180115 VO-L Evil (2018W)
A fitting category of philosophical ethics respectively morals?
Labels
Registration/Deregistration
Details
Language: German
Examination dates
Monday
04.02.2019
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 2i NIG 2.Stock
Monday
04.03.2019
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 3B NIG 3.Stock
Monday
06.05.2019
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 3B NIG 3.Stock
Monday
24.06.2019
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 3B NIG 3.Stock
Wednesday
16.10.2019
16:45 - 19:00
Seminarraum 3A NIG 3.Stock
Lecturers
Classes (iCal) - next class is marked with N
Monday
08.10.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Monday
15.10.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Monday
22.10.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Monday
29.10.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Monday
05.11.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Monday
12.11.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Monday
19.11.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Monday
26.11.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Monday
03.12.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Monday
10.12.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Monday
07.01.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Monday
14.01.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Monday
21.01.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Monday
28.01.
13:15 - 14:45
Hörsaal 21 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 8
Information
Aims, contents and method of the course
Assessment and permitted materials
The written exam will contain of 4 open questions, 2 of them shall be answered. You are free to use literature you read while phrasing your answers. Apart from that participation on discussions as well as reading texts we agree to discuss will be of high importance for the grading.
Minimum requirements and assessment criteria
The lecture is one with a high proportion of autonomous reading by the participants. A collection of important texts, every participant should read, will be offered as a copy template.
An independent, reflected, critical approach to the subjects of the lecture should be apparent in the exam. Important, especially relating to the exam, are coherent and consistent argumentation, use of topic-related literature and reference to it.
An independent, reflected, critical approach to the subjects of the lecture should be apparent in the exam. Important, especially relating to the exam, are coherent and consistent argumentation, use of topic-related literature and reference to it.
Examination topics
Subjects of the lecture; they will also be available compressed in presentation slides.
Reading list
Mintz, Steven/Stauffer, John (eds.): The Problem of Evil. Slavery, Freedom, and the Ambiguities of American Reform (Amherst/Boston 2007).
Neiman, Susan: Evil in Modern Thought. An Alternative History of Philosophy (Princeton 2002).
Pagels, Elaine: The Origin of Satan. How Christians Demonized Jews, Pagans, and Heretics (New York 1995).
Pinker, Steven: The Better Angels. Why Violence has declined (New York 2011).
Neiman, Susan: Evil in Modern Thought. An Alternative History of Philosophy (Princeton 2002).
Pagels, Elaine: The Origin of Satan. How Christians Demonized Jews, Pagans, and Heretics (New York 1995).
Pinker, Steven: The Better Angels. Why Violence has declined (New York 2011).
Association in the course directory
Last modified: Tu 15.10.2019 13:08
So it seems to be indispensable to distinguish between philosophical concepts of morals or ethics on one hand and religious moral teachings on the other hand. It is also of high importance to distinguish the terms ethics and morals beyond philosophical or religious approaches, which are often equated. Strictly speaking they describe quite different ideas: In respect to consideration of ancient Greek thinkers, ethics can be seen as a collective name for theories or doctrines of successful life (in a very wide sense), while morals have always to do with rules or norms. Nevertheless, there are also normative ethics, such as utilitarianism. Nowadays ethics is – against its original meaning – often used to describe a branch of practical philosophy, designated to find criteria to describe human behavior as good or bad. The term evil is mostly avoided in this perspective.
Religious, especially Christian, but also Islamic concepts of morals or ethics are usually tied to norms, seen as founded in transcendental spheres and absolutely valid because enacted by an absolute powerful, good force. Even more problematical than the idea of an absolute Good is that of an absolute Evil. Based on a concept like that it is quite easy to class other human beings, creatures, but also social and cultural phenomena as in principle bad, depraved, maybe even demonic – and as a consequence also treated in accordance to that point of view.
Notwithstanding the distinction between good and evil was also applied to the sphere of philosophical morals, in particular when Immanuel Kant invented the term radical evil. As part of her considerations of Adolf Eichmann Hannah Arendt referred to this terminology and connected it with the term banality. Arendt’s view Eichmann was no demonic figure, but was profoundly banal (or trivial) in terms of ordinary or mean. Arendt insists on the category evil, maybe also because it is indeed difficult to find proper terms for the things, Eichmann did. For Arendt he was a normal representative of a dehumanized, anonymous bureaucracy, applicable for any purpose or program. Even though this interpretation cannot be kept up without serious modifications on the basis of meanwhile found as well as new interpreted older sources, the question remains, how the deeds of Eichmann or people like him can be assessed in moral or ethical terms. Can it be helpful to classify those people or what they did as evil – or would it, from a philosophical perspective, preferable to go without a term like evil at all?Method: Lecture, (critical) analysis of texts and film sequences, discussion