‘Nominal essences’? or… ‘A class by any other name’
All bad puns and literary illusions aside, the Washington Post has a quick article on the marketing of Philosophy classes by using intriguing names:
Some Professors Could Use a Class in Marketing
I teach:
- Minds and Machines (intro to phil mind)
- What is Art? (intro to aesthetics)
- Anarchy, Autonomy and Authority (social / political phil)
- Minds and Language (intro to phil language)
- On What Is (metaphysics)
I still need names for Philosophy of Science, Logic and Critical Thinking. A few years ago, some students suggested ’stupid people suck’ for Critical thinking, but I suspect that was born of the 2004 presidential election result than actual marketing savvy. Anyone have any suggestions?
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 3rd, 2008 at 12:32 pm
How about “How to win arguments” for Critical Reasoning.
What is Science (Why Astronomy is better than Astrology) for PhilOfSci
I can’t help with logic, but I think avoiding all talk of truth tables would be in your best interest.
March 14th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
The most popular course we offer in my department is, surprise surprise, “The Philosophy of Sex and Love”.
June 18th, 2008 at 9:12 am
Swarthmore breaks its intro class into 5 units, each taught by a different instructor. The first is called “Lies, BS and Bias” - now that’s a candidate for a name for a CT course!
(http://www.swarthmore.edu/x10090.xml)