Stewart Huang is a grad pupil at Brandeis, specializing in metaphysics and philosophy of faith. On this interview, he discusses his ideas on the graduate faculty expertise.
Which courses had been your favourite from graduate faculty?
My favourite was Professor Palle Yourgrau’s class on fiction, a subject which unsurprisingly grew to become the main target of my grasp’s thesis. The category was attention-grabbing to me partly as a result of it was so new and totally different in comparison with different topics I encountered and primarily as a result of I cope with fictional characters each day, as a lover of video video games, motion pictures, and story-telling generally. I additionally was an English main as an undergrad. Wanting again, I want English courses would discuss what this class touched on, the ontology of fictional characters and whether or not fictional names have referents, which appear so vital for the examine of literature looking back, as an alternative of no matter “psychoanalysis” is.
We primarily mentioned Saul Kripke’s Reference and Existence, a collection of lectures by which he lays out his view of fictional characters as existent summary objects and his resolution to the issue of true detrimental existential statements relating to fictional characters. I believe it’s introductory work in that it will get one to begin interested by these points: it might need been one of many first to debate them, however I’m undecided. It additionally connects these points with some very well-known concepts established in Naming and Necessity just like the notion of names as inflexible designators, not as descriptions. Nonetheless, once I needed to begin the analysis course of for my grasp’s thesis, I didn’t discover this work to be very clear or helpful. It appears to have little to say about different views relating to the ontology of fictional characters, other than the view that they’re merely possibilia, which it argues in opposition to. I additionally nonetheless can not make out what its resolution for true detrimental existential statements is. So far as I can inform, Kripke doesn’t actually have one and appears to only quit in the direction of the tip. However total, it is a thought-provoking collection of lectures in that it makes some unintuitive claims, just like the central declare that fictional characters are summary objects. I used to be instantly struck by this and spent a lot at school simply interested by the way it is likely to be fallacious. To be honest to Kripke although, I believe any believable view on this topic is sure to be unintuitive in some respects, a characteristic which makes the subject so attention-grabbing and irritating to consider, and his view might be probably the most intuitive one on the finish of the day.
After Kripke, we learn components of Mark Sainsbury’s guide Fiction and Fictionalism, an introduction to the totally different views on fictional characters. This guide turned out to be an enormously useful supply for my analysis because it covers a lot floor. In my grasp’s thesis, I ended up discussing an issue, which I name the Downside of Preliminary Reference, that’s similar to one other downside Sainsbury calls the Choice Downside. Maybe they’re the truth is the identical downside, however I can’t say for certain.
That’s sufficient philosophy discuss. Along with the subject, I really like this class as a result of I had loads of enjoyable corresponding with Professor Yourgrau, who later grew to become my thesis advisor. I had simply turn into a grad pupil right now, so I used to be studying how you can get extra snug interacting with the professors—addressing them by their first names, for starters. And I’m pleased with the progress I made on this class. In direction of the tip of the category, generally I might make these humorous feedback in response to what he mentioned simply to mess with him generally. These moments would make my day, and I actually respect him being such a cool professor and graciously entertaining my tomfoolery.
What notable pedagogical practices did you encounter at grad faculty? What had been your ideas on them?
Professor Katrina Elliot’s extraordinarily clear and detailed essay examination prompts. I believe philosophy programs are typically sufficiently clear with regards to the expectations for essay prompts, at the least compared to what I’ve heard about different liberal arts disciplines like sociology. However I’ve by no means seen prompts which are as useful as Professor Elliot’s. These are examination prompts that ask college students to clarify or join some concepts mentioned at school, specified by such an in depth and instructive method that makes it really easy to interact with. Right here’s an instance:
Your first take-home essay examination is to reply two of the next three prompts. For every immediate, you might be to jot down a single, unified essay that conducts the reader by these concepts. (In different phrases, you aren’t to deal with “A”, “B”, and “C” above as impartial inquiries to be answered with separate paragraphs lettered “A”, “B”, and “C”.) There is no such thing as a web page restrict, however I think about that every essay may be answered in roughly 4 double-spaced pages.
Immediate 1: Mill on Pure Varieties
A) Clarify Mill’s distinction between an actual Variety and a finite type. Present an instance of an actual Variety, and clarify what options of the class in your instance qualify it as being an actual Variety. Present an instance of a finite type, and clarify what options of the class in your instance qualify it as being a finite Variety.
B) Clarify the sense by which it’s appropriate to say that actual Varieties are made by nature and finite varieties are made for our comfort, for Mill. (see particularly pg. 151-152.)
C) Clarify the sense by which it’s incorrect to say that actual Varieties are made by nature and finite varieties are made for our comfort, for Mill. (see particularly pg. 151-152.)
I distinctly keep in mind doing this essay on the Brandeis Library and being amazed at how rapidly and simply I used to be capable of end it. As a substitute of merely telling you to “clarify Mill’s view on pure varieties,” it guides you all through all the essay such that you realize precisely what components of his view it is advisable to clarify. Whereas for assignments from different courses, I used to be generally not sure in regards to the quantity of particulars I ought to embody: is this concept related or is it too tangential? Ought to I focus on this level though the paper I’m explaining doesn’t point out it? If I ever get to assign essay exams sooner or later, I’ll use her prompts as a mannequin for my very own.
One other notable pedagogical follow I encountered was Professor Eli Hirsch’s impromptu surveys on Zoom courses. He would current two opposing philosophical positions or intuitions and ask college students to “increase their digital fingers” in the event that they agree with both of those views. I beloved these surveys as a result of they had been a type of empirical investigation, one thing one hardly ever does in philosophy. However on problems with atypical language, a frequent subject for Professor Hirsch, this sort of investigation appears fairly vital: one wants to truly ask what folks assume to know what they might ordinarily say in such-and-such conditions. These surveys had been additionally an effective way to encourage college students to take part, since, I assume, folks typically need to specific their very own views and discover it attention-grabbing to see what different folks’s views are, and so they may achieve this simply on this format. As well as, I believe these surveys made philosophy extra relatable within the sense that it reminded college students that the matters mentioned weren’t simply extremely summary matters contemplated by folks with an excessive amount of free time. They had been related to values they may maintain or disagree with themselves.
Do you might have a most popular method for academics to conduct class? If that’s the case, why?
I like when professors focus on a paper just by laying out the construction of its most important argument ASAP, as an alternative of slowly growing it by first studying by the paper kind of line-by-line. I dislike the latter as a result of oftentimes the assigned paper itself isn’t very participating to learn. A fellow grad pupil joked to me as soon as that Derek Parfit’s On What Issues quantity 1 is so boring to chew by, one would assume it’s about issues that don’t matter. The opposite pitfall is that generally the professor can get right into a tangent or turn into obsessive about some element like phrase selection whereas doing an in depth studying of a paper. In the meantime, the scholars are simply sitting there dumbfounded, questioning the place the lecture is heading or what the large fuss is about. And when the shut studying is lastly finished, it’s onerous for the scholars to place every thing collectively—it took an excessive amount of time to develop the argument to recollect the way it even began. In fact, particulars like phrase selection matter, however I’d like to listen to in regards to the construction of the argument first so I can correctly respect the smaller stuff. There’s a wise order to those issues, like having dessert served after the principle course.
In distinction, laying out the construction of the argument ASAP is much more participating. The principle motive for that is that it instantly generates curiosity, so college students are naturally compelled to tune into what the professor has to say subsequent. As an illustration, the premises could possibly be complicated, or it’s shocking how the premises handle to achieve the conclusion, at this preliminary stage of studying in regards to the argument. I particularly take pleasure in when professors break an argument down right into a numbered listing of premises. The logical construction is laid naked for all to see, which inspires college students to work together with it. Every time I see arguments on this type, I instinctively begin attempting to determine the weakest premise to seek out an objection, virtually like I’m enjoying a board recreation. I believe this type of instructing is an enormous a part of why I loved Professor Hirsch’s philosophy of faith class a lot in my sophomore 12 months, a lot in order that I grew to become a philosophy main within the first place.
How straightforward or troublesome did you discover your programs, both the fabric or the assignments? What helped you succeed?
My soiled little secret is that I hardly ever did the assigned studying earlier than courses—I hope my expensive professors don’t see this. Subsequently, once I would go to class and hearken to them clarify the studying that I used to be purported to do, I typically felt that the fabric was so easy and simple, since they all the time did such a fantastic job explaining it. However once I really needed to do the readings for a paper project, I might understand simply how little I really understood the fabric and would discover it very troublesome. What I received from the lectures and handouts was merely an abridged model with some vital particulars lacking. I might have all these questions on how precisely a given argument works: how does thought A result in thought B precisely? What does this thinker imply by this specific phrase? These had been troublesome questions particularly as a result of it was typically onerous to inform whether or not the creator made a mistake, which might be fertile floor for an objection, or just that I’m simply not understanding issues by being uncharitable or unintelligent. This downside can typically be exacerbated by the obtuse type that some philosophy papers have: the construction of the argument isn’t laid out properly sufficient; the sentences are too syntactically difficult; there are too many notations and acronyms; or there’s all of a sudden formal logic—like an affordable soar scare in a horror film—the place clear argumentation would have sufficed.
One instance involves thoughts. I used to be assigned an excerpt on Strawson’s Individuals for my graduate proseminar. The next is how I began my project responding to the studying:
This piece by Strawson is without doubt one of the most unreadable items of analytic philosophy I’ve come throughout up to now in my admittedly quick philosophy profession. With needlessly difficult syntaxes, liberal use of parentheses, lack of concrete examples, and 0 sign-posting, this excerpt largely eludes my ignorant thoughts…
Regardless of most of the assigned readings being very troublesome, there have been a number of components that helped me reach nonetheless delivering competent assignments. The primary is to have the ability to comply with the lectures properly sufficient to realize a baseline stage of understanding, which might be enhanced later by my really doing the studying. To this finish, I hardly ever took notes. I’ve realized over time that it actually simply distracted me from maintaining with what the professor was saying. I additionally make loads of errors in my handwriting and typing—this could additional distract me. So I made a decision to only be an attentive listener for probably the most half, which I discovered to be efficient.
The second is after all class participation. I made up for my nonexistent homework by taking part at school and asking questions. One apparent good thing about that is to get rid of factors of confusion and take a look at out preliminary objections. Admittedly, there was all the time the chance of asking one thing the studying already addressed and totally embarrassing myself. However I’d contemplate the chance to be a part of the joys of the entire exercise. One other, extra delicate profit is that it makes the category extra participating and thus memorable, in order that I may higher keep in mind the fabric. Yet one more delicate profit is that I may set up some rapport with the professors, like I did with Professor Yourgrau in his class on fiction. I simply assume they’re all extraordinarily pleasant and enjoyable to speak to. And so they might need been extra sympathetic when grading my work. You by no means know.
The third issue contributing to my educational competence is the next: bathe. Given the problem of the readings, I typically needed to reread the identical paragraph and even the identical sentence a number of instances to start having an honest grasp of what was being mentioned. However generally this simply didn’t work, and generally this made issues extra complicated. I’d begin to get paranoid after so many read-throughs: I’d thought that at the least some components had been clear, however now I wasn’t so certain anymore. It’s like scuffling with a Sudoku puzzle: you simply can’t handle to fill these last blanks, so you start to wonder if you’ve already screwed up at a lot earlier steps. Different instances, I felt like I used to be on the cusp of delivering , clear argument, however I simply couldn’t do it. I might find yourself looking at my laptop and get nothing finished for a couple of hours. In instances like these, I discovered {that a} good bathe did wonders. It was one thing like a psychological reset. I used to be capable of assume much more clearly, and good concepts would come far more simply. After thirty minutes within the bathe, I might emerge a greater thinker.
In case you may enhance your graduate expertise in a technique, what would it not be?
Brandeis has a comparatively small philosophy division. Which means you get to know just about each grad pupil and school member and luxuriate in small-sized courses. This sense of a tightly-knit group is undeniably a fantastic energy of the division. Nonetheless, I do want it was simply barely larger, each by way of the scholar physique and school. The 2023 cohort solely comprises 4 folks. They’re beautiful, fantastic folks, however I want I received to know only a few extra, particularly now that my cohort and the earlier have principally graduated—I’m nonetheless hanging round campus, anxiously ready on my PhD functions. As well as, with extra school, there would possible be extra graduate seminars accessible to us. There appears to be just one or two accessible each semester. To not discriminate in opposition to the undergrads an excessive amount of, however I actually loved these seminars the place we are able to have extra higher-level discussions extra regularly and likewise joke round extra because the grad college students know one another fairly properly.
Additionally, I want the meals on and round campus was higher. That is one thing I complain about each time given the prospect. I’ve already spent 3.5 years in Brandeis as an undergrad, and the cafeterias have solely turn into worse. So my recommendation to incoming grad college students is to not get a meal plan right here. For a tough concept of how unhealthy the campus meals is, you may learn my old article from 2019 on the subject. It additionally doesn’t assist that Waltham, the place Brandeis is located, is dwelling to quite a lot of mediocre eating places. They’re not horrible. They could even be thought of good. However they’re not nice, particularly while you examine them to locations in Newton, Watertown, Cambridge, Somerville, Downtown Boston, and so forth. As well as, there aren’t any good ramen locations in Waltham. It breaks my coronary heart.
Do you might have any favourite tales from grad faculty to share?
Probably not tales, however I like telling different college students the amusing speech habits of sure school members. One of many professors loves to begin his sentences with the phrase: “I can’t resist the next remark…” I can’t resist a smile each time I hear him say it—it’s simply such a peculiar phrase. I requested him as soon as whether or not he realizes how a lot he makes use of it. He mentioned no, to my shock.
One other professor likes to begin his each response to pupil feedback and questions with “Yeah! Good!” It’s humorous but in addition very candy, as a result of generally what the scholar (like me) mentioned gave the impression to be fallacious or irrelevant, but he would all the time reply with these two phrases in order that the scholar doesn’t really feel shot down when he ultimately explains how they had been fallacious. They’d thus really feel validated and inspired to take part extra at school. However I’m undecided if he’s consciously doing this as a part of his pedagogy or if that is only a speech behavior he picked up. I’ll ask him subsequent time I see him.
Apart from speech habits, there are additionally some humorous examples professors use I prefer to share with fellow college students. My favourite one is given to display the idea of conversational implicature. It goes roughly like this: suppose I am going to the school lounge and see the college president there, and I comment that “he’s sober at present,” what am I saying? It appears I’ve in some way instructed that the president has a consuming downside, though what I mentioned appears to be direct proof that he doesn’t have a consuming downside. I’ve heard this one so many instances, but it surely nonetheless cracks me up each time I hear it.
Typically I am the topic of those examples, which I discover hysterical. Professor Hirsch is a deflationist with regards to ontology. He thinks that the majority philosophical points in ontology are merely verbal disputes, a well-known view of his which he loves repeating, with a sure fervor, to the poor undergrads. I, however, take pleasure in speaking about all this spooky stuff and entertaining extravagant views. So he would typically draw a distinction between us to be able to clarify his place: “Stewart is a heavy-weight thinker who thinks… whereas I’m only a feather-weight that thinks…” Probably the most hilarious occasion of that is when he requested us one thing about atypical language and made this comment: “Appears to be like like not even Stewart is inclined to say this.” I may barely include myself after that. I like his humorousness. It’s very very like my very own.
