Summer 1999 -- 1st Term
Dr. Beth S. Bennett
HUMANITIES DESIGNATION

This course has been designated as a HUMANITIES course because it teaches what has traditionally been recognized as humanistic mode of thought. Specifically, the course is designed, as its classical predecessors, from the principle that critical thought is necessary to preserve individual human interests, values, and dignity in public decision making about the public good. In other words, the underlying assumption is that rationality is fundamental to a civilized society. Thus, rather than an historical survey of humanistic artifacts, this course focuses on contemporary discourse and the issues raised concerning the public good. In response, students are required to formulate rational judgments, not passive acceptance or rejection, of these public issues.

The course is developed around three cognitive units.

 Rather than a "process" orientation or some other social science perspective, the emphasis throughout the course is on the individual human perspective in decision making. Students are introduced from the beginning to the conflict in decision making between private ethics and public ones. Ethical issues, such as the right to free speech versus the public's need for its citizens to conform to societal norms, serve as the philosophical foundation for students to question what specific ethical criteria should apply to their own case studies. Such ethical questions also serve as the grounds for examining different sources of information (e.g., "facts" versus "opinions", ideology versus propaganda, beliefs versus prejudices). As a result, students are required to examine their own beliefs, as well as those of the people whom they are consulting, while deciding what issues and information should be included in their discussions.

 The course also introduces students to the way language works logically. Rather than scanning sources for important "facts," students are taught to recognize that public discourse -- whether speeches, editorials, advertisements, television programming, or film -- must be examined from the perspective of its author's central claim. What is the author's point? How does the rest of the message function to support that idea logically? Students are required to dissect texts into their logical components, to reach some consensus among themselves as to what grounds constitute validity in their specific cases, and then to debate the merits and the weaknesses of specific proposals or decisions. Each student is required to make his or her own judgment, then, regarding which proposals or decisions seem to be "best" based on all of those factors.

 Finally, the course introduces students to the way aesthetics and persuasive appeals affect the individual's judgment in decision making. In particular, students become acquainted with the concept of ethos (character) and its role in enhancing or diminishing their acceptance of a person's ideas. They are asked to consider the popularity of "emotional" ploys, despite "logical" opposition, and to determine how responsible they will hold each other for resorting to such tactics. They also study the appeal of felicitous word choice and arrangement, as well as effective manner of presentation. These concepts of effective form are dealt with last, because the purpose of the course is not to produce pragmatically effective persuaders. Instead, the aim is to enable students to become more responsible consumers of public discourse and to make them critically aware of their own decision making. At this point in the course, after the emphasis on ethical considerations and on logical case development, most students learn that the persuasive factors of public discourse should be used with restraint and with responsibility, not merely for effect.



Beth S. Bennett, bbennett@bama.ua.edu. Created 5 June 1999.