This course will introduce you to key ethical debates in the area of digital technology. As such, you will learn about the key debates on a range of issues from artificial intelligence to digital privacy that equip you with the knowledge to delve deeper into these topics and connect them to each other, as well as debates on technological developments beyond the classroom.

• Understand key philosophical issues at stake in the development and use of modern digital technology and the philosophical ideas and concepts that help us make sense of them.
• Develop your philosophical reasoning skills.

Both of these objectives require practice: practice reading, reasoning and writing. We often think of the stereotypical philosopher as someone who spends a lot of time on their own working out their ideas. But in reality, philosophy requires a lot of engagement: we need to talk to each other in order to better understand our own ideas and identify their flaws and strengths. We need feedback from others to learn how to best communicate those ideas, so others truly understand what we want to argue. This course embraces that spirit and will provide you with ample opportunities to read, write, provide and receive feedback throughout the semester.

Course structure

The course is comprised of the following components:

• Lectures and in-class discussions: Mo-Wed-Fri
• Collaborative annotations of key texts in preparation for lectures
• Three short take-home essays (800-1000 words)
• Three group tutorials (45 minutes each)
• Two short in-class paper-based exams (40 minutes)
• A choice of EITHER a final essay/project OR a longer final exam.

See below for more information on each of these components.

Lectures and in-class discussions

Monday and Wednesday sessions are usually lecture-style, whereas Friday sessions are reserved for in-class discussions and group activities to help you learn from each other.

We will (for the most part) look at one topic each week. While each of the sessions will have a specific focus (often related to thetext or texts assigned to that session), all the sessions of the week are usually intertwined. You should have read all of the texts assigned for each session before class. All the assigned texts will be available on Canvas or, if they are available as an ebook, a link will be provided on the course schedule page.

Collaborative annotations

This course requires you to read, write, and comment on philosophical ideas. As such, each week you will:

• 1. read assigned readings; and
• 2. collaboratively annotate and comment on the text you have read (together with a group of your classmates, using the Hypothesis tool integrated with Canvas) and respond to the comments of others in your group.

Your annotations are due by midnight on the day before the session for which the text has been assigned (usually Sunday and Tuesday, but check the schedule each week; sometimes readings are assigned for Friday sessions as well in which case the annotations are due by the end of Thursday).

Collaborative annotations are graded for completion: you will get full credit for them as long as you submit the required number of annotations and comments (three of each) and they reflect a reasonable and good-faith attempt to engage with the assigned texts and your classmates' comments.

Three short essays

You will write three short essays (800-1000 words) over the course of the semester. These essays provide you with the opportunity to practice your writing skills at home. They draw on ideas and concepts from class and the readings that you will have engaged with in the prior weeks and you are expected to develop your own argument in response to them. Each essay will be based on a prompt that will be released on Canvas ahead of time. They are due on the dates specified in the course schedule.

Three group tutorials (45 minutes each)

Three group tutorials (45 minutes each): these are based on your short essays. You will be assigned to a tutorial group (of 3-4 students) which will meet three times with the instructor throughout the semester. In preparation for the tutorial, you will read and comment on each other’s short essays. Those comments and any questions that arise from your prior engagement will form the basis of a 45 minute group discussion in which you will provide and receive critical feedback on your and your groupmates’ arguments and writing, and deepen your understanding of the material. This is also the place where you can ask questions that go beyond that material and dig even deeper.

Two short in-class paper-based exams (40 minutes each)

A choice of EITHER a final paper/project OR a longer final exam

Final paper/project

This is a long-form assignment in which you will be able to exercise your philosophical reasoning and writing skills. This project is on a topic of your choice (subject to instructor approval) related to the course material. You have to meet with Julia at least twice prior to handing in your final project to receive guidance and feedback. You will also meet with Julia once more after you have handed in your project for a 30 minute tutorial to discuss and receive feedback. Both the written part of the project and the tutorial are part of your final project grade.

Final exam

This is a 120 minute paper-based final exam which consists of both short argumentative tasks and questions to test your understanding of key ideas and concepts you will have encountered throughout the semester.

IMPORTANT: If you would like to select the final paper/project option, you must notify Julia of that choice by October 31st. (A form will be distributed in advance.) If you do not make a choice, you will be automatically enrolled in the final exam. You may switch to the final exam option at any time before the final paper/project is due, but you may not switch to the final paper/project option after October 31st.

Grading scheme

Grade inflation is real, and everyone in college has to contend with it.

One of the downsides of grade inflation is that grades lose their communicative value. Let me explain: we often tend to see the purpose of grades as summative assessment – providing information on how well you did in the class to external audiences, e.g., the university, other institutions, or future employers.

However, grades can (and should) also be a tool of formative assessment – providing you and me as an instructor with an honest indication of where your strengths and weaknesses lie, what you need to work on, and giving both of us an idea of your skill-building trajectory across the course. This signal gets lost if almost everyone expects and receives an A for each component of the course.

At the same time, grading in any one single course cannot operate in isolation of the expectations the rest of the world has about the meaning of a grade. If a B is perceived as a "bad" grade by others, it doesn't matter that, within the confines of a course, it's meant to reflect a good effort which merely lacks some features that make it fall short of the "outstanding" mastery of skills required for an A.

In this course, I want to be cognizant of all of these dimensions. Hence, we will operate two grading schemes:

1. a formative, honest grading scheme that is finely differentiated and aims to truly reflect your trajectory of skill development and provides honest feedback; and
2. a summative grading scheme in which the more differentiated grades of the formative scheme will be translated into the standard ABC/NC or S/NC grading scheme.

Here's what this will look like in practice:

The grades you receive on all assignments (including exams) will follow a numerical scheme from 1-6. Here's what the numbers mean:

• 1: outstanding
• 2: good
• 3: satisfactory
• 4: sufficient: B
• 5: deficient: C
• 6: insufficient: NC

For summative grading and your final grade at the end of the semester, I will translate your grades as follows.

Letter grade translation:

• Grades 1-3 will be translated to an A;
• Grade 4 is equivalent to a B;
• Grade 5 to a C;
• and grade 6 is a failing grade.

S/NC grade translation:

• Grades 1-5 are equivalent to an S.
• Grade 6 is a failing grade.

This means that final grades follow the same distribution as they historically have and do in other courses, meaning that external perception and comparison in a grade-inflated environment remains consistent. But it also means that you receive honest feedback throughout the semester, and you'll know how strong your work is and where you can improve even work that will ultimately result in an A.

You have my commitment that I will honor this translation: if your grades are in the 1-3 range, you will receive an A at the end of the semester (even if they are all 3s).

AI policy

In short, all of the written work you hand in (this includes all collaborative annotations, essays and exams) must have been outlined, argued, and written by you without the use of AI tools.

This policy is not ignorant of the fact that AI tools are transforming the way in which we collect and process information, and communicate our ideas. They can help us collect and summarize information and perspectives, provide feedback and polish our writing. That's great!

But the point of taking a philosophy course is not to produce the most impressive-looking essay in the most efficient manner. It's to build true understanding and develop your capacity for critical reasoning and judgment. Here's the rub: developing those skills requires manual practice. That practice involves reasoning your way through a gnarly argument on your own, and also the struggle to put those ideas in your own words – writing catalyzes our thought process.

Short-circuiting these tasks by using AI tools for the developing and conveying your arguments (i.e., reasoning, outlining and writing) will prevent you from learning what this course intends to teach you. That's why this policy does not permit the use of AI tools in the manner outlined above. Submitting work that is clearly copied from AI output also violates Brown's Academic Code and will be pursued as such.

You are explicitly welcome, though not required, to use AI tools for tasks that support you in building your argumentative skills: i.e., helping you understand ideas, concepts, and debates, and to find additional resources. Keep in mind, though, that AI tools aren't always reliable, especially when it comes to providing information about contested or more niche ideas and topics. When you decide to use them for research, I strongly recommend you treat them as springboards for further research and argumentation to back up the information they provide.

In short, in order to be successful in the course and do well on all graded parts of the course (annotations, short essays and tutorials, short exams, the final paper or exam), you have to put in the legwork of practicing to think, argue, and write yourself.

If you have any questions about this policy or are unsure about whether might be in violation of it, please get in touch before you start working on an assignment. I am happy to discuss this with you and provide guidance on how to use AI tools in a way that is consistent with the goals of the course and this policy.

Other policies

Late policy

You can use a budget of two late days in total which can be used for the three short essay assignments. The purpose of these late days is to provide you with some flexibility for unexpected situations in which you find yourself unable to complete an assignment on time (e.g., coinciding deadlines, extracurricular commitments, etc.). For those situations, I normally expect you to use your late days, rather than asking for an extension, so make sure to use them judiciously. Late days will be accounted for automatically, so you do not need to request them. If you have used up your late days and find yourself in a situation in which you cannot complete an assignment on time for an unforeseen circumstance or emergency, please contact me as soon as possible to discuss the situation. I will consider extensions on a case-by-case basis, but they will only be granted for legitimate reasons and in exceptional circumstances.

Annotations are generally due at midnight (EST) on Sunday and Wednesday (see course schedule for exceptions), and owing to the small amount of credit they contribute individually, there will be no late submission. If you do encounter particular, unexpected hardships however, please send me an email.

Attendance

Participation

This is a lecture course but it will nevertheless be interactive, so please be prepared to get involved in the discussion. The Friday sessions will typically be dedicated workshop and discussion sessions and your active participation is expected in those, but there will also be ample room for conversation in the lecture sessions on Monday and Wednesday.

One note on the culture of debate which I would like to foster in this course: discussions in philosophy are not about winning an intellectual battle, but about engaging with others’ views on their merits. They are also about taking intellectual risks, putting forward a potentially controversial argument, as well as receiving and offering constructive criticism. This is only possible in a class environment in which we build trust. In class, I therefore expect us all to treat each other courteously, engage with each other’s arguments constructively and in good faith no matter the topic.

Accommodations