Historical introduction to philosophy/Archives

Attention, Lord Sunshine Speaking

Students in PHIL374, Please add yourself below. Use the ones already done as templates. I will use these links for grading.

Aquinto's Contribs

Cordova's Contribs

Hartline's Contribs

Schmurr's Contribs

Ferguson's Contribs

Robinson's Contribs

Fitzgibbon's Contribs

Gannon's Contribs

Smith's Contribs

Chen's Contribs

Anderson's Contribs

Interesting looking course!

Welcome to Wikiversity. This class looks interesting. Particularly the method of production. It would be useful to the rest of Wikiversity if a summary of strong points and weak points of the Wikiversity project for supporting this type of class were conveyed somehow to the Wikiversity mailing list sometime.

Are you aware that images used within and at Wikiversity must be submitted under an FDL so as to meet our project goals? Mirwin 07:46, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

"Historical"

Out of curiosity, in what sense is this course Historical? I'm wondering if we should be cross-listing it over at the School of History. The Jade Knight 11:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion, the Historical adjective should be dropped, this is not an historical introduction at all, this is a typical basic-level introduction to philosophy's main themes--Nikolas (discuss • contribs) 00:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

How does it compare with Introduction to Philosophy? Should the two be merged, or is one better than the other? -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 00:39, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

It seems that Introduction to Philosophy itself is just a plan, here I see an excellent work, but it doesn't cover at all an historical point of view of the subject: furthermore, many topics can be found also in b:Introduction to Philosophy : merging is a good idea, though we should be careful that no content gets deleted in the process. --Nikolas (discuss • contribs) 03:10, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Care to be bold and work on it? I'd be happy to assist if you have any logistical questions. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 03:45, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I would like to, but not right now, pretty busy in my life. I hope to come back soon, though.--Nikolas (discuss • contribs) 00:12, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good. Let me know if/when you need anything. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:04, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok :) Nikolas (discuss • contribs) 00:13, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Platos' cavern image

I think that the image ilustrating Platos' cavern has some problems. First, the "prisioner" should be chained. That's important. Second, the shadows in the cavern should come from some kind of puppets. Thats very important too. Third, a fire should be present, casting the shadows to the bottom of the cavern. Oh, and fourth, I think there should be more than one prisioner in the cavern. I am not skilled in digital drawing, so I could not correct it myself. Would appreciate if anyone took the trouble. Thanks! 201.235.187.13 21:23, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Borrowing portions of course

I hope you don't mind, but I have redirected links to some of the pages in this course so that it can be referenced either in whole or in parts related to the Mind-Body Problem, from Artificial Consciousness/Philosphy of Mind Please inform me if there is any objection to this reference.

The progress of Philosophy

Thanks for this series of courses.

What I would like to see added is a "progress report" or "state of the philosophies" or "a summary of progress" regarding philosophy. What are the big questions that philosophy has considered and settled over the past 2,500 years? What are the "current problems" in philosophy where progress is being made? What are the most important unanswered questions that are unsolved in philosophy. In short I would like to understand the overall contribution and trajectory of the discipline over the past 2,500 years. Thanks! --Lbeaumont (discuss • contribs) 12:36, 6 February 2019 (UTC)