Transcript of a philosophical conversation

PHIL Dialogue Project                                                                                                             (Fall 2020)

Socrates: Then we ought never to act unjustly?

Crito: Certainly not.

Socrates: If we ought never to act unjustly at all, ought we to repay injustice with injustice, as the multitude thinks we may?

Crito: Certainly not.

Socrates: Well, then, Crito, ought we to do evil to anyone?

Crito: Certainly, I think not, Socrates.

Socrates: And is it just to repay evil with evil, as the multiple thinks, or unjust?

Crito: Certainly it is unjust.

Socrates: For there is no difference, is there, between doing evil to a man and acting unjustly?

Crito: True.

From Crito, by Plato (F.J. Church, translator)

Socrates, perhaps the most popular philosopher ever, and one of the first important ones, was fortunate to have Plato as a follower, for Plato transcribed many of Socrates’ words.  (Scholars may never be certain which words are really Socrates’; still, most believe that a sizeable portion of the words and ideas expressed in Plato’s dialogues are based upon Socrates’ conversations.)

As a part of your work for this class, you are required to participate in your own focused philosophical conversations with others. Record the conversation(s), and transcribe them, word-for-word—no summaries or alterations.  Here are requirements, recommendations, and expectations:

1. These must be conversations (not interviews); you will be serving as the one in control, so to speak—the student of philosophy who has goals to be met, information to be gathered, specific things (course-related) to be learned, and, importantly, things to share and learning to demonstrate. Choose whomever you’d like as participants—but not classmates in this PHIL class.

3. Submit 4-6 pages of transcript for each of 2 portions (one due at midterm, one at semester’s end), with single-spacing within passages, double-spacing between, 12-point font, and one-inch margins. Include only the most philosophically relevant, illuminating blocks of conversations.

4. The topics covered in the finished product (i.e. that which you turn in for assessment) must be related directly to ones found in the course content areas and learning outcomes (see the syllabus, specifically, and our textbooks); there is no room or reason for off-task conversations to be included in the transcripts themselves. (Your actual conversations may wander; don’t include the wanderings as you type.) The more specific, relevant, and deep, the better.  You may prep your participants with info/terms/theories/examples from the textbook, too.

5. Finished products should reveal meaningful, enlightening, and relevant conversation.

6. Above all, learn and enjoy as you go, and take philosophy out of the classroom!

[continued]

Dialogue transcript rubric (50 points x 2 transcripts):

____ / 25         Relevance, focus, and accuracy (both in terms of the textual foundations)

____ / 15         Thoroughness and depth

____ / 5           Clarity, overall

____ / 5           Format

===============================

____/ 50          TOTAL (for each of two transcripts)

Note: Major point deductions will result if projects do not meet the aforementioned requirements (#1 through #6). For example, if the document submitted only amounts to 2 pages, the work will earn a relevant portion (at best) of the possible points.

Due dates:

Transcript 1: Post in Assignments by no later than 11:59 p.m. on Sunday, October 25.