Scott Shushan

One of the principal activities that distinguishes us as the kinds of beings we are is that we strive to make sense of our reality: ourselves, others, the world, and perhaps even what lies beyond. Two ways that we do this are through philosophy and literature. Fairy tales, fables, myths, short stories, and novels not only fascinate and entertain but also teach us how to be in the world, present us with puzzles that deepen our understanding, and both implicitly and explicitly communicate moral lessons. Philosophy, although it assumes various forms—dialogues, meditations, phenomenologies, genealogies, pseudonymous works, aphorisms, and, of course, essays and books—aspires to offer a conceptual analysis of some of the most trenchant questions of existence: What is truth? How should we be moral? Are we free or determined in our actions? This class will investigate the intersections between these two forms of reflection. As we proceed in this investigation, we will reflect on (i) the possibility that philosophy and literature are complementary pursuits of the same end, (ii) a philosophical investigation of literature, and (iii) a consideration of philosophy itself as literature. Some topics that we will discuss are the truths communicated by ancient and modern tragedies, the various satisfactions that we derive from different forms of narrative, the structure of metaphor, the relation of a fictitious work to its author, and the ethical significance of art. We will read literary works from Sophocles, Shakespeare, Virginia Woolf, Jean-Paul Sartre, Ralph Ellison, Ursula K. Le Guin, J. M. Coetzee, W. G. Sebald, Octavia Butler, Rachel Cusk, and Maggie Nelson. Philosophical works will include Plato, Aristotle, René Descartes, G. W. F. Hegel, Søren Kierkegaard, Jean-Paul Sartre, Iris Murdoch, Stanley Cavell, Jacques Derrida, and Cora Diamond. (Please note: this course will be reading intensive; we will always be reading a work of fiction, and each session will have a philosophical text assigned.)

You care about movies (I presume). Why do you care about movies? Because they entertain you? Because they are beautiful? Because they are informative? Because they make you feel things? The guiding thought of this class is that we care about movies, because they participate in the practice of philosophy (or at least they have that potential). Of course, this also presumes that we care about philosophy (a claim that will take some time to defend). To test that hypothesis—that films have the potential to participate in the practice of philosophy—we first need to consider what the practice of philosophy is. Then, we will need to say something about what film is. And then, we can examine whether film can do philosophy. In the first part of the course, we will analyze the medium of film in order to clarify the characteristics of film that would allow it to be philosophical. In the second part of the class, we will explore how those characteristics of film contribute to how we think philosophically about our lives. In particular, we will explore problems pertaining to subjectivity (What it is to be a human being?) and to ethics (How do I know the right thing to do?). Each week we will watch a film (including Jeanne Dielman, Psycho, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Get Out, and Spring Breakers) and read a philosophical text (including Aristotle, Cavell, Merleau-Ponty, Parfit, and Adorno) with the aim of placing the two in conversation.

Surveying the post-Holocaust world of late capitalism, Theodor W. Adorno writes that “Wrong life cannot be lived rightly.” We find ourselves in a world replete with strife, burdened with a disconcerting future, and so the possibility of living a good life seems not just illusive but altogether impossible. And yet, from this dire prognosis, Adorno offers a critical assessment of modern life in all of its minutiae that hints at the possibility of redemption. His analysis is boundless, ranging from a vehement takedown of astrology to a psychoanalytic reading of fascist propaganda, from reflections on the fiction of Franz Kafka to questioning our capacity to shut a door quietly. Adorno suggests that describing the ills of modern life—what he variously identifies as capitalism, fascism, consumerism, or, more pervasively, the hallowing of meaningful experience that resolves itself in loneliness and alienation—might offer the possibility to transform those stifling conditions. The seminar will begin with his diagnosis of our social reality, proceed to theorize about the metaphysical underpinnings of this reality, and conclude by considering the capacity of art to redeem our physical existence. Underlying the entirety of our investigation of Adorno’s work will be the imperative to overcome what he calls the “barbarity” of our time. Readings will be drawn from Adorno’s main works, Dialectic of Enlightenment (1944), Minima Moralia (1951), Negative Dialectics (1966), and Aesthetic Theory (1970), as well as various essays. Our ambition will be not only to understand Adorno’s assessment of the stultifying conditions of his time but also to consider how he supplies us with tools, methods, and arguments for addressing the challenges facing our own.

Art seems to be an inextricable part of human life. The question that guides this class is seemingly simple: What is art? As will soon become clear, answering this question proves to be exceedingly difficult. For example: Are trees works of art? Is an iPhone a work of art? Is a movie a work of art? Are all movies works of art? Is a doodle in your notebook a work of art? It may turn out that no definitive answer to our guiding question is possible; however, without demarcating between what counts as art and what doesn’t, art refers to everything and, consequently, to nothing special. This class investigates how works of art become meaningful. The narrative of the class traces the different frameworks that philosophers over the last 2,500 years have used to pursue this question. We will follow a historical narrative, learning how these frameworks have responded both to each other and to the artworks of their time. We will read texts by Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Hegel, Danto, Benjamin, and others, as well as analyze artworks from Sophocles, William Shakespeare, Édouard Manet, Pablo Picasso, Andy Warhol, John Cage, Kara Walker, Jordan Peele, and many others. At the end of the semester, our aim will be to articulate what is so special about art and why we care about it.

We can ask the question—What is the right thing to do?—because we take our reasons to influence our actions. But what does it mean to be free? And how do our reasons affect what we do? This course will investigate two central issues in moral philosophy: freedom and moral reasons. In the first half of the course, we will ask: What qualifies us as responsible for our actions? To answer this question, we must think about what it means to be a human agent. Some thinkers believe that we are born agents, while others believe that we must develop our agency. If agency is developed, then the society that we are born into is crucial for this development—which means that, to understand responsibility, we must consider how sociality shapes who we are and, thus, what we do. In the second half of the class, we will turn to critically reflect on the ethical questions that arise, inasmuch as we exist in a social world with other human beings. We will discuss pressing social issues such as wealth inequality, women’s health issues, climate change, animal rights, race- and gender- based discrimination, the death penalty, and mass incarceration. Beyond thinking through specific issues, we will be interested in the nature of moral reason and moral arguments. What makes a good moral argument? And does a good moral argument change our minds on an issue? Our discussions will prompt us to doubt our deeply-held beliefs that inform our thoughts and actions, questioning their validity and goodness.

This course investigates the ways in which feminist philosophers have challenged traditional approaches to moral philosophy. We will look at feminist ethics as not just a branch of ethics (for instance, one addressing the concerns of women) but as an approach to ethics as a whole that puts pressure on dominant moral philosophies— specifically, those inspired by Kant and Mill. Feminist philosophers have sought to correct the privileging of the male standpoint and question its characterization as neutral. Where traditional moral philosophy focuses on individual moral subjects, feminist interventions have illuminated the social and material conditions under which moral problems arise and moral actions occur. Over the course of the semester, we will consider how feminist ethics invite us to reconsider: (1) the way moral theories determine what counts as harmful or wrong; (2) how moral psychology construes our motivation to act and our responsibility for what we have done; and (3) individual social issues, including misogyny, abortion, and our thinking around sex. Our aim will be to appreciate how these thinkers expand the scope of moral consideration and to ask previously ignored or obscured questions. How does one’s upbringing shape their moral outlook, and should it change what one is responsible for? How does being oriented by care reframe what we take ethics to be about? What kinds of beings (and things) are eligible for moral consideration? Should this include animals? Or the environment? How does a feminist perspective allow us to notice systematic oppression on the grounds of race or sexuality? In working through these questions and others, some of the thinkers we will read include Elizabeth Anscombe, Simone de Beauvoir, Judith Butler, Claudia Card, Patricia Hill Collins, Cora Diamond, Carol Gilligan, bell hooks, Eva Kittay, Iris Murdoch, and Margaret Walker.

One of the principal activities that distinguishes us as the kinds of beings we are is that we strive to make sense of our reality: ourselves, others, the world, and perhaps even what lies beyond. Two ways that we do this are through philosophy and literature. Fairy tales, fables, myths, short stories, and novels not only fascinate and entertain but also teach us how to be in the world, present us with puzzles that deepen our understanding, and both implicitly and explicitly communicate moral lessons. Philosophy, although it assumes various forms—dialogues, meditations, phenomenologies, genealogies, pseudonymous works, aphorisms, and, of course, essays and books—aspires to offer a conceptual analysis of some of the most trenchant questions of existence: What is truth? How should we be moral? Are we free or determined in our actions? This class will investigate the intersections between these two forms of reflection. As we proceed in this investigation, we will reflect on (i) the possibility that philosophy and literature are complementary pursuits of the same end, (ii) a philosophical investigation of literature, and (iii) a consideration of philosophy itself as literature. Some topics that we will discuss are the truths communicated by ancient and modern tragedies, the various satisfactions that we derive from different forms of narrative, the structure of metaphor, the relation of a fictitious work to its author, and the ethical significance of art. We will read literary works from Sophocles, Shakespeare, Virginia Woolf, Jean-Paul Sartre, Ralph Ellison, Ursula K. Le Guin, J. M. Coetzee, W. G. Sebald, Octavia Butler, Rachel Cusk, and Maggie Nelson. Philosophical works will include Plato, Aristotle, René Descartes, G. W. F. Hegel, Søren Kierkegaard, Jean-Paul Sartre, Iris Murdoch, Stanley Cavell, Jacques Derrida, and Cora Diamond. (Please note: This course will be reading-intensive; we will always be reading a work of fiction, and each session will have a philosophical text assigned.) Separate from the course content, we will meet biweekly as a group to discuss various topics relating to life at Sarah Lawrence. These sessions will have a particular focus on working on writing skills.

Written in 1807, G. W. F. Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit is arguably the most important book one could read to understand our modern world. The book was so pathbreaking that subsequent philosophers were compelled to contend with its claims; and it is no stretch to say that, without Hegel, there would be no Marx, Kierkegaard, Sartre, Foucault, or even feminist theory. A book about the nature of knowledge, our relation to others, what makes an action right, the influence of culture, the value of art, and the role of religion in our lives, Phenomenology of Spirit offers a comprehensive theory of what makes life meaningful. During the course of the semester, we will read significant portions of the text as we work to comprehend Hegel’s expansive philosophical thought. Central to that thought is the contention that we achieve self-knowledge not through introspection but by looking outward to the world and to the entirety of human history. Accordingly, Phenomenology of Spirit weaves a narrative through a panoply of frameworks and practices that people have inhabited in making sense of their lives (skepticism, stoicism, science, art, religion, and philosophy). This unique narrative progresses dialectically, demonstrating how the contradictions that inhere in one framework or practice generate a new framework or practice, which ultimately gives way to “Absolute Knowing.”

This class is an exploration of our human way of being. As Aristotle theorized, our nature is distinctive in being incomplete—only finding its completion in the social world. Taking Aristotle’s thought as a guiding principle, we will investigate not only our innate nature but also our second nature. This second nature includes the customs, habits, and practices that we inhabit as we mature and through which we see, think, and interact with the world. As such, second nature accounts for everything from walking upright to our ethical and political commitments. The paradox of second nature is that while it shades the entirety of our experience, we are largely unaware of its operation. While we might know what we are thinking about, we rarely know how we are thinking or what guides us to certain conclusions. Accordingly, the topics of second nature will touch upon philosophical problems such as the establishment of criteria for knowledge, judging the rightness or wrongness of our action, as well as the role of art in both facilitating and resisting second nature. Lastly, if we are guided in our thoughts and actions by a second nature whose effect is mostly opaque to us, then we must also address the apparent challenge to our freedom; that is, the degree to which our thoughts and actions are up to us. Readings for this course will include Aristotle, G. W. F. Hegel, Felix Ravaisson, Sigmund Freud, William James, John Dewey, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Simone de Beauvoir, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Sally Haslanger, and Charles Mills.

Immanuel Kant revolutionized philosophy with his Copernican turn, which limits our knowledge of the world to our subjective experience of it. Kant elaborated this thought in the three volumes of philosophy that comprise his critical system. After investigating questions pertaining to knowledge in the First Critique and problems of validating moral judgment in the Second Critique, Kant shifts in the Third Critique (our object of study) to elaborate the forms of judgment that we employ in making sense of beauty in nature, works of art, and the meaning or purpose of life. The first part of the book focuses on aesthetic judgments; in it, Kant asks, What do we mean when we call something—for instance, a sunset or even painting of a sunset—beautiful? The second part of the book investigates teleological judgments; in it, Kant asks, How do we judge something to be alive? Not only does this book establish many of the central questions of modern aesthetics—such as, How can aesthetic judgments be objective?—but it also addresses the antagonism between freedom and nature, the experience of the sublime, the emergence of artistic genius, the postulation of a sensus communis (common sense), and the relation between beauty and morality. Over the course of the semester, we will observe the vast influence of the Critique of Judgment on both art and the philosophy of art. We will complement our reading of Kant’s text by considering such modern thinkers as Theodore Adorno, Hannah Arendt, Jean-Francois Lyotard, Achille Mbembe, and Hannah Ginsborg. As well, we will appraise Kant’s ideas in consideration of the works of Beethoven, Barnett Newman, Jackson Pollock, Jo Baer, Marcel Duchamp, James Turrell, among many others.

This class is an investigation of the philosophy of Karl Marx. While interpreters primarily read Marx as an economist, historian, political theorist, or sociologist, we will read him foremost as a philosopher—examining the philosophical ideas animating his critical project. Of course, Marx famously wrote, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it.” To consider Marx as a philosopher, first of all, requires that we see his thinking as responding to traditional philosophical ideas (for instance, those of Aristotle, Kant, and Hegel) but, at the same time, expanding our understanding of what philosophy is or should be. Traditionally, the practice of philosophy consists of examining the ideas that organize the world we inhabit; but, for Marx, these ideas are necessarily rooted in material realities and must be examined in the light of an empirical study of those realities. The contradictions that fuel Marx’s critical assessment of his time are not merely within or between theories but are contradictions between these theories and actual social reality. If Marx may be considered a philosopher, it is because he broadens what it means to be a philosopher—not merely compelling us to reflect but to act. To appreciate Marx’s philosophical contribution, we will investigate the concepts he develops in analyzing the fraught condition of modern social life: alienation, class, historical materialism, human essence, ideology, and labor. Beginning with the letter Marx wrote to Arnold Ruge that has since been titled “For A Ruthless Critique Of Everything Existing,” we will read pieces that cover all periods in Marx’s development, including Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, The German Ideology, Manifesto of the Communist Party, and, of course, Capital. Throughout our investigation of his work, we will be guided by the question: How does capitalist society diminish the possibility of human fulfillment?

What does it mean to know something? Every day, we presume to know things: We presume to know that the Earth circles around the Sun, that human beings are born with unalienable rights, that you are upset with me for answering honestly about whether I like your new shirt, that I am currently reading a course description for a philosophy class, that Radiohead is my favorite band, or that this is my right hand. Beyond specific claims, when we act we rely on knowledge about the world; for instance, when we sit in a chair, we demonstrate knowledge that a chair is a thing to be sat upon. This class investigates what these varied instances of knowledge share in common, how knowledge should be defined, and what capacities qualify us as knowers. We will begin by reading the first historical queries into how we arrive at knowledge (Plato and Aristotle), then jump to consider modern attempts to secure foundations for knowledge (René Descartes), and then turn to investigate the asymmetry between knowledge of our own minds and knowledge of others’ minds (Gilbert Ryle and Stanley Cavell). Finally, reading critical race theory (W. E. B Du Bois and Charles Mills) and feminist philosophy (Sally Haslanger and Lorraine Code), we will consider how our identities and relative privileges or underprivileges influence what we are capable of knowing. This will give us the opportunity to reflect on the vital relationship between knowledge and justice.