Philosophy of Law

7 July 2016

PHL 612 Philosophy of Law [Calendar Description]: What is law? What makes something a legal norm? Should citizens always obey the law? What is the relationship between law and morality? This course will explore competing theories of law, such as natural law and positivism, and touch on crucial debates over civil disobedience, purposes of punishment, and interpretation of legal texts. It will deal with contemporary controversies over the legal regulation of human behaviour, for instance in matters of sexual morality. Grading Scheme: Course Evaluation: Grades will be determined in the following manner: Task Value Date Midterm Test

25% Week 7 Essay Assignment* 30% Week 11 (March 28) Final Exam 45% TBA *Essay Assignment will be 1750 – 2250 words (Approximately 7 – 9 pages) OR Alternative Community-based/ Service Learning Opportunity Marks for assignments will be posted on Course Website on Blackboard Any alterations in any of the above will be discussed in class prior to being implemented. The usual process for making alterations to the grading scheme includes: (a) discussing the changes with the class; (b) making such revisions as early as possible in the course; and (c) confirming the changes both orally and in writing (handout or posting to course website).

Philosophy of Law Essay Example

NOTE: Faculty Course Surveys will be administered online Readings and Resources: There will be a Course Website on Blackboard. Course readings will be comprised of selected journal articles and court cases as specified in the Course Schedule. The readings are itemized and numbered in the Course Schedule below. All course readings can be accessed electronically. Many are available through links found in the Course Readings area of the course website on Blackboard (through Ryerson University Library electronic holdings). Court cases can be accessed through the CanLII website.

NOTE: The full references and citations for the readings follow under the heading “Sources/ References for Course Readings”. Powerpoint Presentations and Instructors Supplemental Notes will be posted in the Documents area of the course website on Blackboard. Other documents will be posted in the Documents area, and figures and charts are posted in the Information area. Please note: A variety and diversity of readings on the issues are included in order to give students choices for the essay topics; only specified readings will be the focus of the questions on the mid term test and final exam. ELABORATION ON COURSE CONTENT:

In this course we will focus on the conceptual issues arising from philosophical questions about law: What is law? What makes law valid? How do moral norms and legal norms overlap, and yet ultimately, differ from each other? How do moral perspectives impact upon and influence the articulation and interpretation of legal norms? In what ways do particular interpretations of legal documents and legal rulings provide reasons for acting or deciding (if one is a judge)? What are judges disagreeing about when they disagree about how to decide a particular case – what the law is, or what it ought to be?

Does what the law is sometime depend on what it ought to be? Are we morally obligated to obey each and every law, even when the content of a particular law is contrary to justified morality? Theories and principles to be explored throughout the course include several variants of Natural Law, Legal Positivism, and Interpretivism, as well as Feminist Theory and Critical Race Theory. Course materials will also engage with debates over the role of the Harm Principle, Moralism and Paternalism, especially in the context of Criminal Law.

In order to bring these often very abstract issues to life, we will examine a selection of high profile and prominent decisions (mainly from Canadian courts, and frequently from the Supreme Court of Canada) which can be said to have changed the law, and in which the judges of the court have disagreed among themselves. Cases to be covered concern controversial issues such as Battered Woman Syndrome, Euthanasia/ Physician Assisted Suicide, Hate Speech, Marijuana Use, Obscenity/ Pornography, Prostitution, or topics in human rights (i. e.

, freedom of expression, national security and the right not to be tortured, or religious freedom). Analysis of cases will include exploration and examination of the philosophical aspects of crucial terms and concepts that appear in Canadian law, such as in the Criminal Code of Canada, or in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. PLEASE NOTE: Philosophical theories of punishment, such as deterrence (based on the ethical theory of utilitarianism), retributivism (based on the ethical theory of deontology), denunciation, and restorative justice are covered comprehensively in a different course, PHL 449, Philosophy of Punishment.

Throughout the course, there will be an iterative process for learning, one in which philosophical theories and perspectives on the nature of law are scrutinized in the context of the reasoning of the judges in real world cases, in order to make more sense of what was at stake, philosophically as well as legally. Finally, at the culmination of the course, there should be an opportunity to delve into the debates over the justification of civil disobedience and the theoretical foundations of the rule of law, topics that can help to bring together many of the themes of the course as a whole.

Our goal in this course is to think more critically about our concepts of law, and the values and principles reflected and represented in our laws. Course materials deal with topics and issues that can evoke strong moral reactions and raise sensitive issues. The goal of subjecting the topics to philosophical scrutiny and analysis to articulate, clarify and elaborate on the insights to be gleaned from reliance upon logical reasoning and critical argumentation.

Philosophers believe that significant progress can be realized through efforts made to examine and explore the conceptual and theoretical convergences and divergences between competing and contrasting positions in public policy debates. Classroom discussions can be expected to be full of argument and debate, and yet we should all expect of ourselves and each other that the discussions will be conducted in a spirit of inquiry, exemplifying respect, civility, courtesy and goodwill. Course Schedule: Course Schedule:

Wednesdays from 11:10 am to 2:00 pm, East Kerr Hall, Room 225 Week One Classes begin Friday January 10 *NOTE: Please see Sources and References below (following the Course Schedule) for information on the course readings (available through the Blackboard course website or on the internet) Week One/ Wednesday January 15: TOPIC – Introduction to Philosophy of Law; Conceptualizing Law And Reading a Case (1) Riggs v. Palmer [Link in Course Readings] Week Two/ Wednesday January 22: TOPIC – Cluster Concepts of Law READINGS: (2) Brian Tamanaha, “Law” [Link in Course Readings]

Week Three/ Wednesday January 29: TOPIC – Legal Theory: Classical and Modified Legal Positivism READINGS: (3) H. L. A. Hart, “Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals” [Link in Course Readings] *NOTE: The key portions of the article by H. L. A. Hart are the following: section I, pages 594 (middle) – 605, plus pages 614 (middle, beginning with “We can now return to the main point… ) and section IV, pages 615 (middle) to 621 top. The Grudge Informer case is discussed on pages 618-619. Week Four/ Wednesday February 5: Legal Theory: Classical Natural Law Theory READINGS:

(4) Lon Fuller, “Positivism and Fidelity to Law: A Reply to Professor Hart” [Link in Course Readings] *NOTE: The key portions of the article by Lon Fuller are the following: section I, pages 633-638, plus section V. pages 648 (middle) – 661 (middle). The Grudge Informer case is discussed on pages 652-653. Week Five/ Wednesday February 12: Legal Theory: Procedural Natural Law Theory PLUS Riggs v Palmer AND Review for Mid Term Test READINGS: Review (3) and (4) Week Six/ February 17 – February 21: No Classes; Study Week/ Winter Break Week Seven/ Wednesday February 26: TOPIC – MID TERM TEST

Week Eight/ Wednesday March 5: TOPIC – Paternalism and Moralism AND Charter Jurisprudence, Prostitution and Feminist Legal Theory READINGS: (5) and (6) John Stuart Mill, Excerpts from On Liberty, Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 [Link in Course Readings] (7) Gerald Dworkin, “Paternalism” [Link in Course Readings] (8) Bedford v. Canada [Available online through CanLII] Week Nine/ Wednesday March 12: TOPIC – TOPIC – Charter Jurisprudence and Marijuana Use READINGS: (9) R. v. Malmo? Levine; R. v. Caine (combined decision, excerpts) [Available online through CanLII] Week Ten/ Wednesday March 19: TOPIC – Charter Jurisprudence and Euthanasia READINGS:

(10a) Rodriguez v. Attorney-General of B. C. (SCC) (excerpts) [Available online through CanLII] (10b) Rodriguez v. Attorney-General of B. C. (BCCA) (excerpts) [Available online through CanLII] Week Eleven/ Wednesday March 26: Guest Speaker, Nicole Bernhardt on Critical Race Theory PLUS TOPIC – Charter Jurisprudence and Pornography READINGS : (11) Carol Aylward, “Critical Race Theory” [Link in Course Readings] (12) Martha Fineman, “Feminist Legal Theory” [Link in Course Readings] (13) R. v. Butler (excerpts) [Available online through CanLII] *ESSAY DUE (Friday March 28) Friday March 28, 2014: Final Date to Drop Without Academic Penalty

Week Twelve/ Wednesday April 2: TOPIC – Battered Woman Syndrome and Feminist Legal Theory READINGS: (14) R. v. Lavallee (excerpts) [Available online through CanLII] Week Thirteen/ Wednesday April 9: TOPIC – Religious Freedom PLUS Review for Final Exam READINGS: (15) Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys (16) Trinity Western University v. British Columbia College of Teachers OR TOPIC – Interpretivism READINGS: (17) Ronald Dworkin, “Law as Interpretation” [Link in Course Readings] (18) Ronald Dworkin, “Law’s Ambitions for Itself” [Link in Course Readings] Thursday April 10, 2014: Classes End

Final Examination Period: Monday April 14, 2013 to Monday April 28, 2013 Sources/ Citations for Course Readings: (1) Riggs v. Palmer 115 NY 506, Court of Appeals of New York (1889). Link in Course Readings and Available online: http://www. courts. state. ny. us/reporter/archives/riggs_palmer. htm (2) Tamanaha, Brian. 2008. “Law”, Oxford International Encyclopedia of Legal History, St. John’s Legal Studies Research Paper No. 08-0095. Link in Course Readings and Available online: http://papers. ssrn. com/sol3/papers. cfm? abstract_id=1082436&rec=1&srcabs=1012051 (3) Hart, H. L. A. 1958.

(1958) “Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals” Harvard Law Review, Volume 71, Number 4 (Feb. , 1958), pages 593-629. Link in Course Readings and Available online through Ryerson University Library; URL: http://www. jstor. org/stable/1338225 (4)Fuller, Lon. 1958. “Positivism and Fidelity to Law: A Reply to Professor Hart”, Harvard Law Review, Volume 71, Number 4 (Feb. , 1958), pages 630-672. Link in Course Readings and Available online through Ryerson University Library; URL: http://www. jstor. org/stable/1338226 (5) Mill, John Stuart. 1869. On Liberty, Chapter One, “Introductory”.

Link in Course Readings and Available online: http://www. utilitarianism. com/ol/one. html (6) Mill, John Stuart. 1869. On Liberty, Chapter Two, “Of the Liberty of Thought and Discussion”. Link in Course Readings and Available online: http://www. utilitarianism. com/ol/two. html (7) Dworkin, Gerald. 2010. “Paternalism”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Link in Course Readings and Available online: http://plato. stanford. edu/entries/paternalism/ (8) Bedford v. Canada, 2013 SCC 72 (Supreme Court of Canada). Available online: CanLII: http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/2013/2013scc72/2013scc72. html (9) R.

v. Malmo? Levine; R. v. Caine, [2003] 3 S. C. R. 571 (Supreme Court of Canada, combined decision); 2003 SCC 74 (CanLII). Available online : CanLII: http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/2003/2003scc74/2003scc74. html; http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/2003/2003scc74/2003scc74. pdf (10a) Rodriguez v. Attorney-General of B. C. [1993] 3 S. C. R. 519 (Supreme Court of Canada); 1993 CanLII 75 (SCC). Available Online: CanLII: http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/1993/1993canlii75/1993canlii75. html; http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/1993/1993canlii75/1993canlii75. pdf (10b) Rodriguez v. Attorney-General of B.

C. [1992] 4 W. W. R. 109 (British Columbia Court of Appeal); 1993 CanLII 1191 (BC CA). Available Online: CanLII: http://www. canlii. org/en/bc/bcca/doc/1993/1993canlii1191/1993canlii1191. html; http://www. canlii. org/en/bc/bcca/doc/1993/1993canlii1191/1993canlii1191. pdf Excerpts Available in Canadian Cases in the Philosophy of Law, edited by Jerome Bickenbach, Third Edition, pages 160-166. Available Electronically through Ryerson University Library; Call Number: KE427. A7 C36 1998eb (11) Aylward, Carol. 1999. “Critical Race Theory”, Chapter 1 from Canadian Critical Race Theory: Racism and the Law, pages 19-49.

Fernwood Books. Available through Ryerson University E Resources. Call Number: KE4410 . A94 1999eb (12) Fineman, Martha Albertson. 2005. “Feminist Legal Theory”, Journal of Gender, Social Policy and the Law, Volume 13, Number 1, 2005, pages 13-23. Link in Course Readings and Available online: http://www. wcl. american. edu/journal/genderlaw/13/fineman. pdf? rd=1 (13) R. v. Butler [1992] 1 S. C. R. 452 (Supreme Court of Canada), 1992 CanLII 124 (SCC). Available online: CanLII : http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/1992/1992canlii124/1992canlii124. html; http://www. canlii.

org/en/ca/scc/doc/1992/1992canlii124/1992canlii124. pdf Excerpts in Canadian Cases in the Philosophy of Law, edited by Jerome Bickenbach, Third Edition, pages 87-95. Available Electronically through Ryerson University Library; Call Number: KE427. A7 C36 1998eb (14) R. v. Lavallee [1990] 1 S. C. R. 852 (Supreme Court of Canada). Available Online: CanLII: http://scc. lexum. org/en/1990/1990scr1-852/1990scr1-852. html; http://scc. lexum. org/en/1990/1990scr1-852/1990scr1-852. pdf Excerpts in Canadian Cases in the Philosophy of Law, edited by Jerome Bickenbach, Third Edition, pages 239-246.

Available Electronically through Ryerson University Library; Call Number: KE427. A7 C36 1998eb (15) Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys, [2006] 1 S. C. R. 256, 2006 SCC 6 Available online: CanLII: http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/2006/2006scc6/2006scc6. html http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/2006/2006scc6/2006scc6. pdf (16) Trinity Western University v. British Columbia College of Teachers, [2001] 1 S. C. R. 772, 2001 SCC 31 Available online: CanLII: http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/2001/2001scc31/2001scc31. html http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/2001/2001scc31/2001scc31.

pdf (17) Dworkin, Ronald. 1982. “Law as Interpretation”. Critical Inquiry, Volume 9, Number 1, The Politics of Interpretation (September 1982), pages 179-200. (18) Dworkin, Ronald. 1985. “Law’s Ambitions for Itself”. Virginia Law Review, Volume 71, Number 2 (March 1985), pages 173-187. ADDITIONAL: (19) King, Martin Luther. “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”. Available online: http://www. africa. upenn. edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham. html (20) Brownlee, Kimberley. 2007/ 2009. “Civil Disobedience”. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available online: http://plato. stanford. edu/entries/civil-disobedience/

AND Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982 being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U. K. ), 1982, c. 11. Sections 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 15. Available Online: CanLII: http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/const/const1982. html ********************************** Recommended Resources for Future Learning: NOTE: There are links in course readings to some of these items. Christman, John. 2003/ 2009. “Autonomy in Moral and Political Philosophy”. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available online: http://plato. stanford. edu/entries/autonomy-moral/

Crenshaw, Kimberle, Neil Gotanda, Gary Peller, and Kendall Thomas, editors. 1995. Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings That Formed the Movement. Available through Ryerson University Library; Call Number: KF4755. A75 C7 1995 Delgado, Richard and Jean Stefancic. 2012. Critical Race Theory: An Introduction. Second Edition. New York University Press. Delgado, Richard and Jean Stefancic, editors. 1999. Critical Race Theory: The Cutting Edge. Second Edition. Temple University Press. Available through Ryerson University Library; Call Number: KF4755 . C75 2000 Devlin, Patrick. 1971. “Morals and the Criminal Law”.

In Morality and the Law, edited by Richard Wasserstrom (Wadsworth, 1971), pages 24-48 Dworkin, Gerald. 1971. “Paternalism”. In Morality and the Law, edited by Richard Wasserstrom (Wadsworth, 1971), pages 107-126 Dworkin, Ronald. 1971. “Lord Devlin and the Enforcement of Morals”. In Morality and the Law, edited by Richard Wasserstrom (Wadsworth, 1971), pages 55-72 Finnis, John. 2007. “Natural Law Theory”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available online: Fish, Stanley. 1982. “Working on the Chain Gang: Interpretation in Law and Literature”. Critical Inquiry, Volume 9, Number 1, 201-216.

Reprinted in 60 Texas Law Review, 1981-1982, 551-567. Fuller, Lon. 1964/ 1969. The Morality of Law. Revised Edition. Yale University Press. Green, Leslie. 2003. “Legal Positivism”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available online: Hart, H. L. A. 1961/ 1994. The Concept of Law. Second Edition. Oxford University Press. Hart, H. L. A. 1971. “Immorality and Treason”. In Morality and the Law, edited by Richard Wasserstrom (Wadsworth, 1971), pages 49-54. Lefkowitz, David. 2007. “On a Moral Right to Civil Disobedience”. Ethics, Volume 117 (2), pages 202-233. Menkel-Meadow, Carrie. 2005.

“Portia Redux: Another Look at Gender, Feminism and Legal Ethics”. In Susan Carle, editor, Lawyers’ Ethics and the Pursuit of Social Justice: A Critical Reader, 274-281. New York University Press. Available online: http://jay. law. ou. edu/faculty/jmaute/lawyering_21st_century/menkel-meadow. pdf Shapiro, Scott. 2007. “The ‘Hart-Dworkin Debate’: A Short Guide for the Perplexed”, University of Michigan Public Law Working Paper No. 77. Available online: http://ssrn. com/abstract=968657 Tamanaha, Brian. 2007. “A Concise Guide to the Rule of Law”, Florence Workshop on the Rule of Law, edited by Neil Walker, Gianluigi Palombella,

St. John’s Legal Studies Research Paper No. 07-0082, Hart Publishing Company, 2007. Available online: http://ssrn. com/abstract=1012051 Tushnet, Mark. 2005. “Survey Article: Critical Legal Theory (without Modifiers) in the United States”. The Journal of Political Philosophy, Volume 13, Number 1, pages 99-112. Link in Course Readings and Available through Ryerson University E Resources. Waldron, Jeremy. 2008. “The Concept and the Rule of Law”, Georgia Law Review, NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 08-50, 2008. Available online: Wasserstrom, Richard, editor. Morality and the Law. Wadsworth.

Available through Ryerson University Library; Call Number: BJ55 . W3 1971 West, Robin. 1988. “Jurisprudence and Gender”. University of Chicago Law Review, Volume 55, Number 1, Winter, pages 1-72 (selected excerpts). Link in Course Readings and Available online: http://scholarship. law. georgetown. edu/cgi/viewcontent. cgi? article=1642&context=facpub West, Robin. 1993. “Natural Law Ambiguities”, Georgetown Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 11-75, Connecticut Law Review, Volume 25, 1993, pp. 831 ff. ; Available online through Ryerson University Library; URL: http://papers. ssrn. com/sol3/papers.

cfm? abstract_id=1846852 Recommended Additional Cases: Bedford v. Canada, 2010 ONSC 4264 (Ontario Superior Court of Justice) [Prostitution]; Available online: CanLII: http://www. canlii. org/en/on/onsc/doc/2010/2010onsc4264/2010onsc4264. html Bedford v. Canada, 2010 ONCA 814 (Ontario Court of Appeal) [Prostitution]; Available online: http://www. ontariocourts. ca/decisions/2012/2012ONCA0186. htm Carter v. Canada (Attorney General) 2012 B. C. S. C. 886; [Euthanasia/ Physician Assisted Suicide]; Available online: http://www. courts. gov. bc. ca/jdb-txt/SC/12/08/2012BCSC0886. htm R. v. Clay [2003] 3 S. C. R.

735, 2003 SCC 75 (CanLII) [Marijuana Use]; Available online: CanLII http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/2003/2003scc75/2003scc75. html; http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/2003/2003scc75/2003scc75. pdf Little Sisters Book and Art Emporium v. Canada (Minister of Justice), 2000 SCC 69, [2000] 2 S. C. R. 1120 [Obscenity/ Pornography]; Available Online: CanLII: http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/2000/2000scc69/2000scc69. html; http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/2000/2000scc69/2000scc69. pdf R. v. Malott [1998] 1 S. C. R. 123 (Supreme Court of Canada); 1998 CanLII 845 (SCC) [Battered Woman Syndrome]; Available Online: http://www.

canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/1998/1998canlii845/1998canlii845. html; http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/1998/1998canlii845/1998canlii845. pdf; Excerpts in Fourth Edition ofCanadian Cases in the Philosophy of Law, edited by Jerome Bickenbach, pages 280-281. R. v. Zundel [1992] 2 S. C. R. 731 [Hate Speech]; Available online: CanLII: http://csc. lexum. org/en/1992/1992scr2-731/1992scr2-731. html; http://csc. lexum. org/en/1992/1992scr2-731/1992scr2-731. pdf Syndicat Northcrest v. Amselm [2004] 2 S. C. R. 551 Available online: CanLII: http://www. canlii.

org/en/ca/scc/doc/2004/2004scc47/2004scc47. html http://www. canlii. org/en/ca/scc/doc/2004/2004scc47/2004scc47. pdf RECOMMENDED RESOURCES (General): Orin Kerr, “How To Read A Legal Opinion”, The Green Bag, Second Series, Volume 11, Number 1, Autumn 2007; Available online: Jim Pryor, “Guidelines on Reading Philosophy”, 2006 Jim Pryor, “Guidelines on Writing a Philosophy Paper”, 2006 Jim Pryor, “Philosophical Terms and Methods” Zachary Seech, Writing Philosophy Papers, Fifth Edition (Wadsworth, 2008) Lewis Vaughn and Jillian Scott McIntosh, Writing Philosophy: A Guide for Canadian Students (Oxford University Press, 2009)

************************************* Learning Objectives: Learning Objectives: This course will address issues in the Philosophy of law, as well as philosophical theories and principles which arise in law, specifically in the context of Charter jurisprudence. Thus, we will be examining what philosophers have to say about law, along with the influence of philosophical ideas on legal arguments and judgments. Through this course – with its combination of lectures, discussions and assigned readings – it is hoped that students will have opportunities to realize many of the following course objectives:

I Appreciation of the philosophical implications of diverse conceptions of the meaning of law; IIComprehension of the salient features of, and differences between (i) natural law theory (classical and procedural variants); (ii) legal positivism (classical and modified variants); (iii) interpretivism; (iv) legal realism; (v) critical race theory; and (vi) feminist legal theory, and their respective contributions to conceptualizing and theorizing about law; III Insight into the relevance and significance of principles and theories

including: (vii) the Harm Principle; (viii) Paternalism; (ix) Legal Moralism; (x) Quality of Life, (xi) Sanctity of Life, and (xii) Wrongness of Killing, as principles underlying legal measures, and especially criminal law; IVRecognition of the crucial dimensions of validity, normativity and justification, for assessing and analysing diverse perspectives on law; VInsight into the distinctions between moral norms and legal norms, along with their overlapping and enduring influence upon each other;

VIComprehension of the salient distinctions between factual issues, value issues, and matters of interpretation, and insight into diverse theories about interpretation of legal language and legal rules. VIIAppreciation of principles, values and norms which are fundamental to liberal, democratic societies, such as autonomy, equality and liberty; VIIIInsight into the range and scope of arguments in favour of freedom of expression/ speech, such as the Argument from Truth, the Argument from Democracy and the Argument from Self-Realization, and the criticisms frequently raised against those arguments;

IXAppreciation of philosophical aspects of diverse conceptions of the term “justice”, such as Compensatory Justice, Corrective Justice, Criminal Justice, Distributive Justice, Procedural Justice and Substantive Justice, and the relevance of these distinctive concepts for issues pertaining to philosophy of law; XInsight into the philosophical significance and salience of the conceptual framework for Charter jurisprudence, and selected passages of Charter cases that illustrate and illuminate the pervasive influence of philosophy on law.

XIAbility to apply the general moral and legal principles and theories covered in the course to cases concerning contemporary controversies, such as abortion, adultery, advertising, battered woman syndrome, euthanasia, hate speech, marijuana use, pornography, prostitution, or to topics in human rights (i. e. , national security and the right not to be tortured, or religious freedom) in a perceptive and fruitful manner. XIIAppreciation of the relevance and significance of critical thinking skills for analysing, evaluating, and crafting arguments, including those found in the course materials.

XIIIEnhancement and optimization of essay writing skills, including explication and interpretation of complex ideas, analysis, evaluation and development of arguments, including setting out a position and defending it, identifying and addressing criticisms and objections to one’s own position. Other Important Course Specific Information: *Notes on Assignments (General): Writing Assignments (including Essays, Case Studies, and Reflective Papers) are judged primarily on the basis of QUALITY, and SELECTION.

Considerations include the ways in which the written work evidences a thoughtful, cogent and insightful articulation of ideas, as well as a coherent and consistent principle of selection used to decide what to include and what to leave out, and in what order/ sequence to present ideas, information and analysis, along with the writing style and optimal communication practices. Factors of optimal communication practices include: thoughtful, cogent and insightful articulation of ideas, coherent and effective sequencing of points, word choice, and development of ideas within an effective organizing framework.

Factors of writing style include: grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, and paragraph demarcation. Tests and exams are judged primarily on the basis of QUANTITY and RELEVANCE – how much information (as modified by interpretive significance) can be provided, that is relevant to the specific questions being asked – in the time available. Word choice, cogent and coherent sequencing of points, and development of ideas within an effective organizing framework are important for tests and exams, as well as for essays.

Less important for evaluating answers on tests and exams are matters of writing style, grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, and paragraph demarcation (which are all crucial for evaluating essays). The Mid-Term Test and the Final Exam will be comprised of a variety and combination of short answer and medium length questions (on terms and concepts, and theories and perspectives from course materials), and some longer essay type of questions, which call for integration and assimilation of course materials.

There will likely be some choice of questions, and study questions will be provided beforehand to indicate the general format, the types of questions which will be asked, and the specific materials to be covered. The Mid-Term Test and the Final Exam can be expected to address topics, themes, issues, terms, concepts, theories, perspectives, information and ideas presented in the following: class lectures and discussion; assigned readings; powerpoint presentations; and other course documents (available on Blackboard).

Late Penalties: A late penalty of 2 percent per day will apply to late papers. The penalty will not be applied where there is a medical situation or family emergency, with documentation. Late essays will normally not be accepted after the Final Examination period. Requests for extensions, accommodations or considerations should be made in person, over the telephone (voicemail), during drop in office hours or during a scheduled visit with a pre-arranged appointment time.

**Instructors Email Policy: Email communication is NOT intended to supplant, or substitute for contact in person, or telephone communication, but rather to supplement them. Email is appropriate as a last resort, and for brief transmissions of crucial, time sensitive information. Email should not be used to try to replace telephone discussions, or exchanges of information which could happen during any of the following: in class; before or after class; drop in office hours; or a scheduled office visit with a pre-arranged appointment time.

Assignments can be submitted electronically ONLY in order to meet a deadline (there will be an electronic record that the work was in on time), BUT a hard copy must also be provided to the instructor/ tutorial leader for the purposes of grading. QUOTATION, REFERENCING and CITATION One of the main purposes/ objectives/ goals of a written assignment is for students to demonstrate their own perspectives on the knowledge and insights gained from course materials, and to develop their own arguments and positions in relation to the course materials.

Be sure to read the relevant course materials, and to make use of them – assimilate them, analyze them, and integrate arguments and points from them into your essay. Writing assignments can present fruitful and stimulating opportunities to find your own voice, to develop your own interpretations and come to your own understanding of the materials. You should endeavour to present your arguments and your ideas in your own words, and not to rely too heavily on quotation.

To the extent that you will be relying upon ideas and information of others, be mindful that direct quotation or close paraphrasing without proper citation, and without giving proper credit, is plagiarism. Writers are expected to show respect for the ideas and information provided by others through proper, scholarly citation and referencing. This is the ethical and scholarly standard. It is crucial that information and ideas that you have not come up with on your own should be properly cited and referenced.

You may use any style you wish to do so – whether in text citation (brackets) with reference list, or endnotes, or footnotes, and bibliography. You need to make your best efforts to document your sources, for any and all quotations or close paraphrases, especially including material taken from the internet. ACADEMIC INTEGRITY ***NOTE on Turnitin The Ryerson Student Code of Academic Conduct defines plagiarism and the sanctions for those who plagiarize. Courses at Ryerson University are able to make use of Turnitin’s integration for Blackboard Users, a process designed to help prevent and detect plagiarism.

Ryerson University has subscribed to the Turnitin service which helps professors identify plagiarism and helps students maintain academic integrity. Turnitin’s products and services are designed with the aim of ensuring originality of student work, and providing efficient mechanisms for upholding the value of academic integrity. Turnitin is relied upon with the aspiration of helping to ensure that students whose work exemplifies academic integrity get proper recognition for their efforts, talents and abilities.

The Turnitin. com service provides an advanced search technology that checks student papers (submitted to the system) against in-house copies of archived content, a proprietary database of previously submitted student papers, and materials found on the internet. Turnitin’s software provides an “Overall Similarity Index” and “Originality Report” which can provide the basis for further evaluation and investigations. http://www. turnitin. com/static/plagiarism. html PHL 612 will b

A limited
time offer!
Save Time On Research and Writing. Hire a Professional to Get Your 100% Plagiarism Free Paper