This class wasn't too bad overall. Some of the assigned readings were super long and kinda boring, but the TA's did a good job clarifying the main arguments, and were very helpful in office hours. The most annoying thing for me was the fact that we had pop quizzes (like 8-9 of them), because that made it pretty much impossible for you to skip class. The lectures are also not that helpful, but the quiz questions are based on what he says during them so you really have to go. Lomasky assigns 4 papers, and you get to write 3 and drop 1 of them, which was really nice. The final was easy if you paid attention during class and understood the main points of the readings. Overall, it's easy to get a B+/A- if you put in some effort, but definitely not the most fun class you could take.

Lomasky, some people hate him and some people love him. I personally liked him. In this class you definitely need to do all of the work and go to every class because there are pop quizzes often.

Overall, I enjoyed this course. Most people don't like the professor, but I thought that he was all right. You'll only enjoy this course if you've got any interest or curiosity about the concept of ethics. Sometimes the professor's lectures would be boring or drag on, but the ideas that he discusses are very interesting. Make sure you write down almost everything he says as there are pop quizzes that quiz on some tiny details from the books or from some random topic discussed in class. Fair warning, some of the philosophy books can be dense so make sure that you allot yourself enough time to read them. It's all right if you don't understand everything in the books--use Wikipedia or Sparknotes or even some good YouTube recap videos to help out. Also the TAs are very helpful, they are willing to answer your questions and help you out. The pop quizzes are either really easy or really hard; make sure that before each class you review previous lecture notes and that you understand everything going on in the book that you are currently reading. Overall, if you put effort into this class and come in interested about ethics, then you will most certainly do well. Also this class has a decent curve.

Lomasky is a god, for sure has the best beard game on Grounds. Also talks like he's underwater. As far as the course goes, your grade comes down to two papers, reading quizzes, and the final exam. The papers were graded leniently, but Lomasky doesn't give you a whole lot of time to write them. He releases around 4 prompts, and you can do up to 3 with the lowest one getting dropped (plenty of room to budget your time which I appreciated). The quizzes will be hard if you skip lecture/don't do the reading but if you do both those things they're not that bad. The reading can be difficult to understand at first glance but he doesn't assign a lot so you have time to go back and really understand what its saying. The final was easy as long as you understood the general theories of each philosopher. I would recommend this class to anyone trying to major/minor in philosophy, but if philosophy isn't your thing don't go in expecting an easy A - you'll have to work for it.

Lomasky's class isn't incredibly difficult, but his teaching style and grading can be tricky and annoying. He is very vague during lectures and tends to go off on tangents, but then also has questions on the quizzes that are very specific and something he mentioned in passing during lecture. If you're taking this class to fill a requirement or just want a gpa booster, I definitely don't recommend it. If you're planning to major/minor or have taken a phil course before, you'll probably enjoy it.

Professor Lomasky speaks really slowly, which could potentially make it easier to take notes, but I found him to be quite dry at times. His voice is also really deep, so I sat in the front each class so I'd be able to understand what in the world he was saying. He tends to digress during lecture in an attempt to pop in some jokes that, more often than not, fall flat. He also has a strict "no technology" policy and claims that he will embarrass you if your phone ends up going off. Anyways, in terms of the content of the course, I think it will come across as more difficult if you did not already have an interest in philosophy before taking the class. You read through the works of prominent minds like Kant, Smith, Plato, etc., but I honestly didn't believe Lomasky did a stellar job of fleshing out their different theories. The TA-led discussions were helpful in clarifying points that Lomasky couldn't really explain all that convincingly. You will spontaneously have pop quizzes throughout the semester which, at times, do not test you on philosophically-relevant content. Some questions just try to get you to recall unimportant details to make sure that you actually did the reading and I found that pretty pointless. He also will spontaneously provide paper prompts which you will have the option or whether you want to write it or not, though you must end up writing two in total. For the final exam which is cumulative, it's helpful to get a group of people to work on a study guide together as there's a lot of theories/concepts that are easy to mix-up and it's important to know who thinks what and how to differentiate between them. Ultimately, as long as you keep up with the reading (either the actual text or itself or through sparknotes) and take good notes during lecture/discussion, the course is fine!

I took this class to see if philosophy was possible major track for me. I have completed this course with mixed feelings. The weekly quizzes in the syllabus are described as super easy, so I went into the class thinking that syllabus wasn't spouting false advertising. From my experience, the quizzes were on the tricky side. I'm an avid reader, but I found that philosophical texts were incredibly difficult to unpack. As a result, the "easy" reading quizzes ended up being not easy, because readings have a paragraph worth of meaning in every sentence and you won't remember what analogy he used for some principle you didn't realize was relevant. That being said, I think that the class is highly curved because I thought didn't have a chance to get a high grade with the quiz average I accumulated over the semester, yet ended up with a favorable grade. Also, the exam is curved as well. So maybe I did really well on the exam and saved myself, or everything was curved. Interesting material, but the layout of the class wasn't for me.

Professor Lomasky is a good lecturer and his jokes are pretty funny! But I am going to warn you that this is not an easy class....he gives out pop quizzes during lectures about readings and some of the questions on there can be very nitpicky. He also assigns papers randomly and you are expected to write them in like four days. Your grade composes of the quizzes (about 10), 2 papers, final exam and participation in discussion. The final was pretty tough and it's like 40% of your grade and overall, I would avoid this class if you're not really interested in philosophy and ethics because it will just ruin your gpa.

Dude talks like he is underwater and I love it. He has a sick beard. He has some good humor. He is all in all a true savage. This class however is hard and what are supposed to be "easy" reading check quizzes are actually very difficult. Do not take this class expecting an easy A because it is not. B+/A- is very obtainable however, but it is somewhat difficult. Do not buy the readings you can access them all online for free.

Do not be fooled by this class's 1000 level. Quizzes are rarely straight forward even if you read the sparknotes. The papers are randomly assigned, once over spring break. However, Professor Lomasky may have the great hair-beard combo in the game (probably the only reason to take the class).