PHIL V2201

3 one page papers (35%) 1 five page paper (25%) Midterm (20%) Final (20%)

Weekly writing assignments, heavy reading, three take-home essays.

3 one page papers, 1 five page paper, a midterm and a final.

Very poor teacher. I think people like him solely because he's funny. Classes are disorganized and have no relationship to the readings we do. He offers minimal guidance on how to write a philosophy paper and no guidance on what's on the tests. You get tested on everything he says in class, NOT what's in the reading, so the best strategy is to NOT do the readings but instead write down everything he says and memorize it in time for the final. Also write a rough draft of your essays in time to have them reviewed by the TAs before they're due. If you can choose between Adam Blazej and Jake McNulty as TAs I recommend Adam because he's an easier essay grader and he gives out study guides for the midterms (however these study guides don't include EVERYTHING that will appear on the midterm.) I only attended Jake's recitation and he's a much better teacher than Prof Morrison, though. Grade received: A-

For a 2000 level Philosophy course, I was expecting a class for students who are still somewhat beginner in their knowledge / background of philosophy. This is not the case. This class is not structured in a way that allows students to easily succeed. Weekly writing assignments are heavy in analysis and require you to do all of the reading to get a decent score (sometimes hundreds of pages). The same is true of the three take-home exams. My TA graded all of my assignments harshly, even though I put in a lot of work... On Canvas I could see the class average for each assignment was around 7/10. On the plus side- The class material is really interesting and Kyle is a great lecturer. If you are interested and experienced in Philosophy, I would recommend this course. Just not for beginners and not for anyone looking for a chill class.

Christia Mercer is one of the best teachers I have had at Columbia. She is truly brilliant, and her classes are not only clear but also fun, which is something remarkable when you are studying philosophers like Descartes and Kant. I always looked forward to her lectures. In response to an earlier review, which complained that Professor Mercer’s classes do not contain enough historical information, I say that studying the history of philosophy is different from studying history. The history of philosophy has to do with the evolution of human thought, not with historical details about individual philosophers. Professor Mercer focuses on a the central question—What is there really? The reason we study questions like this one, is that in order to understand and write about philosophy, we must know what other philosophers have said, and how they said it. For example, we have to know what Cartesian dualism is in other to engage in a meaningful discussion about the mind/body problem. It is not just that the opinions of these philosophers are relevant today, but also that we need to know what has been said by others in order to formulate our own opinions. I too was once frustrated by having to study the arguments of outdated thinkers, but I now understand why we do it. Furthermore, Professor Mercer actually provided a good amount of historical context for the philosophers she introduc…

3 one page single spaced papers; you summarize and make a short objection for one of the readings 1 theee-5 double spaced paper, comparing 2 philosophers' ideas 2 in-class exams (non-cumulative) that mostly on lecture material. Take good notes; this will help when studying!

Professor Morrison is smart, funny (in a silly way), approachable, great at explaining, and passionate. This class is very doable if you take the couple of hours each week to read/understand the readings and go to lecture and TA session. The class was structured really well. -Aquinas/Anslem -Descartes/Elizabeth correspondence -Spinoza -Leibniz -Anne Conway -John Locke -Berkeley -Hume -Kant

Not too much reading, but some of it's dense (i mean, what do you expect, it's philosophy!) You can get away with not doing the reading if you go to class, but to get everything out of the course you should do both. 3 one page papers (single spaced, pretty much just translating a philosophers idea into clear/concise sentences) 1 four page final paper comparing the ideas of several philosophers midterm and final with 20-30 short answers (final is NOT cumulative! very doable!)

I highly recommend this course/professor/TA. First: the professor. Morrison is one of the nicest, smartest professors I have had so far at Columbia. He's very approachable, and if you have any questions at all you can meet with him in his office hours. He makes lots of endearing jokes (which aren't always funny. but that's why they're awesome). Also, he's so enthusiastic about everything! He really loves what he's doing, especially when we get to Spinoza (which is his favorite). next: the TAs. I had Mark as a TA and he is FANTASTIC. his discussion sections were really interesting. He's so smart and explains even the toughest concepts in a way that everyone will understand. He's a very very fair grader- he wants you to do well! Meet with him in office hours to go over the paper topics and fine tune your arguments.Also the day he lectured the class confirmed that he will make an amazing professor one day. and finally: the class. It wasn't an easy A class. You can definitely do it, but if you go to lecture/don't read or read/don't go to lecture you'll have to work a lot harder to get that A. Trust me, trust me, it's worth it to do both. The material is interesting, and the lectures are enjoyable. It's a good way to get introduced to philosophy, or John is a great professor to have when you are finishing up your philosophy major requirements.