MODULE HANDBOOK PPR.

212 Metaphysics 2020-1

Nick Unwin

Aims
In this module, we shall examine some key issues in metaphysics and the theory of
knowledge. We shall begin by examining three key distinctions which set the scene for much
of modern philosophical debate: a priori versus empirical; analytic versus synthetic;
necessary versus contingent. The notion of necessity will be developed further when we
consider some traditional problems about substance, most notably how ordinary physical
objects exist in space and time. Issues about personal identity will be developed in the light
of this. Finally, some more general problems about the nature of time will be examined.

Learning Outcomes
You should gain a good understanding of some key philosophical distinctions and a good
knowledge of some basic metaphysical issues. You should be able to articulate and analyse
several of the problems that arise in this area, and show how they relate to each other and
to other problems within philosophy.

Much useful reading matter may be found in the Library, mostly in the <AH> section, and
there are also many useful online articles. Below is an indicative reading list together with a
weekly lecture syllabus. Pieces marked with an asterisk * should be read before your
seminar for that week. Lecture notes and Panopto recordings are also be posted on Moodle.

Assessment
One essay of 2,500 words (40%) and a final two-hour examination (60%). Essay topics and
guidance can be found in a separate document on the course website. General advice on
essay writing can be found in the Philosophy Part 2 Handbook

Weekly syllabus
1 A priori knowledge
What is a priori knowledge?
A priori versus innate knowledge
The connection between the a priori/empirical and analytic/synthetic distinctions

Locke, John, Essay Concerning Human Understanding , Book I

*Kant, Immanuel, Critique of Pure Reason, Introduction
Russell, Bruce, "A Priori Justification and Knowledge", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall
2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<http:/plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/apriori/%3e>

1
Rey, Georges, "The Analytic/Synthetic Distinction", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall
2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<http:/plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/analytic-synthetic/%3e>

2 Geometrical knowledge
Is geometry a priori?
Non-Euclidean geometry

*Barker, Stephen, Philosophy of Mathematics (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1964), Chs 2, 3

(scan available on Moodle)
Frege, Gottlob, The Foundations of Arithmetic (Oxford: Blackwell, 1978), Introduction and Part I
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Euclidean_geometry

3 Necessity and essence

Arithmetical knowledge
The necessary/contingent distinction and its connection with the a priori/empirical distinction
Modality de dicto and de re; essential and accidental qualities

Kripke, Saul, Naming and Necessity (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1980)
Putnam, Hilary, ‘The Meaning of “Meaning”’, Mind, Language and Reality (Cambridge: CUP, 1975)
*Robertson, Teresa, "Essential vs. Accidental Properties", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
(Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/essential-accidental/>.

4 Physical objects I
Objects considered as 4-dimensional entities, extended in both time and space
Parts of objects
The difference between objects and events
*Hawley, Katherine, "Temporal Parts", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition),
Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/temporal-
parts/>.
Merricks, Trenton, Objects and Persons (Oxford: Clarendon, 2001)
van Inwagen, Peter, "Temporal Parts and Identity Across Time", Monist, 83 (2000): 437-59.

5 Physical objects II
Objects considered as 3-dimensional continuant substances
Can two objects exist at the same place at the same time?
Sortal concepts and essences

*Grandy, Richard E., "Sortals", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward
N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/sortals/>.
Simons, Peter, 1985, "Coincidence of Things of a Kind", Mind 94: 70-75.

2
————, 2000, "Continuants and Occurrents", Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society
Supplementary Volume 74: 59-75.
Wiggins, David, Sameness and Substance (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1980)

6 Personal identity I
Are persons bodies?
What is the self?

*Olson, Eric T., "Personal Identity", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2019

Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2019/entries/identity-personal/>.
Williams, Bernard, Problems of the Self (Cambridge: CUP, 1973)
Locke, John, Essay Concerning Human Understanding II, xxvii (‘Of Identity and Diversity’)
Perry, J. (ed.), Personal Identity (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1975)
Strawson, P.F. ‘Self, Mind and Body’, in Freedom and Resentment and other Essays. London:
Methuen, 1974

7 Personal identity II
The unity of consciousness
Parfit’s critique of personal identity

Nagel, Thomas, ‘Brain Bisection and the Unity of Consciousness’, Mortal Questions (Cambridge: CUP,
1979). Reprinted in Perry 1975
Parfit, Derek, ‘Personal Identity’, Philosophical Review 80 (1971), pp. 3–27. Reprinted in Perry 1975

8 Time and Reality

Evaluation of the classic argument against the reality of time
The meaning of indexicals such as ‘now’, ‘here’ and ‘I’

Dummett, Michael, ‘A Defence of McTaggart’s Proof of the Unreality of Time’, Truth and Other
Enigmas (London: Duckworth, 1978), pp. 351–7
*Markosian, Ned, "Time", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2016 Edition), Edward
N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2016/entries/time/>

9 Time and Fixity

The difference between the future and the past
Could effects precede their causes?

*Faye, Jan, "Backward Causation", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition),
Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/causation-
backwards/>.

3
Dummett, Michael, ‘Can an Effect Precede its Cause?’ , Truth and Other Enigmas (London:
Duckworth, 1978), pp. 319–32
—————— ‘Bringing About the Past’, Truth and Other Enigmas (London: Duckworth, 1978), pp.
333–50
Hume, David, An Enquiry Concerning Human Nature , §VII

Additional General Reading on Metaphysics

Baldwin, Thomas
    Metaphysics :  key concepts in philosophy.
  London : Continuum, 2008
Crane, Tim and Katalin Farkas, Metaphysics: A Guide and Anthology (Oxford: OUP, 2004)
Loux, Michael J.
  Metaphysics :  a contemporary introduction / Michael J. Loux. -  2nd ed.
  London : Routledge, 2002.
Lowe, E. J. 
  A survey of metaphysics
  Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2002
Lowe, E. J. 
  The possibility of metaphysics :  substance, identity, and time
  Oxford : Clarendon Press
Taylor, Richard, Metaphysics, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice Hall, 1992

  
Essay Questions

Answer one of the following:

1. What is a priori knowledge? Is there any?

2. Is geometrical knowledge a priori or empirical?

Word Limit
2,500 words.

For full details of the PPR policy on word limits, see Undergraduate Handbook, section 6.7.
Coursework is designed to allow students to develop and demonstrate a range of academic skills,
including the ability to express ideas in written English in a structured manner and within certain
parameters; as a result, all pieces of coursework have target word lengths.

As a rule of thumb, markers would not expect pieces of coursework to exceed a 10% bracket either
above or below a coursework word length. If your piece of coursework falls into this category then it
is likely to be failing to meet the assessment criteria in some way – because, for instance, it does not
cover all the relevant material in sufficient detail or it includes extraneous and irrelevant material –
and you should take the opportunity to discuss the coursework with your tutor in their office hours.
Please note that the coursework word length includes all footnotes, but does not include the

4
bibliography.

Referencing
PPR does not prescribe a single system of referencing for essays. You should pick a recognised
referencing system (APA, Chicago, Harvard, etc.) and apply it consistently. Good referencing allows
you to acknowledge the sources which you have drawn upon in your essay, to provide evidence for
your claims, and to help situate your work within a scholarly debate. See
https://www.lancaster.ac.uk/library/referencing/referencing-guides/ for information on various
referencing systems.
Submission Instructions
It is very important that you meet deadlines for the submission of essays. It is an important part of
vocational training that you should learn to timetable your work.

One copy of each essay should be placed in the locked essay box in the Department and
one should be submitted electronically via the Moodle site. Your essay will be considered
late if both of these forms of submission are not completed. The deadline for all essays is 12
noon and essays submitted after this time will be considered late. If you repeatedly fail to
submit coursework then the Director of Undergraduate Studies may request a meeting with
you to discuss your progress, and you may be referred to the Standing Academic
Committee.

Extension Policy
The Department expects work to be submitted on time. Work which is not submitted on time will be
penalised. Essays which are submitted beyond an agreed extension to a deadline will also be
penalised. Under exceptional circumstances, an extension to a deadline may be granted by the Part
II Co-ordinator or Undergraduate Director. Please refer to section 6.5 of the Undergraduate
Handbook, available on the ‘Part II General Notice Board’ Moodle, for full details of how to request
an extension, and the conditions under which extension may be granted.

Plagiarism
Plagiarism is copying another person’s work without acknowledging it – whether as a whole
essay, or as sections of text or data taken from other sources – without proper source
referencing or without showing that it is a quotation. Close paraphrasing without source
referencing is also considered plagiarism, as is submitting the same work for multiple
assessments, even when your own.

Plagiarism is considered dishonest, and a grave offence against the principles of academic
integrity. Essays which are plagiarised will be given a mark of zero – and repetition of the
offence will carry a more serious penalty, including possible exclusion from the university.
The rules and penalties for plagiarism offences are described in more detail at:
https://gap.lancs.ac.uk/ASQ/Policies/Pages/PlagiarismFramework.aspx.

All essays are automatically checked by plagiarism detection software.

Useful advice can be found here: http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/student-based-services/exams-

and- assessment/regulations/plagiarism/, and there is an online tutorial on plagiarism here:
http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/library/referencing/what-is-plagiarism/.

5
 Points of Contact

Module convenor
Dr Nick Unwin, B77, N.Unwin@lancaster.ac.uk.

You should contact the module convenor in the first instance for any academic or
organisational questions about this module.

Part II co-ordinator
Ms Clare Coxhill, B42, c.coxhill@lancaster.ac.uk.

Any requests relating to essay extensions, module changes, timetable clashes, as well as
corrections to attendance records should be communicated to the Part II co-ordinator. For
any major issues of concern relating to PPR modules specifically more broadly, you can
contact the Part II co-ordinator to book an appointment with the Undergraduate Director.

Undergraduate Course Reps

Please see the ‘Part II General Notice Board’ Moodle for names and email addressed
of your course reps, elected in Week 1.

Feedback can be offered in person to the Convenor, or during the LUMES survey conducted
at the end of the module. You can also give feedback, raise concerns, and make
suggestions to your elected PPR Reps. They have termly meetings with the UG Director
and attend Department Meetings to represent your interests.

Expectations and Delivery

Attendance:
Attendance at both lectures and seminars is compulsory, and will be monitored via
iLancaster check-in. Occasionally there may be a good reason why you cannot attend a
session – if this is the case, you should register your absence through the Student Portal. If
you repeatedly fail to attend events then the Director of Undergraduate Studies may request
a meeting with you to discuss your progress, and you may be referred to the Standing
Academic Committee.

Preparedness:
Students are expected to arrive in class having done the assigned readings for the session,
thought about them, and prepared to discuss them throughout the lecture or seminar.

6
Students will be responsible for engaging with the material during class sessions, by asking
questions, responding to questions posed by me and their peers, and interpreting and
critiquing the ideas presented in readings and lecture. In order to succeed in the written
assignments, students must be prepared to read the assigned materials carefully and
critically.

Respectful Speech:
Exclusionary speech and behaviour can hurt our ability to maintain an open, safe, and
productive class environment, in which all are able to participate and learn. Exclusionary
speech – speech which demeans or trivialises the perspective of others – is often
unintentional, but can nevertheless harm other students’ ability to participate in conversation
and debate. We all have an interest in maintaining openness and inclusivity in our
discussions, first because it enables the learning of everyone in the classroom, and second
because it contributes to the maintenance of rich and interesting conversations and debates.
We may sometimes fall short of our goals of inclusivity and openness, but students are
expected to be conscientious about avoiding exclusionary speech in discussions and
debates.