Lutz Wingert: Catalogue data in Autumn Semester 2023 |
| Name | Prof. em. Dr. Lutz Wingert |
| Field | Philosophy, Practical Philosophy in particular |
| Address | Professur für Philosophie ETH Zürich, RZ F 2 Clausiusstrasse 59 8092 Zürich SWITZERLAND |
| lutz.wingert@gess.ethz.ch | |
| Department | Humanities, Social and Political Sciences |
| Relationship | Professor emeritus |
| Number | Title | ECTS | Hours | Lecturers | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 851-0095-00L | Is All Relative? On Scientific Authority, Belief Change, and Universally Valid Norms Doctoral students can receive credit for the achievements of this course in the section "Transferable Skills". | 3 credits | 2G | L. Wingert | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract | Is all relative? “Yes!” is often the answer in societies of the West, the East, and the South now. The sciences are but one belief system among others like religions. Human rights are inventions with vested interests of their Western inventors. Reality is standpoint-relative. For, the view from nowhere is impossible. Yesterday’s knowledge is today’s merely socially shared belief. Is this true? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Learning objective | Those students who are studying the explained and commented literature and following attentively the discussions will know certain answers to some important questions. And they will be able to evaluate those answers to the following questions: 1. What are reasons for the authority of the sciences in the 21th century? 2. Scientific theories about the world are incomplete, they changed and will change. Should we conclude from incompleteness and change that scientific authority is doubtful or even illegitimate? 3. Social norms and scientific methods vary with historical times and with cultures. Do we have to draw the conclusion that there are no universally valid social norms? Do we have to accept and tolerate cultures and methods whatever they are? 4. We human beings form opinions about the world and cope with the world on the bases of firm background beliefs, values, norms, and interests. Does this make experienced reality standpoint relative? 5. What is the right and what is the wrong way to conceptualize “relative” and “relativism”? 6. In which sense a truth is relative and in which sense it is not? 7. How should we understand the relation between “relative”/”relativism” and “objective”/”objectivity”? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Literature | Literature in alphabetical order: Martin Carrier, Wissenschaft im Griff der Wirtschaft. Auswirkungen kommerzialisierter Forschung auf die Erkenntnisgewinnung, in: Gerhard Schurz, Martin Carrier (Hrsg.), Werte in den Wissenschaften. Neue Ansätze zum Werturteilsstreit, Berlin 2013, S. 374-396. Nancy Cartwright, A Philosopher Looks At Science, Oxford 2022, I. The Melange of Theory Ingredients: Concepts; Models and Narrativs; Diagrams, Illustrations, and Graphs; Experiments and the Testing of Theory, S. 19-61. Pascal Engel, Les vices du savoir. Essai d’éthique intellectuelle, Marseille 2019, Teil V, Kap. 1: Les valeurs et normes épistémiques sont-elles simplement sociales?, S. 275-293; Kap. 3: Quelles taxinomies pour les vertus et les vices intellectuels?, S. 298-311. Stephen Gaukroger, Objectivity. A Very Short Introduction, Oxford 2012. Jürgen Habermas, Vom pragmatischen, ethischen und moralischen Gebrauch der Vernunft, in: ders., Erläuterungen zur Diskursethik, Frankfurt/M. 1991, S. 100-118. Sandra Harding, Objectivity and Diversity, Chicago 2015, Kap 7: After Mr. Nowhere. New Proper Scientific Selves, S. 150-173. Katja Hosling, Roseanne Russell, Discrimination Law. Equality Law, and Implicit Bias, in: Michael Brownstein, Jennifer Saul (Hrsg.), Implicit Bias & Philosophy. Moral Responsibility, Structural Injustice, and Ethics, Oxford 2016, S. 255-278. Matthias Mahlmann, Mind and Rights. The History, Ethics, Law and Psychology of Human Rights, Cambridge 2023, Kap. 3.6: The Many Roots of Human Rights, S. 180-198. Thomas Nagel, The Last Word, Oxford 1997, Introduction; Kap. 6: Ethics; S. 3-11, 101-125. Jürgen Renn, Die Evolution des Wissens. Eine Neubestimmung der Wissenschaft für das Anthropozän, Berlin 2022, Teil 2: Wie sich Wissensstrukturen wandeln. Kap. 4: Strukturelle Veränderungen in Wissenssystemen, S. 155-198. Peter Unger, Philosophical Relativity, Oxford 1984, Teil III: A Relativistic Approach to Some Philosophical Problems, S. 46-64. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Competencies |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 851-0125-71L | Whose Responsibility for What? On Individual and Collective Responsibility Particularly suitable for students of D-ARCH, D-BAUG, D-HEST, D-MTEC, D-USYS Doctoral students can receive credit for the achievements of this course in the section "Transferable Skills". | 3 credits | 2G | L. Wingert | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract | Responsibility is a key concept in ethics: The individual's responsibility is emphasized. Contrary to that, one often points to the limits of a person's responsibility, e.g. for a stock market crash, for greenhouse gas emissions, for injust social conditions. What belongs to to our responsibility as individuals and what to our collective responsibility? And do robots have responsibilities? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Learning objective | 1. Certain concepts should be clarified: e.g., the very meaning of "being responsible for one's actions and its consequences". To what extent are we responsible for the social conditions we find ourselves in? 2. One theoretical position in the philosophy of sociality holds that only individual persons (and not firms, institutions, or states) can be responsible for action and social conditions. Students should be able to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of this thesis (methodological individualism). 3. What does responsibility mean in special social spheres like the economy and the sciences? What does a citizen's collective and personal responsibility consist in? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Competencies |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 862-0004-17L | Research Colloquium Philosophy for Master Students and PhD (HS 2023)  | 2 credits | 1K | N. Mazouz, M. Hampe, L. Wingert | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract | Ph.D. students, post docs, members of staff, and senior colleagues from other philosophy departments will report on their work in progress. Furthermore, promissing new philosophical articles and parts of new philosophical books will be studied. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Learning objective | Ideas and arguments dealing with systematic problems especially in epistemology, ethics, political philosophy, and the philosophy of mind will be scrutinized and elaborated. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||