General Discussion: Introduction to Philosophy
@hugh Great! I’m afraid I don’t know a thing about aesthetics. Ethics I can muddle through, metaphysics too. I’m not bad with the Greeks when that comes around. I’m no Kant expert, but I’m more sympathetic than most.
I’ll lurk around the ethics section for now, but feel free to deploy me if something needs proofing, reading, or editing.
Hi @adam! I wonder if you could fill out a line on this spreadsheet with your info…it’s where we are keeping track of who has which interest/expertise areas: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1a71X6Qs45W0W8_oM7p3zdEQdFTNd5VRJ4zMzaEEHefM/edit#gid=266577735
And please look at the ethics section discussion we have so far to see if you have any thoughts! https://forum.rebus.community/topic/126/ethics-section-ed-george-matthews
And I’d love to take a look at your free philosophy textbook if you can give us a link!
I’m pinging a few people who expressed interest in ethics–see below!
We have a draft table of contents for the ethics section of this book. Can you please take a look and give comments? We’d like to have a general sense of what that section will look like and then we’ll be looking for people to help write it!
It’s over in this thread: https://forum.rebus.community/topic/126/ethics-section-ed-george-matthews
@clhendricksbc Thanks. I filled in the info. [Here’s a link](https://www.dropbox.com/sh/3kbi8691j5prlln/AADn2hX_C5I5UIu33SML7iwya?dl=0 to the book–there are two versions, one pretty and one more complicated.
I’m late to the conversation, but happy to be joining it. My name is James, and I teach intro philosophy courses and intro ethics courses on the Downtown Phoenix campus of ASU (in addition to courses in English composition, literature, film, gender studies, and religious studies). At ASU I serve as the Digital Humanities Course Manager for the Languages & Cultures faculty as well as a Faculty Fellow in the Center for the Study of Race and Democracy.
I’m interested in this process for multiple reasons, but what draws me in the most is the potential for a text book that is radically collaborative and one that has the possibility to ensure a greater level of access for students coming from a variety of walks of life.
I’m interested in the idea of an open textbook. I’m currently a postdoc at University College Dublin. I’m afraid that I don’t know much about aesthetics or ethics. I work on philosophy of language which I see isn’t one of the planned areas, although I suppose that bits of it show up in mind, metaphysics, logic, and epistemology.
@jwermers Welcome! What draws you to this process fits well with what we are trying to do here. And I’m excited that you also teach ethics because we are currently working on the ethics and aesthetics sections most actively at the moment. Have you looked at the discussion for the ethics section yet? https://forum.rebus.community/topic/126/ethics-section-ed-george-matthews
I am going to be talking with the editor of that section next week and we’ll soon be looking for people to contribute content!
@twsh Welcome! You’re right we don’t have anything planned for philosophy of language at the moment. We are aiming for topics that are commonly taught in a first-year course, and I’m not sure if philosophy of language is? Honestly, I don’t know; I teach a value theory focused section of intro (at my uni we separate value theory and metaphysics & epistemology into two intro courses), and I’m not sure what others do. But then again, we might have a section on philosophy of science and I think that’s not often taught in intro either.
Have you put your name and interest area on our spreadsheet? That’s how we’ll contact people for other sections…
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1a71X6Qs45W0W8_oM7p3zdEQdFTNd5VRJ4zMzaEEHefM/edit#gid=0 (scroll down to “people” tab to add your name)
@clhendricksbc I suspect that you’re right about language in intro courses. I suppose one nice thing about this model is that you could eventually include all sorts of things that aren’t often taught at that level but could be, because people can just take what they want.
I’ve added myself to the list.
I suppose one nice thing about this model is that you could eventually include all sorts of things that aren’t often taught at that level but could be, because people can just take what they want.
Indeed, why stick to old models when a continually expanding collection of related-yet-distinct chapters maximises the scope of usefulness?
I’ve added myself to the list for possible contributions for language, logic, and for philosophical issues related to sex, love, gender etc. should these come up for development.
Our first year classes at Calgary tend to be a little different. We don’t have an intro to philosophy class at all, but three different ones: ‘Virtue, morality, and society’. ‘Mind, matter, and god’, and ‘Sex, love, and death’. So the eventual promise of a remixable book would definitely see some uptake here.
@stevefoerster Yes, agreed!
@nicolewyatt Hi Nicole–welcome! Glad to hear a remixable book would see uptake. That’s the value of open educational resources!
I have a faculty member who is interested in being involved with the Philosophy book. Where do I send her?
@fisherdi right here! thanks!