Skip to main content

Matthew Lampert

Title: Lecturer

Department: Philosophy and Religion

College: College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences

Curriculum Vitae

Curriculum Vitae Link

Education

  • PhD, The New School, 2014
    Major: Philosophy
  • MA, Boston College, 2004
    Major: Philosophy

Current Scheduled Teaching

No current or future courses scheduled.

Texas Education Code 51.974 (HB 2504) requires each institution of higher education to make available to the public, a syllabus for undergraduate lecture courses offered for credit by the institution.

Previous Scheduled Teaching

PHIL 6500.001Cultural CriticismSpring 2026
PHIL 2050.001Logic and Critical ThinkingSpring 2026 Syllabus
PHIL 2050.101Logic and Critical ThinkingSpring 2026
PHIL 4970.001Philosophy CapstoneSpring 2026 Syllabus
PHIL 4900.001Special ProblemsSpring 2026 Syllabus
PHIL 3310.001Ancient Greek PhilosophyFall 2025 Syllabus SPOT
PHIL 3400.001Ethical TheoryFall 2025 Syllabus SPOT
PHIL 3225.001Philosophy and FilmFall 2025 Syllabus SPOT
PHIL 3100.001AestheticsSpring 2025 Syllabus SPOT
PHIL 2050.001Logic and Critical ThinkingSpring 2025 Syllabus SPOT
PHIL 2050.101Logic and Critical ThinkingSpring 2025 Syllabus SPOT
PHIL 4970.001Philosophy CapstoneSpring 2025 Syllabus SPOT
PHIL 3400.001Ethical TheoryFall 2024 Syllabus SPOT
PHIL 2050.001Logic and Critical ThinkingFall 2024 Syllabus SPOT
PHIL 2050.002Logic and Critical ThinkingFall 2024 Syllabus SPOT
PHIL 2050.101Logic and Critical ThinkingFall 2024 Syllabus SPOT
PHIL 2050.202Logic and Critical ThinkingFall 2024 Syllabus SPOT
Texas Education Code 51.974 (HB 2504) requires each institution of higher education to make available to the public, a syllabus for undergraduate lecture courses offered for credit by the institution.

Published Intellectual Contributions

    Book Chapter

  • Lampert, M. (2024). Corporate moral personhood. Elgar Encyclopedia of Corporate Governance. 183-184. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839107061.ch63
  • Lampert, M. (2016). North American Critical Pedagogy. Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory. 1-6. Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-532-7_232-1

    • Journal Article

  • Lampert, M. Towards a Rancièrean Critical Theory. Other. 27 (2) 95-126. University Library System, University of Pittsburgh. http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/jffp.2019.891
  • Lampert, M. (2024). Ambivalence and Impulsiveness. Other. 40 (2) 9-12. Philosophy Documentation Center. https://doi.org/10.5840/swphilreview202440234
  • Lampert, M. (2024). Persons, Agents and Wantons. Other. 11 (1) 7-27. Walter de Gruyter GmbH. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mopp-2022-0037
  • Lampert, M. (2022). Methodological egalitarianism and the task of a critical theory. Other. 29 (1) 48-64. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.12588
  • Lampert, M. (2021). Ideology Without Dupes. Other. http://www.consecutio.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/lampert
  • Lampert, M. (2020). Jacques Rancière and the Politics of Theory. Other. 106 (1) 1-26. Project MUSE. https://doi.org/10.1353/cul.2020.0000
  • Lampert, M. (2019). The misinterpellated subject. Other. 18 (S3) 171-174. Springer Science and Business Media LLC. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41296-018-0213-8
  • Lampert, M. (2017). Beyond the politics of reception: Jacques Rancière and the politics of art. Continental Philosophy Review. 50 (2) 181-200. Springer Science and Business Media LLC. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11007-016-9369-1
  • Lampert, M. (2017). How to Do Things with Rancière. Comparative and Continental Philosophy. 9 (1) 96-106. Informa UK Limited. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17570638.2017.1318552
  • Lampert, M. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and the supposed moral agency of corporations. Other. http://www.ephemerajournal.org/contribution/supposed-moral-agency-corporations
  • Lampert, M. (2015). Resisting Ideology: On Butler’s Critique of Althusser. Diacritics. 43 (2) 124-147. Project MUSE. https://doi.org/10.1353/dia.2015.0008
,
Overall
Summative Rating		 Challenge and
Engagement Index		 Response Rate

out of 5
out of 7		 %
of
students responded
  • Overall Summative Rating (median):
    This rating represents the combined responses of students to the four global summative items and is presented to provide an overall index of the class’s quality. Overall summative statements include the following (response options include a Likert scale ranging from 5 = Excellent, 3 = Good, and 1= Very poor):
    • The course as a whole was
    • The course content was
    • The instructor’s contribution to the course was
    • The instructor’s effectiveness in teaching the subject matter was
  • Challenge and Engagement Index:
    This rating combines student responses to several SPOT items relating to how academically challenging students found the course to be and how engaged they were. Challenge and Engagement Index items include the following (response options include a Likert scale ranging from 7 = Much higher, 4 = Average, and 1 = Much lower):
    • Do you expect your grade in this course to be
    • The intellectual challenge presented was
    • The amount of effort you put into this course was
    • The amount of effort to succeed in this course was
    • Your involvement in course (doing assignments, attending classes, etc.) was
CLOSE