Augustine - St. Joseph's College - University of Alberta

Augustine
PHIL 309-B1 – Winter 2012
Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays – 10:00-10:50, ED 315
Instructor: Dr. Matthew Kostelecky
Office Hours: Mondays 1-2pm and Fridays 11am-12pm. Otherwise by appointment.
Office: St. Joseph‟s College, Office 0-16
Phone: 780-492-7681, ext. 243
Email: kostelec@ualberta.ca
Purpose of the course: The course is meant to introduce the student to the thought of St.
Augustine, primarily by recourse to a thorough and relatively slow reading of his most
famous work: The Confessions. Within that rather large domain, we will focus on the
philosophical thought of Augustine, though we will also be treating some of the literary,
historical, sociological, and theological themes that we can pull out of his work. In order to
get a better perspective on his work as a whole, we will look at excerpts of some of his other
writings as well.
General themes of the course: The themes we will be treating in this course include the
following: knowledge, memory, time, the „self‟, sex, belief (in God and belief more generally),
moral decision making and the problem of evil, the relationship between faith and reason,
and how to read and write upon a classical text. We will also be looking at Augustine‟s
intellectual debt to the Neo-Platonists (especially Plotinus). In order to relate some of the
themes of The Confessions to contemporary philosophical concerns, we‟ll also be reading
chapters from a recent philosophical anthology on the work.
Required Texts:
St. Augustine, Confessions. Translated by Henry Chadwick (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2009).
Augustine’s Confessions: Critical Essays. Edited by William Mann (Lanham: Rowan & Littlefield
Publishers, 2006).
Other materials will be disseminated electronically or in class.
Grading: You must complete all of the following assignments in order to receive credit for
this course.
1) Two short essays (3-4 pages): 30%. The students will write on assigned topics for
these assignments.
a. First short essay (15%) – due Wednesday, February 1.
b. Second short essay (15%) – due Wednesday, March 7.
2) Longer Writing Assignment – 45%. The students will choose their own topic for
this assignment. Please see the last sheet of this syllabus describing in detail the
three components of this assignment.
1

a. Précis – 5%. – Due on Wednesday, March 28.
b. Explication de texte – 10%. Due on Wednesday, April 4.
c. Essay, 7-10 pages – 30%. Due on Friday April 13.
3) Oral Final Exam 25% - Monday, April 23 at 9am (make-up exam date: May 28,
2012). The oral exam is a cumulative measure of the material we will cover for
this class. As such, it is comprehensive in scope. I will hand out all the questions
(somewhere around 8-10 questions) for the oral several weeks before the exam
date. You will draw one of these questions at random at the time of the exam
and have 15 minutes to prepare an answer. After the preparation time, you will
present an answer to the question drawn in a face-to-face interview. During the
face-to-face portion of the test, I will ask follow up questions and we will have a
discussion about the content of the course. The oral exam will be recorded
digitally. I will make notes on your presentation (i.e., listing what you have done
well and what could be improved) and you can have these notes once the grades
are submitted. In fact, I can email you the oral exam if requested (a benefit of
recording it digitally). This is foreign, I understand, to what you are used to, but I
have done this method of evaluation many times, and believe that this method of
evaluation is superlative (and the students have nearly always agreed, at least after
the fact). We will talk about this in class, in detail, to dispel as much of the
unknown as possible.
Notes about Grading:
1. Tests and essays returned late will receive a penalty of 3% for each 24-hour period,
with a maximum late-penalty accrual of 21%. Extensions will only be granted for
serious reasons and if you contact me before the due date and time of the test.
2. The marking for this course is not done on a comparative or particular distributive
scheme (i.e., I don’t mark on a bell curve). As the written assignments are given
out, I will clearly lay out the general marking rubrics (my expectations of your work
and how I grade).
3. Class participation is not formally factored into the grade, though it is very much
encouraged and welcomed. Class attendance is, however, required. Habitual or
extended absences without proper documentation will result in grade reductions
once I assign the final mark for the course.
Academic Integrity: “The University of Alberta is committed to the highest standards of
academic integrity and honesty. Students are expected to be familiar with these standards
regarding academic honesty and to uphold the policies of the University in this respect.
Students are particularly urged to familiarize themselves with the provisions of the Code of
Student Behaviour (online at www.ualberta.ca/secretariat/appeals.htm) and avoid any
behavior which could potentially result in suspicions of cheating, plagiarism,
misrepresentation of facts and/or participation in an offence. Academic dishonesty is a
serious offence and can result in suspension or expulsion from the University.” (GFC 29
SEP 2003)
Policy about course outlines can be found in § 23.4(2) of the University Calendar.
A Brief Summary of Various Philosophical Writing Styles
2

1. Précis: A concise (precise) summary of essential points, statements, or facts. It is a
summary that follows the form of the text very closely, paragraph by paragraph, section by section.
The point is to try to understand what the author is trying to say in a particular sentence or paragraph
and then paraphrase it. [paraphrase = a restatement – using your own words – of a text, passage, or
work giving the meaning in another form] The final result should be a text made up of your own
words and phrases which mirrors the original text. This tends to be slow-going and painstaking. The
advantage is that you do not need to have any prior knowledge of what you are summarizing. You
should avoid using any secondary sources. You are not trying to establish whether the author is right
or wrong, clear or unclear (this involves criticism). You are only taking what the author says and
reformulating it in a way that makes sense to you. You are doing a basic level of interpretation. You
are not defending a position or asking why the author takes a particular view.
2. Explication de texte: A detailed analysis of a text. [explicate = to give a detailed
explanation or analyses in view of possible implications; analyze = to break down, to dissect] This
usually focuses on a paragraph or section of text. The aim is to analyze the paragraph or section very
closely, to pick out all the key words or phrases that are important to the meaning of the excerpt.
These key words or phrases must then be explained as fully as possible. How are they being used
within the excerpt? How do they relate to the rest of the text, that is, what is the context for a
particular term? The point is to arrive at an accurate understanding of the word or phrase within the
particular excerpt and also to see its significance within the text as a whole. This involves a deeper
level of interpretation than the précis and a basic level of criticism. You are asking why the author is
using particular words or phrases, whether their use is clear or unclear, and how they relate to an
understanding of the author‟s aim as a whole. This should all be done from within the text, that is,
you should not rely on secondary sources. The point is to arrive at a deeper level of understanding
of the terminology being used in the text. Therefore, you are still not, in a strict sense, taking a
position and defending it.
3. Essay/Paper: Here is where you will employ criticism instead of just mere interpretation.
Having done the Précis and the Explication de texte, you will now be well-equipped to ask more
specific questions about the text. Is what the author says true or false, consistent or contradictory,
proven or not proven, clear or obscure? You will put forth an opinion of your own about the text.
This is not to be simply a personal opinion about whether you liked the text or the author. Rather,
you must take a position with respect to the text and be prepared to defend the position. You must
focus on a particular problem, question, or concern that you find compelling. You must explain why
this problem is interesting (not just to you, but to the author‟s project as a whole) and how you will
go about dealing with this problem. For this you may need to use secondary sources. Doing research
to find other writers who have dealt with the same or similar problem may help you to form a larger
picture of the problem and help you to make your own argument better.
3