Eclipse of a Black Public and the Challenge of a Post-Soul Politics,” In a Shade of Blue: Pragmatism and the Politics of Black America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007), pp. 127-150. Green, Judith M. “Prophetic Pragmatism: King, West, and the Beloved Community,” Deep Democracy: Community, Diversity, and Transformation, Chapter 5 (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999), pp. 135-169. Hamington, Maurice. “Public Pragmatism: Jane Addams and Ida B. Wells on Lynching,” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 19, no. 2 (2005): 167-174. Harris, Leonard. “Insurrectionist Ethics: Advocacy, Moral Psychology and Pragmatism.” In Ethical Issues for a New Millennium, edited by John Howie, 192-210. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2002. MacMullan, Terrance. “Facing up to Ignorance and Privilege: Philosophy of Whiteness as Public ,” Philosophy Compass 10:9 (2015): 646-660. Medina, José. “Pragmatism, Racial Injustice, and Epistemic Insurrection: Toward an Insurrectionist Pragmatism,” Pragmatism and Justice, pp. 197-213. Pratt, Scott. “Race, Education, and Democracy.” In Pragmatism and the Problem of Race, edited by Bill E. Lawson and Donald F. Koch (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2004), pp. 188-202. Rogers, Melvin L. “The of Sacrifice and Necessity of Faith: Dewey and the Ethics of Democracy,” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 47, no. 3 (2011): 274-300. Sullivan, Shannon. “Prophetic Vision and Trash Talkin’: Pragmatism, Feminism, and Racial Privilege.” In Pragmatism, Nation, and Race: Community in the Age of Empire, edited by Chad Kautzer and Eduardo Mendieta (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2009), pp. 186-205. ———. “Setting Aside Hope: A Pragmatist Approach to Racial Injustice,” Pragmatism and Justice, pp. 231-246. Taylor, Paul C. “Pragmatism and Race.” In Pragmatism and the Problem of Race, edited by Bill E. Lawson and Donald F. Koch (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2004), pp. 162-76. 18

UNIT 11 – Pragmatism and the Nation

Assignments: 4/26 Discussion leaders post Critical Responses 4/27-5/2 Forum Discussion 5/7 Seminar Paper Due – Final Draft

Required readings: Bourne, Randolph. “Transnational America” (1916). In The Radical Will: Selected Writings 1911-1918, edited by Olaf Hansen (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977), pp. 248-264. Addams, Jane. “Americanization” (1919). The Jane Addams Reader, pp. 240-247. Rorty, Richard. “American National Pride: Whitman and Dewey,” : Leftist Thought in Twentieth-Century America (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998), pp. 1-38; reprinted in The Rorty Reader, pp. 372-388.

At least one of the following: Medina, José. “Pragmatism and Ethnicity: Critique, Reconstruction, and the New Hispanic,” Metaphilosophy 35, no. 1/2 (2004): 115-146. Mendieta, Eduardo. “Pragmatism and the Ethics of Global Citizenship: Latinos and Transnationalism,” Inter-American Journal of Philosophy 2, no. 1 (2011): 26-34. Pappas, Gregory. “The Latino Character of American Pragmatism.” In Pragmatism in the Americas, edited by Gregory Fernando Pappas (New York: Fordham University Press, 2011), pp. 170-184. Pratt, Scott. “The Legacy of Native American Thought,” Native Pragmatism: Rethinking the Roots of American Philosophy (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2002), pp. 272- 289. Rorty, Richard. “The Unpredictable American Empire.” In Pragmatism, Nation, and Race: Community in the Age of Empire, edited by Chad Kautzer and Eduardo Mendieta (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2009), pp. 208-221. Smith, Andrew R. and Leonard Shyles. “On Ethnocentric Truth and Pragmatic Justice.” In Recovering Pragmatism’s Voice: The Classical Tradition, Rorty, and the Philosophy of Communication, edited by Lenore Langsdorf and Andrew R. Smith (Albany: SUNY Press, 1995), pp. 71-94. Sullivan, Shannon. “White Ignorance and Colonial Oppression: Or, Why I Know So Little about Puerto Rico.” In Race and of Ignorance, edited by Shannon Sullivan and Nancy Tuana (Albany: SUNY Press, 2007), pp. 153-172.

19