Communicate Responsibly

Questions whose answers can be found in the syllabus may not be responded to in order to facilitate self-sufficiency. 

Since much of our coursework is due on Fridays and over the weekend, please plan accordingly so that I can answer your questions in a productive manner. 

Please keep your emails polite and respectful. 

Correspondence that is rude or insubordinate facilitates neither a fruitful learning experience nor environment, and is thus not welcome. 

Remember, I am here to help with the course in any way that I can. 

Also, when emailing the instructor, please be sure to include your full name and course number for a more expedient and efficient reply. 

I will do my very best to respond to emails in a timely manner. However, emails sent past late afternoon during the week, or over the weekend, will not be responded to until the following business day. 

Because philosophy classes will deal with topics that are, by any stretch, controversial; students are encouraged [if not required] to consider opposing views and alternative perspectives. 

Intellectual development, when done well, requires us to: 

✓ Consider beliefs and arguments other than our own, and 

✓ Defend our own beliefs and arguments with reasons. 

Consequently, please be respectful and open-minded when an author, or another student, expresses a view with which you disagree. 

Absolutely no personal attacks, disrespectful or uncharitable comments will be tolerated. 

This does not, by any means, imply that you have to agree with the opposing view. 

Rather, we analyze the arguments themselves; say why we do not accept a particular premise or conclusion, and thus, why our own argument(s) should be accepted by giving reasons or evidence.

Students should strive to use inclusive and charitable language in their writing. 

✓ What is meant by INCLUSIVE is language that is not gender or first person specific and which attempts to include as many people as possible while avoiding stereotypic bias. 

✓ CHARITY in one’s writing refers to a reading of the material that does not assume that the author or subjects one may be arguing against are irrational in their thought process or argumentation. 

Although we may disagree with something or someone, it would be a fallacy to disregard them without adequate consideration of their position. 

Even a great argument can come undone when one's logic is unsatisfactory.