---

Below are various materials that I've used to teach throughout the years (2006-2013). Feel free to use them as references or for your own courses. Acknowledgement for use of this work is a professional courtesy, and greatly appreciated. 

Contents
I. Logic & Linguistics
II. Scientific Realism
III. Epistemology
IV. Metaphysics: Realism & Antirealism

I. Logic & Linguistics
A. Informal Reasoning

• Argument Reconstruction Sinnott-Armstrong, W. & Fogelin, R. Understanding arguments: An introduction to informal logic. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, pp. 51-62. [PowerPoint] Nolt, J. 1997. Logics. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, pp. 6-12.
• Logic & Propositions Copi, I. M. and C. Cohen (2009). Introduction to logic. Upper Saddle River, N.J., Pearson/Prentice Hall, pp. 4-9.
• Deduction, Induction, & Truth Copi & Cohen, pp. 4-9; Khalifa, "Types of arguments"
• Validity & Counterexamples Nolt, J. 1997. Logics. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, pp. 6-12.
• Recognizing & Analyzing Arguments Copi & Cohen, pp. 12-19; Khalifa, "How to read philosophically" and "Common argument forms."
• Language of Argument I: argument markers, standard form, validity, and soundness Sinnott-Armstrong, W. and R. Fogelin (2009), Understanding arguments: An introduction to informal logic. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, pp. 51-62.
• The Language of Argument II: assuring, guarding, discounting, and evaluative language Understanding Arguments, pp. 62-76, 

B. Propositional Logic 

• Symbolic language & basic operators Copi, I. M. and C. Cohen (2009). Introduction to logic. Upper Saddle River, N.J., Pearson/Prentice Hall, pp. 315-327.
• Conditional statements & material implication Copi, pp. 331-339.
• Validity & common argument forms Copi, pp. 346-355.
• Statement forms & material equivalence Copi, pp. 357-361.
• Chains of inference Nolt, J. 1997. Logics. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, pp. 79-81.
• Simple inference rules Nolt, pp. 82-89.
• Hypothetical derivations Nolt, pp. 89-101. 
• Theorems & shortcuts Nolt, pp. 102-106.
• Proof of invalidity Copi & Cohen, pp. 421-423.

C. Predicate Logic 

• Quantifiers, predicates, and names Nolt, J. 1997. Logics. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, pp. 161-169.
• Existential introduction Nolt, pp. 224-227.
• Existential elimination Nolt, pp. 227-232.
• Universal elimination Nolt, pp. 233-234.
• Universal Introduction and Quantifier Exchange Rules Nolt, pp. 235-240.

D. Modal Logic

• The basics Priest, G. (2008), An introduction to non-classical logic : from if to is. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 20-34.
• Normal modal logic Priest, pp. 36-60 (skip 3.7).

E. Formal Semantics

• What is meaning? Portner, P. What is meaning?...
• Syntax, pragmatics, and semantics Kearns, K. (2011), Semantics. 2nd ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1-20.
• Basics of semantics Kearns, pp. 24-44; Priest, G. (2008), An introduction to non-classical logic : from if to is. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. xxvii-19 (skip section 1.11).
• Type theory Kearns, pp. 57-62.
• Lambda calculus Kearns, pp. 62-75.

II. Scientific Realism

• Philosophy of science in a nutshell [HANDOUT]
• Overview Chakravartty, A. “Scientific realism” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2009 Edition), E. Zalta (ed.)
• The No Miracles Argument Putnam, H. (1978), “Lecture II” in Meaning and the moral sciences, International library of philosophy and scientific method. London: Routledge, 18-24. (Skip Sections 3 through 5)
• Critique of No Miracles Argument Frost-Arnold, G. (2010), "The no-miracles argument for realism: inference to an unacceptable explanation", Philosophy of Science 77 (1): 35-58.
• Critique of inference to the best explanation Van Fraassen, B. 1989. “Inference to the Best Explanation: Salvation by Laws?” in Laws & Symmetry. Oxford: Clarendon: pp. 131-150. [PowerPoint]
• The Pessimistic Induction Laudan, L. (1981), "A confutation of convergent realism", Philosophy of Science 48 (1):19-49.
• Structural realism Worrall, J. (1989), "Structural realism: the best of both worlds?", Dialectica 43 (1-2):99-12. 
• Realist critique of structural realism Psillos, S. (1995), “Is structural realism the best of both worlds?,” Dialectica 49 (1):15-46.
• Critique of selective realism Stanford, P. Kyle (2003), "Pyrrhic victories for scientific realism", The Journal of Philosophy 100 (11):553-572. 
• Realist critique of logical empiricism Maxwell, Grover (1962), "The ontological status of theoretical entities", in Herbert Feigl and Grover Maxwell (eds.), Scientific explanation, space, and time, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 3-27. 
• Constructive empiricism van Fraassen, B. C. (1980), “Arguments concerning scientific realism” in The scientific image. New York: Clarendon Press; reprinted in Curd, Martin, and J. A. Cover (1998), Philosophy of science: the central issues. 1st ed. New York: W.W. Norton.
• Realist critique of constructive empiricism Psillos, S. (1999), “Constructive empiricism scrutinized” in Scientific realism: how science tracks truth, Philosophical issues in science. London: Routledge.
• Critique of the observable-unobservable distinction Hacking, I. (1985), "Do we see through a microscope?", in P.M Churchland and C.A. Hooker (eds.), Images of Science: Essays on Realism and Empiricism, with a Reply from Bas C. Van Fraassen, Chicago: University of Chicago, 132-152.
• Entity realism Hacking, I. (1982), "Experimentation and scientific realism", Philosophical Topics 13:71-88.
• Critique of entity realism Resnik, D. B. (1994), "Hacking’s experimental realism", Canadian Journal of Philosophy 24 (3):395-411.
• Natural ontological attitude (NOA) Fine, A. (1984), "The natural ontological attitude", in Jarrett Leplin (ed.), Scientific Realism, Berkeley: University of California Press, 83-107.

III. Epistemology
A. The analysis of knowledge

• Gettier problem. Gettier, E. L. (1963). "Is justified true belief knowledge?" Analysis 23(6): 121-123.
• Epistemologists' methodology Ludwig, K. (2013), "Methods in analytic epistemology", in M. Haug (ed.), Philosophical methodology: the armchair or the laboratory?, London: Routledge, 217-240. 
• Problems of Knowledge Pollock, John L., and Joseph Cruz. 1999. Contemporary theories of knowledge. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, Ch.1. [PowerPoint]

B. Skepticism

1. Pyrrhonian skepticism

• Ancient (Pyrrhonian) Skepticism Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrronhism, Book I, i-xv [PowerPoint]; 
• Pyrrhonian critique of foundationalism Fogelin, R. (1994), Pyrrhonian reflections on knowledge and justification. New York: Oxford University Press, Ch.7. [PowerPoint]
• Pyrrhonian critique of coherentism Fogelin, R. (1994), Pyrrhonian reflections on knowledge and justification. New York: Oxford University Press, Ch.8. [PowerPoint]​​

2. Cartesian skepticism

• Descartes' Skepticism Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy (Meditations 1 and 2) [PowerPoint]
• Contemporary Cartesian Skepticism Stroud, B. (1984), “The problem of the external world,” in The Significance of Philosophical Skepticism. Oxford, Clarendon Press: ch.1. reprinted in E. Sosa and J. Kim (eds.), (2000), Epistemology, An Anthology, Malden, MA: Blackwell, 6-23.
• Contemporary responses to skepticism (comprehensive review) Pritchard, D. (2002), "Recent Work on Radical Skepticism", American Philosophical Quarterly 39 (3): 215-257. [PowerPoint]
• Neo-Moorean response to skepticism Greco, John (2007), “External World Skepticism,” Philosophy Compass 2 (4): 625-636.
• Critiques of Neo-Mooreanism Stroud, B. (2000), "Understanding Human Knowledge in General" in Understanding Human Knowledge: Philosophical Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press: Ch.8. [PowerPoint]
• Contextualism: pro & con Conee, Earl and Cohen, Stewart. (2013). “Is Knowledge Contextual?” In Steup, Matthias, John Turri, and Ernest Sosa, eds.,  Contemporary debates in epistemology. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 60-84.
• Explanationist response to skepticism: pro & con Vogel, Jonathan and Fumerton, Richard (2013). “Can skepticism be refuted?” In Steup, Turri, and Sosa, pp. 107-132. [PowerPoint]
• Neopragmatist response to skepticism Williams, M. (1988). “Epistemological Realism and the Basis of Scepticism” Mind 97 (387): 415-439.

C. Theories of justification

• Foundationalism Pollock, John L., and Joseph Cruz. 1999. Contemporary theories of knowledge. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, Ch.2. [PowerPoint]
• Coherentism Pollock & Cruz, Ch.3. [PowerPoint]
• Externalism: Reliabilism Pollock & Cruz, Ch. 4, Sections 1,4, and 5. [PowerPoint]
• Probabilism & Bayesianism Pollock & Cruz, Ch.4, Sections 1-3. [PowerPoint]
• Epistemic Norms (Critique of Externalism) Pollock & Cruz, Ch. 5 [PowerPoint]
• Internalism vs. Externalism Greco, John and Feldman, Richard (2014). “Is justification internal?” In Steup, Turri, and Sosa, pp. 324-350. 
• Epistemology & Rationality Pollock & Cruz, Ch. 6 [PowerPoint]

IV. Metaphysics: Realism & Antirealism

• Core questions Brock, S., and E. D. Mares (2007), Realism and Anti-realism, Central Problems of Philosophy. Montreal: McGill Queens University Press, Ch.1.
• Defense of realism Devitt, Michael (1997), “Why be a common sense realist?” in Realism and truth. 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 60-82. 
• Existence: overview Brock and Mares, Chapter 2.
• Ontological commitment Quine, W.V.O. (1948), "On what there is", The Review of Metaphysics: 21-38.
• Critique of parsimony arguments Thomasson, A. (2007), “Parsimony and ontological commitment” in Ordinary Objects. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
• Independence: overview Brock and Mares, Chapter 3
• Idealism Brock and Mares, Chapter 4
• Kantianism Brock and Mares, Chapter 5
• Kantianism & relativism Putnam, H. (1992), “Relativism” in Realism with a human face. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press: 18-29.
• Relativism defended Rorty, Richard (1993), "Putnam and the relativist menace", Journal of Philosophy 90 (9): 443-461.