Notices

Workshops in Political Theory, Seventh Annual Conference
Manchester Metropolitan University, 1-3 September 2010

TOLERATION AND RESPECT: CONCEPTS, JUSTIFICATIONS AND APPLICATIONS

Conveners:
Emanuela Ceva (Institute for Advanced Study, University of Pavia)
Sune Laegaard (Roskilde University)
Federico Zuolo (Institute for Advanced Study, University of Pavia)

Discussions of the ideas of toleration and respect have animated vivid and ongoing debates in political and moral philosophy during the last decades. The formulations given to the idea of toleration have come to range from the negative appeal to non-interference to the positive recognition of difference. In a similar vein, the idea of respect has been object of some serious reformulation building on the works of neo-Kantians up to the most recent applications to issues of cultural diversity and religious liberty. However, the sophistication of the dicussions revolving around each of the two ideas has not been accompanied by a clarification of their reciprocal conceptual and normative relations, thus leading, in fact, to a blurring of the lines between them.

On this backdrop, the workshop will offer an occasion to engage in debates leading to a more systematic exploration of the intricate relations, conceptual and practical, between the two ideas. In particular, papers could address one (or more) of the following issues: Read the rest of this entry »

Two theory-heavy political science conferences released their schedules today: the Canadian Political Science Association , June 1-3, Montreal (with the theory section organized by Jennifer Rubenstein and myself, and including a dedicated workhop on “Non-ideal and institutional theory”) and the New England Political Science Association (theory panels organized by Sharon Krause).For those who just want to see the theory listings for CPSA instead of browsing through the unwieldy 86-page pdf, I’ve separated them out here.

The main point of this chapter is to defend a conception of objectivity in our normative thinking about justice.  Against critics of the ‘Enlightenment tradition,’ Sen defends the idea that we should understand reason as the “ultimate arbitrator of ethical beliefs.”  This is not because “reasoned scrutiny” can provide us with “any sure-fire way of getting things exactly right,” but rather because ethical thinking requires us to be “as objective as we reasonably can,” and reason is our only reliable way of doing this (p. 39).  This role for reason is compatible, Sen points out, with recognizing the dangers of ‘overselling reason,’ or in being overconfident in the conclusions of our own reasoning.  Sen also makes the point that our emotions pose no threat to, and should not be understood as hostile towards, our capacity for reason, despite the fact that historically many Enlightenment thinkers may have ignored or downplayed the cognitive role of the emotions (here Sen mentions, unsurprisingly, Smith and Hume as important exceptions).  Nonetheless, “the need for reasoned scrutiny of psychological attitudes does not disappear even after the power of emotions is recognized” (p. 50).  These general claims all strike me as correct and not especially controversial.

Sen also sketches some of the main elements of his account of ‘ethical objectivity’ in this chapter.  One element is Adam Smith’s device of the ‘impartial spectator.’  Another is Rawlsian public reason.  Public reason provides a ‘public framework of thought’ by means of which arguments can be made in a transparent and mutually justifiable way.  Despite the differences amongst the different accounts of ethical objectivity mentioned in this chapter, Sen notes that “there is an essential similarity in their respective approaches to objectivity to the extent that objectivity is linked…by each of them to the ability to survive challenges from informed scrutiny coming from diverse quarters.”  Despite appropriating Rawlsian public reason to his account of ethical objectivity, though, Sen asserts that “the principles that survive such scrutiny need not be a unique set,” (p.45) and that this marks a significant difference between his position and Rawls’s.  (I don’t think that this is a fair interpretation of Rawls’s position in his later writings, but will postpone this discussion until next week.)

One potentially controversial claim is Sen’s assertion that Rawls’s and Habermas’s respective approaches to public justification ultimately do not differ much.  “If people are capable of being reasonable in taking note of other people’s points of view and in welcoming information,” Sen writes, “then the gap between the two approaches would tend to be not necessarily momentous” (p. 43).  I think that Sen is correct here (at least I think I do – I found his discussion in this section at times to be somewhat opaque), but then I haven’t read Habermas in years.  I’d be curious to know what anyone better informed of Habermas’s criticisms of Rawls thinks.

Sen makes another comment that some readers of a Kantian persuasion might find debateable.  He states: “Since reasoned support can hardly be in itself a value-giving quality, we have to ask: why, precisely, is reasoned support so critical?” (Pp. 39-40.)  I suspect that some Kantians (especially those influenced by Korsgaard’s interpretation of Kant’s theory of value) would disagree.  (Although the comment by Sen is so brief, perhaps I am reading too much into it?)

I found Sen’s comment on Rawls’s idea of ‘reasonable persons’ on the bottom of page 43 somewhat puzzling.  After noting his overall sympathy with the idea of Rawlsian public reason, he writes: “I will not make a big distinction between those whom Rawls categorizes as ‘reasonable persons’ and other human beings… I have tried to argue elsewhere that, by and large, all of us are capable of being reasonable” (p. 43).  He then goes on to remark that his own view is instead similar to Rawls’s idea of ‘free and equal citizens,’ according to which all persons have ‘two moral powers’ (a capacity for a sense of justice, and a capacity to form, revise, and pursue a conception of the good).

Sen does not seem to appreciate that Rawls’s idea of ‘reasonable persons’ is a very specific one in political liberalism, and one related directly to the idea of citizens as ‘free and equal.’  The first feature of reasonable persons is that they acknowledge the ‘fact of reasonable pluralism’ (i.e., they manifest a “willingness to recognize the burdens of judgement and to accept their consequences for the use of public reason in directing the legitimate exercise of political power” [PL, p. 54]).  The second feature of reasonable persons is that they hold the ‘criterion of reciprocity’ to be a prescriptive norm for the public political relations of citizens (“reasonable persons are ready to propose, or to acknowledge when proposed by others, the principles needed to specify what can be seen by all as fair terms of cooperation” [JaF, pp. 6-7]).  Finally, reasonable persons honour these principles, even at some cost to their own interests.  These features of reasonable persons correspond to citizens’ capacity for a sense of justice, just as the rationality of persons corresponds to citizens’ capacity for a conception of the good.  So the idea of ‘free and equal citizens’ with ‘two moral powers’ is not wholly distinct from the idea of persons understood as ‘rational and reasonable’ in Rawlsian political liberalism.  Moreover, I see nothing in Rawls’s conception of ‘reasonable persons’ that rules out the possibility that ‘all of us’ are capable of being ‘reasonable’ in the relevant sense.

This is obviously a relatively minor criticism.  However, I think that Sen’s comments here are indicative of a problem that becomes more marked in the next chapter, namely, an apparent failure on the part of Sen to address adequately key features of Rawlsian political liberalism.  This problem is well illustrated, I think, by the very label ‘transcendental institutionalism.’  I’ll have more to say about this next week.

Copenhagen: 19-20 August 2010 | CFP: 1 April 2010

The second University of Copenhagen conference in epistemology will be held from 19-20 August 2010. The following is the description:

We tend to think of liberal democracy as providing the most ethically defensible way to set up a modern society. A separate yet highly relevant issue is whether liberal democracies also are preferable from an epistemological perspective, i.e., from the point of view of promoting true over false belief, knowledge over ignorance, and so on. The purpose of this conference — and of the research project that it is part of — is to investigate the norms, practices, and institutions that  determine how belief and knowledge is acquired and transmitted in liberal democracies. Questions to be addressed include but are not limited to the following: Read the rest of this entry »

[Moving to the top since the deadline is tomorrow. SCM]

THE APT CONFERENCE 2010 – PROPOSAL GUIDELINES

Reed College, Portland, Oregon, October 21-23, 2010; Proposals Due February 20, 2010

The Association for Political Theory welcomes paper proposals, panel proposals, and proposals for roundtable discussions from all approaches and on all topics in political theory, political philosophy, and the history of political thought. Faculty, advanced PhD candidates, and independent scholars are eligible to apply. We also encourage faculty to volunteer to serve as chairs and/or discussants.

Read the rest of this entry »

Global Justice. Concepts, Theories and Constraints: May 18-19, 2010 | CFP: 20 April 2010

Having gained an unprecedented urgency, the topic of global justice has received increasingly public and academic attention, and has lately become a central issue in moral and political philosophy. Our conference seeks to be a forum for discussing the most important theories of global justice, their central concepts and constraints.

Professor Thomas Pogge (Yale University) will deliver the conference keynote address.

The conference will be held at the Faculty of Philosophy, University of Bucharest. The conference is organized by the The Center for the Study of Rationality and Beliefs as part of the research project Reason and Beliefs. Rationality, Public Reason and Education within a Multicultural Society financed by CNCSIS/UEFISCSU.

Submission of papers
We welcome papers concerning any topic related to global justice. Contributions are expected from researchers from different academic fields who are interested in the outlined topic or in closely related ones. Students are also invited to submit papers for the conference, as we intend to organize a student panel. Abstracts should be sent by e-mail as attachment at globaljustice@ub-filosofie.ro until the 20 April 2010. The deadline for submitting the full version of your paper is 10 May 2010. Along with the abstract, please send us your contact details: current affiliation, address and telephone number. The organizers cannot support any travel or accommodation costs.

Read the rest of this entry »

We are pleased to announce the third issue of Dissensus, focused on “Droit et philosophie du langage ordinaire”, directed by D. Pieret, with contributions of D. Pieret, B. Leclercq, B. Ambroise, D. Pasteger, S. Goltzberg, N. Thirion, T. Berns & G. Jeanmart, A. Janvier & J. Pieron, A. Herla and T. Bolmain.

Dissensus is the University of Liege (Belgium) peer-reviewed electronic journal in political philosophy. Papers are welcome, in English or French and are to be sent to secretariat.dissensus [at] ulg.ac.be

Dissensus is available on http://popups.ulg.ac.be/dissensus/ and http://www.philopol.ulg.ac.be/dissensus.html.

Dear Public Reason Contributors and Readers,

Below is the schedule for our international online reading group on Amartya Sen’s recent book, The Idea of Justice.  Of course, modifications to the schedule may have to be made as we go along, but hopefully we will be able to maintain, for the most part, a weekly schedule.

I envision this group as operating in a similar fashion to the previous reading groups conducted on this blog (viz., the ones on Estlund and Brettschneider).  Participants may want to look at those discussions in order to get a sense of what is involved.  (Links to both can be found on the left hand side of this webpage.)

Before we get rolling, there are three modest suggestions that I would like to make.

First of all, it is expected that all participants will have done the relevant reading for the week in question.  Consequently, I don’t think that detailed or comprehensive summaries for each chapter will be necessary.  Rather, I would recommend summarizing only the material that you think is especially interesting, controversial, or relevant to the matters that you want to comment upon.

Second, I would recommend that most posts try to stay under 1000 words (ideally ‘well under’).  “Brevity is the soul of wit,” as the Bard says.  We are all busy people, and I worry that posting ‘mini-articles’ may serve as a disincentive for people to read the commentaries in their entirety and to participate in the discussion.

Third, although this probably is quite obvious to us all, I would recommend, if possible, trying to identify 1-3 specific questions, issues, or criticisms for further discussion in each commentary.

Obviously these are meant as suggestions only!  Feel free to write a longer post, or raise 4+ issues (or none at all), if you think that the chapter on which you are commenting warrants it.

We have an extremely impressive group of commentators lined up for this discussion.  Thanks to all of you in advance for your time and effort!  I’m very much looking forward to our discussion.

Best wishes,
Blain

Schedule

Introduction (Feb 22) Colin Farrelly (Queens U)

Part I – The Demands of Justice

1. Reason and Objectivity (March 1) Blain Neufeld (UW-M)
2. Rawls and Beyond (March 8.) Blain Neufeld (UW-M)
3. Institutions and Persons (March 15) Robert Jubb (UCL/Oxford)
4. Voice and Social Choice (March 22) Chris Lowry (CU HK)
5. Impartiality and Objectivity (March 29) Derek Bowman (Brown)
6. Closed and Open Impartiality (April 5) Jonathan Quong (Manchester)

Part II – Forms of Reasoning

7. Position, Relevance and Illusion (April 12) Steve Vanderheiden (Colorado)
8. Rationality and Other People (April 19) Alon Harel (Hebrew U)
9. Plurality of Impartial Reasons (April 26) Charles Olney (UCSC)
10. Realizations, Consequences and Agency (May 3) Andrew Lister (Queens U)

Part III – The Materials of Justice

11. Lives, Freedoms and Capabilities (May 10) Daniel Weinstock (Montreal)
12. Capabilities and Resources (May 17) David Wiens (Michigan)
13. Happiness, Well-being and Capabilities (May 24) Colleen Murphy (Texas A&M)
14. Equality and Liberty (May 31) Jurgen De Wispelaere (CREUM)

Part IV – Public Reasoning and Democracy

15. Democracy as Public Reason (June 7) Peter Stone (Stanford)
16. The Practice of Democracy (June 14) Cynthia Stark (Utah)
17. Human Rights and Global Imperatives (July 21) Alex Sager (Calgary)
18. Justice and the World (July 28) Alex Sager (Calgary)

The Department of Philosophy at Virginia Tech invites applications for a one-year position, to begin August 10, 2010. Rank: Visiting Assistant Professor; AOS: Ethics; AOC: Open. Five courses per year, including one graduate seminar.

Evidence of teaching ability and research potential required. Salary: competitive. Ph.D. completed by August, 2010. In addition to offering a first class MA in Philosophy, the department is also a major component of two interdisciplinary PhD programs: Science and Technology Studies; and The Alliance for Social, Political, Ethical and Cultural Thought. Virginia Tech is an EO/AA employer and particularly encourages applications from women, veterans, persons with disabilities, and minorities.

Interested candidates are REQUIRED to complete a brief on-line application at www.jobs.vt.edu posting #0100027 and send dossier (cover letter with statement of interest, CV, three letters of recommendation, and evidence of teaching excellence) to Chair, Philosophy Search Committee, Department of Philosophy (0126), Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061. We will begin reviewing applications as soon as they are received, until the position is filled. Those received by 12 March 2010 can expect full consideration.

Rights, Equality, and Justice:A Conference Inspired by the Moral and Legal Theory of David Lyons

Boston University is proud to honor Professor David Lyons with a conference featuring many outstanding scholars in law and philosophy giving papers and commentaries on important topics about which he has written. Professor Lyons will give a response. Boston University Law Review will publish the papers and proceedings. Information about the conference, along with papers (as we receive them), will be posted on the BU School of Law Web site: http://www.bu.edu/law/events/upcoming/. The conference, which is co-sponsored by the BU School of Law and Department of Philosophy, will be held at BU School of Law, 765 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA.

All are welcome to attend. There is no registration fee, but if you plan to attend, please RSVP to Andrea Larsen, alarsen@bu.edu. If you have academic questions about the program, please contact Professor James E. Fleming, jfleming [at] bu.edu.

Read the rest of this entry »

I just wanted to announce the publication of my book with David Schmidtz, A Brief History of Liberty.

It’s something of an unusual book for philosophers, because it’s as much a genuine history (and economics, psychology, law, and sociology) book as it is a philosophy book. I’d summarize our motivation for the project as follows: Dave and I note that historically, philosophers and regular people have used the word “liberty” to refer to a wide range of related things. When philosophers debate what the word “liberty” refers to, or which kind of liberty is most important, they often have a background assumption that liberty, whatever that is, is to be promoted by government in a particular way. But that’s not a good assumption. What role government, or any institution, ought to play in promoting a particular kind of liberty is determined not by conceptual analysis, but by investigating (empirically) what government and other institutions are likely to accomplish. What value any kind of liberty has is also for the most part contingent—we need to see what having certain kinds of liberties does to people, and what happens to people when those liberties are absent. Again, this goes beyond philosophy and requires empirical work. Also, what relationship different kinds of liberty with one another requires empirical work. For instance, while people might debate whether negative or positive liberty is more important, we instead note that empirically, it looks like protecting negative liberty has a long and non-accidental historical track record of promoting positive liberty.

Here’s the table of contents:

Introduction: Conceptions of Freedom.

1. A Prehistory of Liberty: Forty Thousand Years Ago.

2. The Rule of Law: AD 1075.

3. Religious Freedom: 1517.

4. Freedom of Commerce: 1776.

5. Civil Liberty: 1954.

6. Psychological Freedom, the Last Frontier: 1963.

Congress: Democracy Today - In Political Philosophy and Theory, 3 - 6 November 2010 - Universidade do Minho, Braga, Portugal

Today western democracies confront social, cultural and political challenges, which call for a reevaluation of our state affairs, our system of practices and our system of discourses. In contemporary pluralist and multicultural societies, there is an increased gap between citizens and political establishments. Traditional approaches of politics of recognition or redistribution, used to translate claims into the public sphere, seem no longer sufficient in this new paradigm of an increased globalized world and trans-national politics. Under this light, the meaning(s) we generally tend to attribute to the concept of democracy need to be re-evaluated and ultimately redefined.

This will be the First International Congress on ‘Democracy Today’ which will take place at Universidade do Minho, Braga. Having as starting point the assumption that the concept of democracy needs to be revised, we intent, during this congress, to accomplish two main tasks: on the one hand, to provide an account of the multiplicity of meanings of ‘democracy’ and its conceptual nuances. On the other hand, to account for the different instantiations of democracy and its intrinsic practices. Under this light we propose four days of reflection, discussion and dialogue, specially under the scope of political philosophy and political theory.

These are some of the questions we expect to explore:

Read the rest of this entry »

Penn State: 25 July-1 August 2010 | Applications by 10 March (grad) or 15 April (undergrad)

Via Eva Kittay:

The Philosophy in an Inclusive Key Summer Institute (PIKSI) is designed to encourage undergraduate students from underrepresented groups to consider future study in the field of philosophy. PIKSI, held 25 July to 1 August, emphasizes both traditional and nontraditional philosophical scholarship, such as feminist philosophy, critical race theory, and disability studies. All undergraduate student participants are fully funded by PIKSI.

PIKSI is a project of the Association for Feminist Ethics and Social Theory (FEAST) and is supported the Rock Ethics Institute and the College of the Liberal Arts at Penn State, as well as a number of graduate programs which have funded their graduate students to serve as Graduate Student Assistant.

The deadline for applications is 10 March for graduate students and 15 April for undergraduates. For more information on the summer institute, institutional co-sponsorship, and the Iris Marion Young Diversity Scholars fund please visit the PIKSI website.

Newcastle University: 25-26 February 2010

The Newcastle Ethics, Legal and Political Philosophy Research Group are holding a conference in honour of Professor Peter Jones. The topic of the conference is “The Value and Limits of Rights.” The conference will be held at the Devonshire Building (G21 & G22) at Newcastle from 25-26 February. The programme is as follows:

Thursday, 25 February
1:30-2:00pm: Registration and Welcome Address
2:00-3:15pm: Albert Weale (UCL)
3:30-4:45pm: Simon Caney (Oxford)

Friday, 26 February
9:30-10:45am: Richard Bellamy (UCL)
10:45-11:00am: Tea/coffee
11:00am-12:15pm: John Horton (Keele)
12:15-1:00pm: Buffet lunch
1:00-2:15pm: Susan Mendus (York)
2:15-3:30pm: David Miller (Oxford)
3:30-3:45pm: Tea/coffee
3:45-5:00pm: Hillel Steiner (Manchester)

All are welcome to attend although there is a registration fee of £10 to cover the cost of the refreshments and buffet lunch. Payments can be made online here. Please address any questions to Dr Ian O’Flynn.

The Groupe de recherche interuniversitaire en philosophie politique de Montréal (GRIPP) is pleased to announce the results of its 2010 book manuscript competition. The Annual Montreal Political Theory Manuscript Workshop Award has been awarded to Hélène Landemore, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yale University, for her manuscript titled “Democratic Reasons: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many.”Le groupe de recherche interuniversitaire en philosophie politique de Montréal (GRIPP) a le plaisir de vous annoncer les résultats de la concurrence pour son prix annuel. Le lauréat 2010 du Prix annuel de l’atelier de manuscrit de philosophie politique de Montréal est Hélène Landemore, professeure adjointe en sciences politiques à l’Université Yale, pour son manuscrit intitulé “Democratic Reasons: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many.”

Call for Papers from Faculty and Graduate Students

Northwestern University Society for Ethical Theory and Political Philosophy

Fourth Annual Conference: May 20-22, 2010

Keynote Addresses: Elizabeth Anderson and Christine Korsgaard

Submission Guidelines: The deadline is February 15, 2010.  We welcome submissions from faculty and graduate students, as some sessions will be reserved for student presentations.  Please submit an essay of approximately 4000 words and an abstract of at most 150 words.  Essay topics in all areas of ethical theory and political philosophy will be considered, although some priority will be given to essays that take up themes from the works of Anderson and Korsgaard, such as value theory, philosophy and economics, democratic theory, constructivism, practical reason, personal identity, and the moral status of animals.  Essays and abstracts should be prepared for blind review in .doc, .rtf, or .pdf format.  Graduate submissions should be sent by e-mail to leegoldsmith2012@u.northwestern.edu and faculty submissions should be sent by e-mail to garthoff@northwestern.edu.  Notices of acceptance will be sent by March 31, 2010.  For more information, please contact Jon Garthoff at the e-mail address above or visit our website:

http://www.philosophy.northwestern.edu/conferences/moralpolitical/

JOURNAL OF MORAL PHILOSOPHY:
An International Journal of Moral, Political, and Legal Philosophy
(ISSN 1740-4681)Volume 7, Number 1 (2010)

ARTICLES

William Sin, ‘Trivial Sacrifices, Great Demands’, pp. 3-15

Lina Papadaki, ‘What is Objectification?’ pp. 16-36

M. B. E. Smith, ‘Does Humanity Share a Common Moral Faculty?’ pp. 37-53

Jonathan Seglow, ‘Associative Duties and Global Justice’, pp. 54-73

Miriam Ronzoni, ‘Constructivism and Practical Reason: On Intersubjectivity, Abstraction, and Judgment’, pp. 74-104

Kenneth R. Westphal, ‘From “Convention” to “Ethical Life”: Hume’s Theory of Justice in Post-Kantian Perspective’, pp. 105-32

REVIEW ARTICLE

Wim de Muijnck, ‘Thinking about Normativity: Ralph Wedgwood on “Ought”‘, pp. 133-44

BOOK REVIEWS

Clare Chambers on Gender, Class, and Freedom in Modern Political Theory, pp. 145-47

Anca Gheaus on Disadvantage, pp. 148-50

Paul Bou-Habib on Climate Change, Justice, and Future Generations, pp. 151-53

All issues of the Journal of Moral Philosophy are available on Swetswise here and IngentaConnect here.

Subscription information can be found on our Brill website here.

Please direct all enquiries regarding article or discussion submissions to the Editor, Thom Brooks (Newcastle).

Please direct all enquiries regarding review articles and books for review to the Reviews Editor, Christian Miller (Wake Forest).

JOURNAL OF MORAL PHILOSOPHY:
An International Journal of Moral, Political, and Legal Philosophy
(ISSN 1740-4681)

Volume 6, Number 4 (2009)ARTICLES

Ty Landrum, ‘Persons as Objects of Love’, pp. 417-39

Elizabeth Tropman, ‘Renewing Moral Intuitionism’, pp. 440-63

David Alm, ‘Deontological Restrictions and the Good/Bad Asymmetry’, pp. 464-81

Carl Knight, ‘Egalitarian Justice and Valuational Judgment’, pp. 482-98

Geoffrey Scarre, ‘The “Banality of Good”?’ pp. 499-519

REVIEW ARTICLE

Sean Coyle, ‘The Ideality of Law’, pp. 521-34

BOOK REVIEWS

Stefan Bird-Pollan on The Founding Act of Modern Ethical Life: Hegel’s Critique of Kant’s Moral and Political Philosophy by Ideo Geiger, pp. 535-37

Justin Jeffrey on A Theory of Virtue: Excellence in Being for the Good by R. M. Adams, pp. 538-40

Adam Rawlings on Reasons and the Good by Roger Crisp, pp. 541-43

BOOKS RECEIVED

REFEREES FOR VOLUME 6

All issues of the Journal of Moral Philosophy are available on Swetswise here and IngentaConnect here.

Subscription information can be found on our Brill website here: http://www.brill.nl/jmp

Please direct all enquiries regarding article or discussion submissions to the Editor, Thom Brooks (Newcastle).

Please direct all enquiries regarding review articles and books for review to the Reviews Editor, Fabian Freyenhagen (Essex).

The Monist 94 (4): October 2011 | CFP: 31 October 2010

Via Gillian Brock, a CFP for an issue of the Monist on cosmopolitanism due out in 2011:

According to cosmopolitanism, every person has global stature as the ultimate unit of moral concern and is therefore entitled to equal respect and consideration no matter what her citizenship status or other affiliations happen to be. This issue of The Monist is intended as a forum for debates about the pros and cons of cosmopolitanism. It will address questions such as: What does cosmopolitanism require by way of obligations of justice to all? What kinds of reforms to our global and local institutions do cosmopolitan concerns require? Are these requirements feasible? In addition to our obligations to everyone, do we have further, more demanding, obligations to compatriots or to family members? Do non-cosmopolitan theories provide a better account of our obligations and allow us a more useful framework for mediating the interests of compatriots and non-compatriots?

Inquiries should be directed to Gillian at gbrock [at] auckland.ac.nz

St. Anne’s College, Oxford: 2-4 July 2010 | CFP: 9 January 2010

Moving up to the top because the deadline is soon — SCM.

The 2010 Society for Applied Philosophy annual conference will be held at St. Anne’s College from 2-4 July 2010. It will be an open themed applied philosophy conference (papers will be considered from the full range of topics in applied philosophy). Plenary speakers include Professor Thomas Pogge (Yale), Professor Judith Lichtenberg (Georgetown), Professor Catherine Lu (McGill), and Professor Ingmar Persson (Gothenburg).

Read the rest of this entry »

Princeton: 9-10 April 2010 | CFP: 18 January 2010

The deadline for this conference has now been extended to 18 January 2010 — SCM.

The Committee for the Graduate Conference in Political Theory at Princeton University welcomes papers concerning any period, methodological approach or topic in political theory, political philosophy, or the history of political thought. Approximately eight papers will be accepted.

Read the rest of this entry »

Linköping, Sweden: 8-12 June 2010 | CFP: 8 March 2010

The European Science Foundation (ESF), in partnership with LFiU is organising a conference on the “Responsibility to Protect: From Principle to Practice” to be held at the Scandic Hotel Linköping Väst, Linköping, Sweden, from 8-12 June 2010. The conference chair is Prof. Andre Nollkaemper, of the Amsterdam Center for International Law, University of Amsterdam.

The closing date for application is the 8 March, 2010. This conference is part of the 2010 ESF Research Conferences Programme and is accessible at its website.

Veniamin Zatsepin

University of Melbourne, Faculty of Education

Table of Contents - Part 2:

Personality types as the elements of anthroposystem

What is human nature?

Where is the concept of evil human nature from?

Afterword

Acknowledgments

References

Personality types as elements of the anthroposystem

The anthroposystem and the social system are two aspects of the same developed human society. Both of them represent humankind as a single whole and both of them are organized and structured. But their structural and organizational elements, and consequently the objects of their attention, are different. The social system’s constructive elements are social institutions, each performing their specific functions of maintaining and regulating economic, political, legal, moral and other relations. The anthroposystem’s “cells”, the “points of references”, are informal social-psychological groups of personality types. The anthroposystem and social system are closely tangled, so these two systems influence each other, but at the same time they still remain relatively independent.

Read the rest of this entry »

Veniamin Zatsepin

University of Melbourne, Faculty of Education

Table of Contents - Part 1:

Preface

Creation of the concept of the social system

The social system in Marxist philosophy

Post-Marxist concepts of the social systems

Testing the social system theories

Into the fabric of social institutes

The basic personality types

Psychopath (sociopath)

Authoritarian personality

Machiavellian personality

“Technocratic”, “practical” or “hoarding” personality

Amiable, friendly or agreeable personality

Altruistic personality

Creative personality

Part 2:

Personality types as the elements of anthroposystem

What is human nature?

Where is the concept of evil human nature from?

Afterword

Acknowledgments

References

Preface

It has always made me feel uneasy reading or hearing someone trying to explain people’s inhumane acts, and even brutish violence, by recourse to the concept of “human nature”. On this explanation, there are really only two possibilities: either one is a criminal (or at least a potential criminal) or one is simply not a human being. At the same time, I still find it bewildering that our primeval ancestors, the illiterate people of the stone and bronze ages (and our contemporaries, the Aborigines of Australia and the Americas), while poorly versed in the theory of nature’s laws, knew and expressed in their everyday lives closer kinship with nature than do even the most educated of us today. Their attitude to each and every part of nature was more humane and respectful than that of the majority of our contemporaries, despite the fact that these people burned trees for fire and killed animals for food. So what has happened to modern people, to society? Does civilization, indeed, spoil us? Why have we been breaking our contracts or mutual understanding with the animate natural world? What has been pitting us against each other and why do we degrade and eliminate other people? Is it true that mankind is a malignant tumor of the body that is earth? Are we, human beings, indeed evil from our very childhood? And who and what exactly are ‘we’?

These are the questions that the following discussion is concerned with.

Read the rest of this entry »

“Basic Income at a Time of Economic Upheaval: A Path to Justice and Stability?”, 15-16 April 2010, Université de Montréal.  

Dear Colleagues,

You might be interested in participating in an upcoming conference on ”Basic Income at a Time of Economic Upheaval: A Path to Justice and Stability?”, to be held on 15-16 April 2010 at the Université de Montréal. Jointly organized by CRÉUM, BIEN Canada and USBIG, this conference will examine the role of the Basic Income Guarantee (BIG) as a radical new approach to rethink the economic fabric of our society in the current economic turmoil.

The conference includes keynote addresses from Dr. Louise Haagh (University of York), Prof. Guy Standing (University of Bath), and Senator Eduardo Suplicy (São Paulo,Brasil), and a roundtable discussion featuring Senators Art Eggleton and Hugh Segal, Amélie Châteauneuf (FCPASQ), Rob Rainer (Canada Without Poverty), Sheila Regehr (National Council of Welfare) and Allan Sheahen (USBIG).

We invite panel presentations from academic scholars, practitioners and policy advocates on a wide variety of topics dealing with the challenges of designing, promoting or instituting a BIG in the current economic climate.Everyone is welcome to attend. For further information please visit the conference website at: http://bigmontreal.wordpress.com/

best wishes,

Jurgen De Wispelaere

BIG Montreal conference organizer

Jacob Levy has put up a link to the podcasts from the recent memorial colloquium on Jerry Cohen’s life and work organised by the Groupe de recherche interuniversitaire en philosophie politique at Montreal. The presentations are from Daniel Weinstock, William Clare Roberts, Joseph Carens, Jurgen De Wispelaere, and Jacob Levy.

Bristol: 30 June - 2 July 2010 | CFP: 1 March 2010

The third International Global Ethics Association conference will be held at the University of the West of England in Bristol from 30 June to 2 July 2010. Confirmed speakers include Simon Caney (University of Oxford) and Darrel Moellendorf (Director, Institute for Ethics and Public Affairs, San Diego State University).

Papers and panels on all aspects of global ethics are invited. The organisers encourage multidisciplinary papers which address the theory and practice of Global Ethics and global justice from academic, policy and practice perspectives. Issues include:

• Development issues like progress towards achieving the MDGs and impact of post-colonial and post-development critiques on development ethics
• Ecological crises such as global warming and the distribution of increasingly scarce natural resources
• War and peace concerns such as the ethical issues arising from the War on Terror, humanitarian intervention, privatization of the military and the ethics of peace-keeping
• Gender issues 20 years since CEDAW, for example, transnational feminism and reproductive rights
• Human rights issues 60 years after the UDHR
• Economic injustices and the global market
• Global networks and civil society
• Identity politics, multiple identities and transnationalism

Please e-mail panel proposals and abstracts (no more than 500 words) to global-ethics [at] uwe.ac.uk by 1 March 2010. For further information please contact Dr Christien van den Anker and Professor Heather Widdows at the same email address.

Prato, Italy: 25-29 August 2010| CFP: 8 March 2010

Karen Green, Lisa Curtis-Wendlandt and Paul Gibbard are organising a conference on on the contribution of women to the history of political thought in Europe during the Enlightenment period. Papers may discuss the political ideas of individual women such as Mary Wollstonecraft, Catherine Macaulay, Mary Hays, Sarah Churchill, Mary Delariviere Manley, Marie Jodin, Emilie du Châtelet, Madame Dupin, Olympe de Gouges, Felicité Keralio-Robert, Madame Roland, Germaine de Staël, Dorothea Erxleben Leporin, Amalie Holst, Johanna Charlotte Unzer, Luise Gottsched, Mariana von Ziegler, Elise Reimarus, Elisabetta Caminer Turra, and others. Papers placing the work of such women in the broader context of political writing by men are encouraged. ‘Political thought’ is broadly interpreted to include sexual politics as well as political theory, and discussions of the political ideas of women as expressed in genres other than the political treatise are welcome.

Submissions of title and one page abstract should be sent by 8th March 2010 to Karen Green by email or in hard copy to her at the School of Philosophy and Bioethics, Monash University, Melbourne 3800, Australia. Up to five bursaries of up to $500 will be available to help post-graduates and early career researchers to attend the conference. Applicants who wish to be considered for one of these should indicate this with their submission.

An edited volume on women’s political thought in Europe during the eighteenth century is proposed, and contributions to the conference may be submitted for publication in this volume. Contributors who are unable to attend the Prato Conference, but would like to contribute a paper to the volume are invited to submit papers for consideration by September 30th 2010.

Boulder: 5-8 August 2010 | CFP: 1 February 2010

The third annual Rockey Mountain Ethics Congress will be held from 5-8 August 2010 at the University of Colorado, Boulder. ?The conference is hosted by the Center for Values and Social Policy. Papers from all areas of ethics and political theory are invited. To encourage the participation of junior scholars, the University of Colorado will be awarding a Young Ethicist Prize of $500 for most meritorious submission. The prize competition is open to any participating untenured philosopher (including, but not limited to, tenure-track faculty, instructors, and graduate students).

Abstract (750-1000 words) should be submitted electronically (in Word format) to Benjamin Hale and Alastair Norcross. Here is a pdf of the CFP.

Southampton: 8-10 April 2010 | CFP: 31 January 2010

The 2010 Association for Legal and Social Philosophy conference will be held at the University of Southampton from 8-10 April 2010. The theme of the conference is the future(s) of democratic citizenship. From the ALSP website:

In the contemporary world the ideal of democratic citizenship appears to be confronted with many challenges and opportunities, and there is substantial disagreement about how it should respond to them. In the light of changing forms of democratic engagement, the globalisation of political power, the continuing challenge of maintaining a common citizenship in the face of cultural diversity and mass migration, the form democratic citizenship will take in the future is open to question. Contributions to this conference will seek to think through the forms that democratic citizenship might, and should, take in the future. We focus on four sets of themes:

* democratic innovations,
* democratic citizenship: from local to global?
* democratic citizenship: threats and insecurities
* competing visions of democratic citizenship.

Keynotes confirmed thus far include Rainer Baubock (European University Institute) and Stuart White (University of Oxford). Selected papers from the conference will be published in a special issue of the Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy.

Washington University St. Louis 1-25 June 2010 | Apply by 2 March 2010

Andrew Altman and Kit Wellman will be running a four-week National Endowment for the Humanities Seminar on Philosophical Perspectives on Liberal Democracy and the Global Order from 1-25 June 2010.

Sixteen participants (fourteen faculty and two graduate students) will be chosen from among eligible applicants interested in liberalism, democracy and international justice. The seminar will feature appearances by Arthur Applbaum (Harvard), David Estlund (Brown), Debra Satz (Stanford), and Thomas Pogge (Yale), who will discuss their recently-published work and/or work-in-progress. Ample time will be allowed for participants to pursue individual projects on Seminar-related topics.

Summer Stipend: $3,300. Stipends are intended to help cover the cost of travel and living expenses during the course of the Seminar. Applications must be postmarked (or submitted electronically) no later than March 2nd, 2010.

Hi all-

Just thought I would let people know that if you happen to have undergrads who you think might be well served by an excellent MA program, Georgia State is now accepting applications for acceptance with Fellowships and Scholarships. Our program is well positioned to help those who would like to improve their philosophical skills before applying to Phd programs or those who simply wish to pursue an MA only. We have a large contingent of philosophers working in social, political, and legal philosophy–5 in the Department alone and others in the Poli Sci Dept and Law School.

Please see:

our Departmental website and
Informational PDF.

CFP: 4th Annual Northwestern Ethics Conference

NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
SOCIETY FOR ETHICAL THEORY AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY
FOURTH ANNUAL CONFERENCE
MAY 20-22, 2010

KEYNOTE SPEAKERS:

Elizabeth Anderson, University of Michigan
Christine Korsgaard, Harvard University

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES: The deadline is February 15, 2010. We welcome submissions from faculty and graduate students, as sessions will be reserved for student presentations. Essays should be roughly 4000 words, with an abstract of at most 150 words. Essays in all areas of ethical theory and political philosophy will be considered, though some priority will be given to those that take up themes from the works of Elizabeth Anderson and Christine Korsgaard, such as value theory, philosophy and economics, democratic theory, practical reason, constructivism, personal identity, and the moral status of animals. Essays and abstracts should be prepared for blind review in word, rtf, or pdf format. Students should submit by e-mail to leegoldsmith2012 [at] u.northwestern.edu; faculty should submit by e-mail to garthoff [at] northwestern.edu. Notices of acceptance will be sent by March 31, 2010. For more information, please contact Jon Garthoff at the e-mail address above or visit the conference webpage.

CALL FOR PAPERS
 
The fourth annual meeting of the Felician Ethics Conference will be held at the Rutherford Campus of Felician College

223 Montross Ave
Rutherford, NJ 07070

on Saturday, April 24, 2010, 9 am - 6 pm
 
 
Plenary Speaker: Christopher Morris (University of Maryland, College Park)

“Why Be Just?”
 
 
 
Submissions on any topic in moral philosophy (broadly construed) are welcome, not exceeding 25 minutes’ presentation time (approximately 3,000 words). Please send submissions via email in format suitable for blind review by Feb. 1, 2010 to: felicianethicsconference@gmail.com.

**Undergraduate submissions are invited for a proposed session consisting of undergraduate papers.**

Alternatively, send surface mail to:

Irfan Khawaja, Conference Coordinator
Dept. of Philosophy
Felician College
262 S. Main St.
Lodi, NJ 07644
 
 
If you have any questions, or would be interested in serving as a commentator and/or chair for individual sessions, please contact Irfan Khawaja, (201) 559-6000 (x6288), or felicianethicsconference@gmail.com.

–
Irfan Khawaja
Assistant Professor of Philosophy
Conference Coordinator, Felician Ethics Conference
Department of Philosophy
Felician College
262 S. Main St.
Lodi, NJ 07644
201-559-6000 (x6288)
felicianethicsconference@gmail.com

The Society for Social and Political Philosophy is pleased to issue a

CALL FOR PARTICIPANTS
for a Roundtable on Marx’s Capital

Texas A&M University,
College Station, Texas
February 24-27, 2011

SSPP’s second Roundtable will explore Volume One of Marx’s Capital (1867).  We chose this text because the resurgence in references to and mentions of Marx – provoked especially by the financial crisis, but presaged by the best-seller status of Hardt and Negri’s Empire and Marx’s surprising victory in the BBC’s “greatest philosopher” poll – has only served to highlight the fact that there have not been any new interpretive or theoretical approaches to this book since Althusser’s in the 1960s.

The question that faces us is this: Does the return of Marx mean that we have been thrust into the past, such that long “obsolete” approaches have a newfound currency, or does in mean, on the contrary, that Marx has something new to say to us, and that new approaches to his text are called for?

Read the rest of this entry »

Via Sally Haslanger:

All professional philosophers are invited to participate in a survey on publishing in philosophy. It should take about 10 minutes. It will be useful to have your CV handy as you fill it out. Please go here to find it.

If all goes well, Sally Haslanger will report on the results at the December APA in a symposium on philosophy publishing (Wednesday 30 December, 11:15-1:15).

Thanks for your help. Please help spread the word.

The American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy (ASPLP) is pleased to announce that it will hold its annual meeting in conjunction with that of the Association of American Law Schools in New Orleans on January 6, 2010. The topic is “Getting to the Rule of Law.” All three sessions of the program will be held in Hilton New Orleans Riverside, 2 Poydras Street, Belle Chasse Room, Third Floor. Below is the program:

I. Getting to the Concept of the Rule of Law: 10:30 a.m.-12:15 p.m.

Principal paper (philosophy): Jeremy Waldron, New York University

Commentator (law): Robin West, Georgetown University

Commentator (political science): Corey Brettschneider, Brown University

Chair: James E. Fleming, Boston University

II. Maintaining or Restoring the Rule of Law After September 11, 2001: 1:30p.m.-3:15 p.m.

Principal paper (political science): Benjamin Kleinerman, Michigan State University

Commentator (law): Curtis Bradley, Duke University

Commentator (philosophy): Lionel McPherson, Tufts University

Chair: Nancy Rosenblum, Harvard University

III. Building the Rule of Law After Military Interventions: 3:30 p.m.-5:15 p.m.

Principal paper (law): Jane Stromseth, Georgetown University

Commentator (political science): Tom Ginsburg, University of Chicago

Commentator (philosophy): Larry May, Vanderbilt University

Chair: Allen Buchanan, Duke University

Reception: 6:30 p.m.-8:30 p.m. Elmwood, Third Floor, Hilton New Orleans Riverside

The principal papers and commentaries - together with additional papers on the topic - will be published in Nomos, the annual yearbook of the ASPLP. If you have questions about the program, please contact Professor James E. Fleming, who is Editor of Nomos: jfleming@bu.edu. If you are interested in political and legal philosophy, and would like to join the ASPLP and subscribe to NOMOS, please go to http://www.political-theory.org/asplp/ or email theasplp@gmail.com.

Manchester Metropolitan University, 1-3 September 2010 

A call for workshop convenors for the 2010 Workshops in Political Theory conference in Manchester:

Following the successful sixth annual series of Workshops held in Manchester, September 2009, at which over a hundred and fifty papers were given by participants from over twenty countries, another conference is being held next year. These workshops reflected the wide diversity of interests and idioms within the discipline and gave delegates plenty of time to discuss their papers in a relaxed setting as well as to attend other panels.  Panels can vary from three to twelve paper givers. The 2009 conference page is here. If interested in organising a panel contact either Professor Joe Femia or Professor Jules Townshend. 

Via an email from CUP:

Columbia University Press is pleased to announce the publication of Sibyl Schwarzenbach’s On Civic Friendship: Including Women in the State.

In this innovative new work Schwarzenbach argues that women have performed the vast majority of often unpaid friendship labor for centuries. Embodying the freedom, equality, and ideals of the Constitution, civic friendship emerges as a necessary condition for genuine justice. Through a critical examination of social and political relationships from ancient times to today, Sibyl Schwarzenbach develops a truly innovative, feminist theory of the democratic state.

You can find out more about the book here.

James P. Sterba at the University of Notre Dame praises the text:
“Sibyl Schwarzenbach’s attempt to show the importance of women’s experiences and feminist theory for the justification of the democratic state is the most successful I have seen. Its achievement should be widely recognized and commented upon by feminist political philosophers and, hopefully, by political philosophers more generally, attracting as much attention as Susan Okin’s Justice, Gender, and the Family.”

(le français suit)THE ANNUAL MONTREAL POLITICAL THEORY MANUSCRIPT WORKSHOP AWARD

Call for applications: The Groupe de recherche interuniversitaire en philosophie politique de Montréal (GRIPP), spanning the departments of political science and philosophy at McGill University, l’Université de Montréal, Concordia University, and l’Université du Québec à Montréal, invites applications for its 2010 manuscript workshop award. The recipient of the award will be invited to Montreal for a day-long workshop in March/April 2010 dedicated to his or her book manuscript. This “author meets critics” workshop will comprise four to five sessions dedicated to critical discussion of the manuscript; each session will begin with a critical commentary on a section of the manuscript by a political theorist or philosopher who is part of Montreal’s GRIPP community. The format is designed to maximize feedback for a book-in-progress. The award covers the costs of travel, accommodation, and meals.

Read the rest of this entry »