PY 240c: Philosophy in Film

Winter 2011
Dr. Jill Rusin

Course Description:

This course uses film as a means of exploring some enduring and complex philosophical questions.
Do humans have free will? What is the value of knowledge? What distinguishes moral from immoral
acts? What is the role of luck in morality? What is essential to being me? What are my obligations to
the world’s poor? To my closest friends and family as opposed to other people, principles and the
world at large? We will explore all these questions, and more, through film, readings, and class discus-
sion.

Professor: Jill Rusin

Office: S006 (Seminary Building)
Telephone: (519) 884-0710 x3274
Email: jrusin@wlu.ca (and for submission of class assignments: rusin AT me DOT com )
Office Hours: Tuesdays 11-12 AM and 2-4 PM

Course Text: Introducing Philosophy through Film, edited by Richard Fumerton and Diane Jeske

Requirements and Grading:

Midterm: 27%, February 17th
Final Exam: 38% date and time as scheduled by Registrar’s Office
Journal: 35%—9 entries, plus one possible makeup assignment after classes end (on The
Matrix). Entries are answers to discussion questions that relate to the
films we view. Questions and due dates are listed at the end of this syllabus. If you
submit by email rather than in class, put the movie title in your subject line please.
Submissions will only be accepted in class or at this email: rusin AT me DOT com
Additionally, outstanding class participation or outstanding class absence may impact your
final grade
Course Schedule: Topics in Lecture Assignment (for the following week)

January Introduction: analyzing concepts. Excerpts from Read: John Perry, PTF
13th Plato’s Republic, Seinfeld, Pulp Fiction.
Williams, PTF
Personal Identity. Clip from The Wizard. Opening
page of Kafka’s “Metamorphosis.” Watch: Memento

Screening of Being JM

January Theories of Personal Identity Read: Parfit, PTF

20th
Discuss Perry and Williams, Being JM and
Journal #1
due (in class
Memento
or by Jan 21
11 AM)

PY 240c Syllabus 1
PY 240c: Philosophy in Film

January Personal Identity, continued Read: Singer, “Famine, Afflu-

27th ence, Morality”
Discussion of Parfit and continued discussion of
Journal #2
due.
Memento and Being JM Andrew Kuper, “More Than
Charity: Cosmopolitan Alter-
----
natives to the ‘Singer Solu-
Begin next unit: intro to Singer’s argument for
tion’”
moral demandingness

Watch—Born into Brothels (85 mins)

February Singer’s argument and possible responses to it Watch: Match Point

3rd
Read: Nagel, “Moral Luck”
Journal #3
due

February Moral Luck

10th
Journal #4
due.

February ***Midterm exam*** Watch: Crimes

and
17th
Misdemeanors
Read: selection from Mill’s
Utilitarianism, PTF 243-57

Williams’ Critique of Utili-

tarianism, PTF, 297-312

March 3rd return midterm, go over answers. Watch: Minority Re-

Journal #5 Theories of Morality. Plato’s Ring of Gyges port
due.
Read: “Introduction to Free
WIll, Foreknowledge, and
Determinism”, pp. 505-9 PTF

Aristotle De Interpretatione
excerpt PTF (511-13)

Frankfurt excerpt PTF (541-9)

PY 240c Syllabus 2
PY 240c: Philosophy in Film

March 10th Freedom, Determinism and Responsibility Read: PTF on obligations to

intimates.
Journal #6
due. Watch: Casablanca

The English Patient

March 17th Obligations to intimates. Discussion of Jeske arti- Read: Nagel, “War and Massa-

Journal #7 cle and moral conflicts in Casablanca and cre” PTF 354-

due. The English Patient

In class screening of 24 (Season 3, 6-7 AM)

March 24th Discuss utilitarianism and absolutism and 24 Watch: Eternal

Sun-
Journal #8 shine of the Spot-
due March
less Mind
25th 8 PM
The Matrix
Read: Grau, ES

Nozick, “The Experience Ma-

chine” PTF, 121

Pryor, “What’s So Bad About

Living in the Matrix?”

March 31st Discuss Eternal Sunshine and morality of

Journal 9 memory; the value of truth and knowledge in
due.
Eternal Sunshine and The Matrix.

Film Screenings: Tuesdays 230 in N1059

January 18th: Memento (dir. Christopher Nolan, 2000) Run time: 113 mins.
February 8th: Match Point (dir. Woody Allen, 2005) Run time: 124 mins.
March 1st: Crimes and Misdemeanors (dir. Woody Allen, 1989) Run time: 104 mins.
March 8th: Minority Report (dir. Stephen Spielberg, 2002) Run time: 145 mins.
March 15th: The English Patient (dir. Anthony Minghella, 1996) Run time: 162 mins.
also see: Casablanca (dir. Michael Curtiz, 1942) Run time: 102 mins
March 22nd: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (dir. Michel Gondry, 2004) Run time: 108 mins.
March 29th: The Matrix (dir. Wachowski bros, 1999) Run time: 136 mins.

Other possibilities for viewing and re-viewing:

PY 240c Syllabus 3
PY 240c: Philosophy in Film

The library has copies of the above DVDs on the 2nd floor, and you can look them up in Primo.
These must be watched in the library, however. Reserve is for 3 hours.

Rent from a video store.

Check with me.

Discussion Questions (for weeks 1-5):

Journal Assignment #1 : Being John Malkovich

Associated readings: Perry and Williams.
Submit in class Jan 20, or by 11 AM Jan 21 to rusin AT me DOT com
The title of Spike Jonzes' film, "Being John Malkovich," suggests that Craig, and perhaps other char-
acters in the film, succeed in becoming, in being, Malkovich. Do you agree? If so (or if not), what does
this tell us about the concept of personal identity?

Journal #2: Memento

Associated readings: Perry ,Williams, Parfit.
Submit in class Jan 27, or by 11 AM Jan 28 to rusin AT me DOT com
"I'm Leonard Shelby" Is Shelby the same person before and after the incident? Does Leonard him-
self think that he is the same person throughout the narrative? Do you think he is? What does this
tell us about the concept of personal identity?
Journal #3: Born into Brothels
Associated readings: Singer and Kuper.
Submit in class Feb 3, or by 11 AM Feb 4 to rusin AT me DOT com
What is your obligation to children in the circumstances portrayed in the film? What do you think
Zana Briski's obligation is?
Journal #4: Match Point
Associated readings: Nagel.
Submit in class Feb 10, or by 11 AM Feb 11 to rusin AT me DOT com
Is morality substantially governed by luck? Are we responsible for only that which is under our con-
trol, or does responsibility outstrip control? Would you rather be lucky or good? (A question consid-
ered by Chris early in the film.) Or do you think that you have to be lucky in order to actually be
good?
Journal #5: Crimes and Misdemeanors
Associated readings: question is broader than, and not tightly related to your specific readings; Mill
Submit in class March 3, or by 11 AM March 4 to rusin AT me DOT com
Near the end of the movie Judah (Martin Landau) describes to Cliff (Woody Allen)
Deloresʼ murder as a “great murder story..a great plot”. Judah also says it is a “chilling
story”. Cliff answers Judahʼs story with this suggestion: “I would have him turn himself
in. Cause then, you see, then your story assumes tragic proportions, because in the
absence of a God... he is forced to assume that responsibility himself. Then you have
tragedy.” What makes Judahʼs story chilling? What is it that is supposed to be tragedy,
in Cliffʼs response?

Journal #6: Minority Report

Associated readings: PTF Intro to Free Will, Aristotle, Frankfurt.

PY 240c Syllabus 4
PY 240c: Philosophy in Film

Submit in class March 10, or by 11 AM March 11 to rusin AT me DOT com

If precrime is infallible and the precogs forsee Marta committing murder tomorrow, is it possible for
Marta to refrain from committing murder tomorrow? Should Marta be punished for the murder?
(Please make sure to answer the first of these two questions; in your journal entry for MR, you may
answer just the first one, or both. If you choose both, make sure you've addressed the first question
before moving on to the second.)

Journal #7: English Patient and Casablanca

Associated readings: TBA readings in PTF
Submit in class March 17, or by 11 AM March 18 to rusin AT me DOT com
(due to Fumerton/Jeske, see p. 467) Did Almasy, in The English Patient, do the right thing when he
traded secrets to the Germans in order to return to Katharine (chapters 27-9)? Compare and contrast
his decision with that of Rick in Casablanca.

Journal #8: Episode of 24

Associated readings: Mill, Williams, Nagel.
Submit in class March 24, or by 11 AM March 25 to rusin AT me DOT com
(due to Fumerton/Jeske, see p. 367) In the series 24 (Season 3, 6-7 AM) Jack Bauer faces the dilemma
of killing his superior Chappelle at the directive of the terrorist Saunder. Saunder is treatening to
release a vial of a deadly virus if Jack fails to shoot the innocent Chappelle. How do you think Mill
would assess the moral dilemma? What action would he identify as being the right action for Jack to
take? What might Williams (or Nagel) say? What do you think--should Jack shoot Chappelle?

Journal #9: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

Associated readings: Grau (and possibly others--optional reading by Driver, and the Matrix readings)
Submit in class March 31, or by 11 AM April 1 to rusin AT me DOT com
Would using the Lacuna technology be morally wrong? Why?

Journal #10: The Matrix

Associated readings: Nozick, Pryor
If submitting: Submit by 11 AM April 3 to rusin AT me DOT com
Cypher: “You know, I know that this steak doesnʼt exist. I know that when I put it into my mouth, the
Matrix is telling me that it is juicy and delicious. After nine years...you know what I realize? Ignorance
is bliss.” Why is Cypher portrayed unsympathetically in the movie? Do you agree with Cypherʼs view
on reality? Does it matter that he isnʼt really eating a steak? Why?

Assessment of Journals: Entries should be approximately 500-800 words. A couple of weeks I ask 4
different (related) questions; you should not answer each question in a list-like fashion, but rather
your writing should offer a fairly continuous line of thought, so if your answer to one of these ques-
tions predominates over the others, that is fine. I do realize that you will be submitting 9 pieces of
writing, so I am not expecting a polished argument here. What I do expect is a sincere effort that
shows you have reflected on the movie in concert with the lecture and readings. You would be wise to
write an essay that does not sound like it could be written by anyone off the street, but rather a phi-
losophy student who has done her readings carefully and paid attention to the class lecture and dis-
cussion before sitting down to write. I don’t want any kind of summary of the lecture/terms/readings

PY 240c Syllabus 5
PY 240c: Philosophy in Film

here, but I do want a *philosophically* informed and reflective response. If your writing shows that
you have thought about and understood the philosophical issues (or rather, some significant aspect of
the philosophical issues in the readings and lecture through which you interpret the movie) you will
get an A. A sincere effort, submitted on time, that shows adequate familiarity with class materials will
receive at worst a B. Though I hope that this exercise will be fairly easy and enjoyable for you, and it
should not be difficult to earn an A or a B (provided that you carefully and attentively read the assignments,
watch the film and come to class!), be aware that journal entries that show little to no engagement with,
reflect scant awareness of, class materials and discussions will receive a C or worse. Late submissions
will be penalized a full letter grade for each day late, unless documentation of medical illness or famil-
ial bereavement is provided. I will not accept assignments mailed to the wrong email address, all
submissions that are made by email (and you are welcome to submit in class instead) must go to: rusin
AT me DOT com. Do not ask for extra time because your internet is out, you computer is broken, you
neglected to read your syllabus, or lost it, etc. In such cases, you should simply chalk it up to bad luck,
and take advantage of the make-up assignment I allow at the end of the course (a question on the film
The Matrix, to substitute for one other journal entry if necessary). And of course (!) you may and
should talk to each other about the films and your takes on them, but you do need to write up your
own responses. Do familiarize yourself with the university’s academic dishonesty policy; unauthorized
collaboration is an offense just as is using another’s work as your own. Do come talk to me should
you have any questions about this matter.

Examination Deferrals:
The Academic Date section of the Calendar (Printed and Web Site Versions) clearly states the examination date period for each
semester. Students must note that they are required to reserve this time in their personal calendars for the examinations. The ex-
amination period for Winter 2011 is April 7-28, 2011. Students who are considering registering to write MCAT, LSAT or GMAT or a
similar examination, should select a time for those examinations that occurs outside the University examination period. For addi-
tional information that describes the special circumstances for examination deferment, consult the University calendar.

Student Awareness of the Accessible Learning Centre:

Students with disabilities or special needs, are advised to contact Laurier’s Accessible Learning Centre for information regarding
its services and resources. Students are encouraged to review the Calendar for information regarding all services available on cam-
pus.

Academic and Research Misconduct:

Students are expected to be aware of and abide by University regulations and policies, as outlined in the current on-line Under-
graduate Calendar (see http://www.wlu.ca/calendars). Academic misconduct is an act by a student, or by students working on a team
project, which may result in a false evaluation of the student(s), or which represents a deliberate attempt to unfairly gain an aca-
demic advantage.

Laurier has an established policy with respect to cheating on assignments and examinations, which the student is required to know.
Students are cautioned that in addition to a failure in the course, a student may be suspended or expelled from the University for
cheating and the offence may appear on one’s transcript, in which event the offence can have serious consequences for one’s busi-
ness or professional career. For more information refer to the current Undergraduate calendar (University Undergraduate Regula-
tions).

Laurier uses software that can check for plagiarism. Students may be required to submit their written work in electronic form and
have it checked for plagiarism. Students are to adhere to the Principles in the Use of Information Technology. These Principles and
resulting actions for breaches are stated in the current Undergraduate Calendar.

Students’ names may be divulged in the classroom, both orally and in written form, to other members of the class. Students who
are concerned about such disclosures should contact the course instructor to identify whether there are any possible alternatives to
such disclosures.

Foot Patrol: After class call "886-FOOT" for a walk or drive home - No Walk is Too Short or Too Long.

PY 240c Syllabus 6