This class is super engaging and relevant to any person. It is a pretty easy GE if you know how to write a philosophy paper, but the TAs and the professor don't really prepare you well enough to know how to write one. Basically, you're just showing that you're thinking about the prompt critically and logically using hypothetical examples to support your ideas. It doesn't even have to be conclusive, just... thoughtful enough?

Prof DeWitt is a friendly person and isn't afraid to share her opinions. The class is highly discussion based which can make it sort of slow and boring since she will take literally every question(most of which are not relevant to the content but the example which leads to long tangents) and thus fall behind in content, but that's partly because she does ask a lot of questions to interact with. Lecture can be hard to follow because of how technical it is, especially Kant since it takes a while to get to his important ideas, but she does write almost all the important information for the tests on the whiteboard. She is flexible with deadlines and will always give you a one-two day extension for the paper no questions asked. The texts are incredibly difficult to understand and she is strongly opposed to using online resources because "they're not always accurate" so she wants you to only take the TA's & her interpretation of the text which makes office hours super important to go to.

This was a super easy philosophy GE I would recommend to any new people. I took this as a freshman in the fall quarter and honestly it was barely any work. Just show up to lectures and take notes because the majority of questions on your final are directly said in lectures. We had two papers and there isn't a page limit, but a word limit. I think the first one was like 600-800 words and the second was like 800-1200 which was not that hard to write. Also, I took this during the TA strike which probably accounted for the easiness because Professor DeWitt canceled some assignments towards the end of the quarter. The professor is really nice, but the TAs are the ones that grade your paper, which ultimately determine your grade.

TAKE THIS CLASS! The professor is amazing and engaging and this class was definitely the highlight of my week. The professor does an amazing job of including people and honestly most of our class time was just philosophical debates (the professor is a very good devils advocate). The essays are short (1.5-3 pages) and they are super fun to write. The only reason anyone should avoid this class is if they get easily tiffed since we do debate moral issues.

Ok so I really liked this class, learned a lot from it, came out with a great appreciation for the material. I would recommend anyone with even a slight interest in ethics take this.

That being said I will say it's pretty funny to take an ethics course taught by an anti vaxxer. Not sure if she's trying to hide that fact but that's the truth :)

we got lucky... the strike def saved everyones grades bc prof was extremely understanding and made our final, midterm paper automatic As if turned in on time, and even got rid of an extra paper in the syllabus. however, the TA's of this class are literally brutal graders, even if they may seem nice at first. I am a 4.0 student and yes, i got an b+ which is fine, but the rigor was intense up until the ta strike. workload for the course (originally) was 2 reaction papers (completion grade, 10%), one paper assigned week 2-4 (15%- i hated this bc the class had just started, we were behind schedule, so stressful and poorly planned, students graded as if they were philo majors when this is an intro class and a GE for many sttudents) paper about kant (20% kinda the midterm in essence), midterm and final mcq (10 each) and final paper (35)

prof gave automatic 2 day extensions on everything to excuses needed. prof didnt know how to lecture, she just read off her notes which she refused to post up until we went online for the strike. her notes are verbatim her lecture and she has no slides. class notes where me legit typing her words. she needs a better lecture style. she would loose her spot and get confused and couldnt continue talking without her notes, like it felt like someone was reading an essay outloud. she bruincasted it thank god bc its so hard to keep up with how fast she reads and theres no slides or notes availible to help us. she tells us not to rephrase our notes because we might alter the meaning and confuse ourselves while we study. she knows our notes is literally transcribing her lectures. she was a sweetheart she just doesnt know how to lecture.. shes so accommodating and has a charming personality. she is a kantian (follows the philosopher kant) and out of everything we learned in that class, i think kant was the only person i learned about bc she actually could defend her positions on him and could elaborate more than just her notes.

i took this to explore the possibility of being a philo minor, and it wasnt for me. overall, i wouldnt recommend this class bc based on how the TA's graded, I easily would have gotten a B. I admit we got lucky af because she gave us the final paper, the reaction paper, and the kant paper: all 100 percent completion BUT WOULD ONLY GIVE UP TO 93-96 for A???? Why no A+, she only wants to hurt her students. So we got handed literally 65% of our grade. my first paper on bentham got me a b-, and i would have assumed my kant one to get a B+ or A-?? idk if my writing ever improved bc we had no TA's so who is to say. In our circumstances, i would say yes take her. But knowing that 65% will not be partially handed to future students since the strike is over AVOID THIS CLASS and dismiss the 2022 fall grade distribution because it is heavily, heavily going to be curved. shes sweet, doesnt know how to lecture, but VERY accommodating. as a person shes awesome, loves philo, great to talk to, but lecturing isnt her thing and she doesnt post her notes which makes it really hard. the ta's are really harsh with how they grade (overall consensus from friends in same class w dif TA's and also other students on bruinwalk from previous quarters, so i guess its a consistent thing somehow)

anti vaxxer tho

honestly this class was straightforward and not that difficult. The essay grading seems to be a major complaint within these reviews, and I just have to point out that those are handles by the TA's, not Prof. Dewitt, so it doesn't exactly reflect her ability as a professor. Prof. Dewitt did exactly what she needed to do. She lectured, emphasized points of importance, was funny, witty, and clear. She did accept a lot of questions, which made us fall a bit behind, but.... on the groupme, those students were asked to refrain from asking those questions during lectures multiple times, and it didn't seem to have much effect.. I hate to say it but the questions were on us, and not her. She told us multiple times to come to office hours instead of asking during lecture. We didn't listen. That's not really her fault. Last note: a lot of my fellow classmates came in with very strong feelings about certain philosophies and philosophers. I just don't recommend it. Come in with an open mind, and learn from an expert! I feel many students became upset with the course because the prof did not represent certain parts of philosophy the way they wanted, and then they suffered in their papers and exams. Just listen to what she SAYS and you'll get an A. Don't take exams and write papers based on previous knowledge; she usually leaves the answers to exams and exactly what she might wanna see in an essay in her notes. Anyways, great prof, highly recommend Jungsuk as a TA if you can get him (he gave me an A on two trash essays and I love him for it).

I took this class as an easy A, it was most definitely not. The papers were not too bad but you barely receive clarity on any possible improvements that you can make, so there's not much to do. The examlets are also extremely hard and though there is supposed to be a curve, there wasn't one so that's doubly frustrating. Loved the teacher, but the way it's graded was just not it.

Professor DeWitt knows what she's talking about. But this course itself would only be really interesting to those who do really love philosophy. I thought I liked philosophy, after this class I realized not really, I found it a bit technical, like mathematics, and so I may stop taking philosophy in the future. But that aside, if you listen carefully to lecture and follow the professor you will know the philosophical theories well enough. The essays composed the bulk of your grade, I find it difficult to write them because I lack experience writing philosophy essays and struggled a bit. But for my Kant paper, after I talked with the professor about my ideas, she gave me really helpful advice and I got an A on the paper. At the end she curved everyone's scores up a little, my other two papers were A- and B+ and still I got an A in the end. So don't worry too much. Also, I actually didn't read any of the readings assigned because I couldn't really make sense of them, I only listened to her lectures (I didn't attend discussion either) and that's pretty sufficient for me to understand the material. Btw besides the three essays you need to turn in and three small exams (I find the exams super easy), there is no weekly homework or anything else.