Run by School of History, Law and Social Sciences

20.000 Credits or 10.000 ECTS Credits

Semester 1

Organiser: Prof Lucy Huskinson

This module explores how we can make sense of the nature and dynamics of a meaningful and flourishing life in the context of the thought and personalities of two iconic thinkers of philosophical, religious, and psychological thought: Friedrich Nietzsche and C.G. Jung. Both characterise the self as essentially divided, with opposite impulses, and interpret life as an attempt to negotiate these divisions and bring the opposites into creative interplay. The prize for those who successfully harness the tensions of the opposites is realization of their respective and infamous conceptions of the ideal human being: the Nietzschean Übermensch or ’superman’, and the Jungian ‘Self’. Failure leads to a stagnant life. Students will examine the striking similarities and important differences between their projects for a flourishing life, before putting them to the test by evaluating the personalities of Nietzsche and Jung according to their own and each other’s projects: to ascertain whether they themselves were able to harness the opposites creatively, and embody their ideals. Nietzsche went mad, and Jung’s most extensive case study attempts to analyse the reasons why. He concludes that Nietzsche identified with the Übermensch, and thereby failed to reconcile the opposites appropriately and in such a way as to realise the ‘Self’. Students will be encouraged to evaluate Jung’s conclusions in light of Jung’s own personal investment in Nietzsche. While Jung claimed Nietzsche’s ideas were a strong influence his own, he also admits to fearing that he too would become ‘mad’ like Nietzsche. Questions then arise as to whether Nietzsche’s project can be absolved from Jung’s critique, and indeed over the extent to which either project is viable and has useful for us to consider in the living of our own lives.

This module explores how we can make sense of the nature and dynamics of a meaningful and flourishing life in the context of the thought and personalities of two iconic thinkers of philosophical, religious, and psychological thought: Friedrich Nietzsche and C.G. Jung. Both characterise the self as essentially divided, with opposite impulses, and interpret life as an attempt to negotiate these divisions and bring the opposites into creative interplay. The prize for those who successfully harness the tensions of the opposites is realization of their respective and infamous conceptions of the ideal human being: the Nietzschean Übermensch or ’superman’, and the Jungian ‘Self’. Failure leads to madness. Students will examine the striking similarities and important differences between their projects for a flourishing life, before putting them to the test by evaluating the personalities of Nietzsche and Jung according to their own and each other’s projects: to ascertain whether they themselves were able to harness the opposites creatively, and embody their ideals. Nietzsche went mad, and Jung’s most extensive case study attempts to analyse the reasons why. He concludes that Nietzsche identified with the Übermensch, and thereby failed to reconcile the opposites appropriately and in such a way as to realise the ‘Self’. Students will be encouraged to evaluate Jung’s conclusions in light of Jung’s own personal investment in Nietzsche. While Jung claimed Nietzsche’s ideas were a strong influence his own, he also admits to fearing that he too would become ‘mad’ like Nietzsche. Questions then arise as to whether Nietzsche’s project can be absolved from Jung’s critique, and indeed over the extent to which either project is viable and has useful for us to consider in the living of our own lives.

threshold

D- - D +. Submitted work is adequate and shows an acceptable level of competence as follows:  Generally accurate but with omissions and errors.  Assertions are made without clear supporting evidence or reasoning.  Has structure but is lacking in clarity and therefore relies on the reader to make links and assumptions.  Draws on a relatively narrow range of material.

good

Good C- - C +. Submitted work is competent throughout and occasionally distinguished by superior style, approach and choice of supporting materials. It demonstrates:  Good structure and logically developed arguments.  At least in parts draws on material that has been sourced and assessed as a result of independent study, or in a way unique to the student.  Assertions are, in the main, backed by evidence and sound reasoning.  Accuracy and presentation in an appropriate academic style. Very Good B- - B+. Submitted work is competent throughout and distinguished by superior style, approach and choice of supporting materials. It demonstrates:  Very good structure and logically developed arguments.  Draws on material that has been sourced and assessed as a result of independent study, or in a way unique to the student.  Assertions are backed by evidence and sound reasoning.  Accuracy and presentation in an appropriate academic style.

excellent

A - - A*. Submitted work is of an outstanding quality and excellent in one or more of the following ways:  Has originality of exposition with the student’s own thinking being readily apparent.  Provides clear evidence of extensive and relevant independent study.  Arguments are laid down with clarity and provide the reader with successive stages of consideration to reach conclusions.

1. have developed the capacity to apply and evaluate philosophical ideas of selfhood to philosophical case studies.

2. have developed oral and written skills in philosophic exegesis and argumentation.

3. have considered a number of central philosophical issues, including questions concerning symbolism, the limits of reason, ethical agency, and creativity.

4. have a grasp of key issues and philosophical understandings about the nature and dynamics of opposites.

5. have acquired a better understanding of how an important philosophical concept can develop in meaning in the course of history and across cultures.

		Hours
Seminar		4
Private study		174
Lecture		22

• Literacy - Proficiency in reading and writing through a variety of media
• Computer Literacy - Proficiency in using a varied range of computer software
• Self-Management - Able to work unsupervised in an efficient, punctual and structured manner. To examine the outcomes of tasks and events, and judge levels of quality and importance
• Exploring - Able to investigate, research and consider alternatives
• Information retrieval - Able to access different and multiple sources of information
• Inter-personal - Able to question, actively listen, examine given answers and interact sensitevely with others
• Critical analysis & Problem Solving - Able to deconstruct and analyse problems or complex situations. To find solutions to problems through analyses and exploration of all possibilities using appropriate methods, rescources and creativity.
• Presentation - Able to clearly present information and explanations to an audience. Through the written or oral mode of communication accurately and concisely.
• Teamwork - Able to constructively cooperate with others on a common task, and/or be part of a day-to-day working team
• Mentoring - Able to support, help, guide, inspire and/or coach others
• Management - Able to utilise, coordinate and control resources (human, physical and/or financial)
• Argument - Able to put forward, debate and justify an opinion or a course of action, with an individual or in a wider group setting
• Self-awareness & Reflectivity - Having an awareness of your own strengths, weaknesses, aims and objectives. Able to regularly review, evaluate and reflect upon the performance of yourself and others
• Leadership - Able to lead and manage, develop action plans and objectives, offer guidance and direction to others, and cope with the related pressures such authority can result in

• Articulacy in identifying underlying issues in a wide variety of debates.
• Precision of thought and expression in the analysis and formulation of complex and controversial problems.
• Sensitivity in interpretation of religious and philosophical texts drawn from a variety of ages and/or traditions.
• Clarity and rigour in the critical assessment of arguments presented in such texts.
• The ability to use and criticise specialised religious and philosophical terminology.
• The ability to abstract and analyse arguments, and to identify flaws in them, such as false premises and invalid reasoning.
• The ability to construct rationally persuasive arguments for or against specific religious and philosophical claims.
• The ability to move between generalisation and appropriately detailed discussion, inventing or discovering examples to support or challenge a position, and distinguishing relevant and irrelevant considerations.
• The ability to consider unfamiliar ideas and ways of thinking, and to examine critically presuppositions and methods within the disciplines of philosophy and religion.
• making effective and appropriate use of relevant information technology
• collaborating effectively in a team via experience of working in a group
• appreciating and being sensitive to different cultures and dealing with unfamiliar situations
• critical evaluation of one's own and others' opinions

Optional in courses:

• V1PM: BA Hanes gyda Newyddiaduraeth year 2 (BA/HN)
• LVJ1: BA Cymdeithaseg/Hanes year 2 (BA/HSW)
• L401: Polisi Cymdeithasol year 2 (BA/PC)
• LM4X: BA Polisi Cymdeithasol & Criminology and Criminal Justice year 2 (BA/PCCCJ)
• LL34: BA Sociology and Social Policy year 2 (BA/SOCSP)
• LQH5: BA Cymdeithaseg a Chymraeg year 2 (BA/SWW)
• LVH1: BA Cymdeithaseg/Hanes Cymru year 2 (BA/SWWH)