BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//208.94.116.123//NONSGML kigkonsult.se iCalcreator 2.26.9// CALSCALE:GREGORIAN METHOD:PUBLISH X-FROM-URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress X-WR-TIMEZONE:America/New_York BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:America/New_York X-LIC-LOCATION:America/New_York BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:20231105T020000 TZOFFSETFROM:-0400 TZOFFSETTO:-0500 RDATE:20241103T020000 TZNAME:EST END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT DTSTART:20240310T020000 TZOFFSETFROM:-0500 TZOFFSETTO:-0400 RDATE:20250309T020000 TZNAME:EDT END:DAYLIGHT END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7723@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://philosophy.columbia.edu/content/graduate-conferences DESCRIPTION:
\nEva Bockenheimer . Frederica Gre goratto . Thimo Heisenberg . Axel Honneth . Rahel Jaeggi . Gal Katz . Frederick Neuhouser . Andreja Novak ovic . Angelica Nuzzo . Johanne s-Georg Schülein . Italo Testa
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20220422 DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20220424 GEO:+40.712775;-74.005973 LOCATION:Zoom\, possibly in person @ New York\, NY\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:First Nature in Social Philosophy Conference URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/first-nature-in-social-p hilosophy-conference/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:conference\,social END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7707@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://nygiw.tumblr.com/2021-2022 DESCRIPTION:Eva Bockenheimer. Frederica Gregoratto. Thimo Heisenberg. Ax
el Honneth. Rahel Jaeggi. Gal Katz. Frederick Neuhouser. Andreja Novakovic
. Angelica Nuzzo. Johannes-Georg Schülein. Italo Testa.
\nApril 22-23
Time TBA
\n*In-person event
Is femi nism in crisis? Recently\, in the United States and abroad\, historic even ts rendered ever more precarious the lives and well-being of people margin alized by their sex\, gender\, race\, and class\, often in complexly inter secting and regionally specific ways. The rise of right-wing populism tran snationally and attacks on reproductive rights\, for example\, exacerbate the challenges feminists confront. At the same time\, as external conditio ns shift\, feminism’s own faultlines continue to deepen. Feminism’s rising trans-exclusionary contingent\, certain feminists’ hesitancy to reckon wi th complicity in racial and colonial violence\, and the ongoing cooptation of feminism by neoliberalism signal serious internal fractures.
\nA s feminism faces external and internal pressures\, how can philosophy help us understand this moment of potential crisis and what\, if anything\, ca n philosophy do to address it? To devise answers to these urgent questions \, we welcome contributions that focus on:
\n1. The relation bet ween feminism and philosophy\, including how feminism should intervene in philosophical debates\, and how philosophy should intervene in feminist de bates\;
\n2. Questions concerning the nature and practice of gen der\, sex\, sexuality\, race\, class\, and disability that draw on feminis t literatures or methodologies\;
\n3. Perspectives that integrat e different feminist traditions to build intersectional and transnational feminist coalitions\;
\n4. Analyses of discourses on sex\, gende r\, sexuality\, race\, class\, and disability in media\, law\, and the sci ences\;
\n5. Translating feminist views on sex\, gender\, sexual ity\, race\, class\, and disability into public policy and social advocacy .
\nWe welcome contributions from scholars working in philosophy and who draw on a variety of disciplinary perspectives. Scholars of all ident ities\, especially those from groups underrepresented and/or marginalized in academia\, are encouraged to submit contributions.
\nPlease send anonymized abstracts of up to 500 words to cunygc.philosophy.conference@gmail .com\, along with any questions you may have. The deadline for submiss ions is September 7th.
\nJoel Kotkin\, Roger Hobbs Pr esidential Fellow in Urban Futures at Chapman University in Orange\, Calif ornia\, and author of The Ne w Class Conflict
\nMi chael Lind\, Professor at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin\, and author of The New C lass War: Saving Democracy from the Managerial Elite
\nThe event will take place from 3 pm to 6 pm on October 14 and from 9 am to 5 pm on October 15. The registration rate is $100 for bot h days and includes a reception on October 14 and lunch on October 15. Click here to register for the event.
\nIn t he last fifteen years\, the discussion of class has shifted with the rise of the Tea Party and then Trumpism in the United States. Whereas the notio n of class used to be a left-wing category championed by socialists\, Marx ists\, and anarchists\, the critique of class division has now shifted to right-wing denunciations of the managerial class. This shift toward a popu list politics targeting the new class has long been a topic of discussion in Telos\, starting with the classic 1975 essay by Alvin Gouldner “Prologue to a Theory of Revolutionary Intel lectuals” (in Telos 26) and continuing through Paul Piccone’s work in the early 1990s in essays such as “ The Crisis of Liberalism and the Emergence of Federal Populism” (in < em>Telos 89) and “Postmodern Populism ” (in Telos 103). A search of the Telos archive wi ll uncover literally hundreds of essays that address various aspects of th is issue. The recent popularizing of the critique of the new class has led to a conflict between the liberal pursuit of redistributive policies and the expansion of the welfare state\, on the one hand\, and the populist at tempt to disempower governmental managerial elites and dismantle the welfa re state\, on the other hand. How is the underlying notion of class being defined by the different parties to this debate? What are the political po ssibilities\, both on the left and on the right\, that can emerge from the conflict? Is this conflict leading to a new kind of civil war\, or can we envision new solutions?
\nIn addition to engaging with these questions\, our event will feature Telos editors\, who will discuss the past and current trajectories of Telos< /em> as well as Telos 200\, devoted to the place of truth at the university.
\nTelos has alway s had a conflicted relationship with universities. On the one hand\, unive rsity academics have constituted the primary audience and contributors to Telos. On the other hand\, Telos has always maintained a distance from university structures\, precisely because of the tie betwee n universities and the managerial class\, and previous special issues in < a href='http://www.telospress.com/store/Telos-81-Fall-1989-p17898236' targ et='_blank' rel='noopener'>Telos 81 and Telos 111 have attempted to address this problem. p>\n
Today\, the situation of universities has become more dire than ever. Trapped between the pressure to provide j ob training on the one hand and political advocacy on the other hand\, the idea of a search for truth sounds hopelessly naive as a description of th e task of colleges and universities today. Matching the shift of our socie ty toward technocratic and managerial solutions to problems\, the natural and social sciences have become recognized authorities based on their clai m to being scientific. Yet the authority of “science” is misleading in the sense that science never has straightforward answers but relies on a meth od of constant questioning. Science itself cannot be counted on to make po licy decisions but can only provide relevant information for decision make rs. Recent pieces in TelosScope by Russell Berman and Mathieu Slama address this issue by looking at the way pandemic policies were dominated by an ideology of “following the science” that amounted to an abdication of democratic decision-making.
\nMeanwhile\, university discussion and debate about decision-making\, traditionally the place of the humanities a nd social sciences\, have been suppressed in favor of a focus on political engagement. The range of perspectives available for discussion has been r educed\, to the exclusion of those views that might challenge the technocr atic bias and the reduction of politics to identity politics that have bec ome dominant at universities.
\nThis n arrowing of perspectives has also undermined the research project of the u niversity. The exclusion of relevant perspectives in university debates ha s degraded the peer review process in the social sciences and the humaniti es\, maintaining an orthodoxy that favors the reinforcement of previously held views rather than the challenging of such views. Such research can th en be cited as the “scientific” basis for a set of policy prescriptions th at have been agreed upon in advance. Where Max Weber once lamented the tra nsformation of the lecture hall into a pulpit\, it is difficult today for academics to avoid the pressure to either conform to a particular politica l perspective or\, in rejecting such politicization\, to be forced into an “obstructionist” camp.
\nIn the midst of these developments\, what is the status of the idea of truth? Will truth necessarily remain subordin ate to politics? How might the search for truth remain a focus of colleges and universities?
\nIn addressing these questions\, the 200th issue of Telos features contributions by Joseph W. Bendersky\, Russell Berman\, Valerie J. D’Erman\, J. E. Elliott\, Wayne Hudson\, Michael Hüth er\, Mark G. E. Kelly\, Tim Luke\, Richard T. Marcy\, Greg Melleuish\, Dav id Pan\, Susanna Rizzo\, and David Westbrook.
\nIf you have any questions about the event\, please contact us at telos200@telosinstitute.net< /a>.
\nTickets: https://www.telosinstitute.n et/telos200/registration/.
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20221014 DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20221016 GEO:+40.754894;-73.981856 LOCATION:17th flr. John D. Calandra Italian American Institute\, Queens Col lege/CUNY @ 25 W 43rd St\, New York\, NY 10036\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Marking Telos 200: The New Politics of Class URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/marking-telos-200-the-ne w-politics-of-class/ X-COST-TYPE:external X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:conference\,political\,social X-COST:$100 X-TICKETS-URL:https://www.telosinstitute.net/telos200/registration/ END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7884@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:CUNY CONTACT:https://philevents.org/event/show/104470 DESCRIPTION:Our speakers will be Karen Lewis (Columbia)\, Sam Berstler ( MIT)\, Ray Buchanan (Texas/Austin)\, and Elmar Unnsteinsson (UC Dublin and U of Iceland). We will post titles and abstracts for their talks\, along with a schedule of who is speaking when\, soon.
\nIf you are not a f aculty or student at CUNY\, you will have to RSVP for the event at this UR L\, no later than Monday\, November 14th:
\nhttps://forms.gle/KN3YJN aCs5yHPtBP7
\nPlease also be prepared to show proof of vaccination w hen you enter the building.
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20221118 DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20221119 GEO:+40.74809;-73.983098 LOCATION:President's Large Conference Room 8201.01 @ 365 5th Ave\, New York \, NY 10016\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Language\, Planning\, and Cooperativity Workshop URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/language-planning-and-co operativity-workshop/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:conference\,language\,social END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7958@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:CUNY CONTACT:https://radicalimagination.info/ DESCRIPTION:\n
\n11:00 – 11:30
\nOpening Remarks
11:40 – 1:00
\nLiterature and Social Knowledge
1:00 – 2
:00
\nLunch
2:00 – 3:20
\nLabor and Power
3:30 –
4:50
\nThe Necessity of Philosophy
5:00 – 6:20
\nKnowle
dge Factories
6:30 – 8:00
\nClosing Remarks and Reception
Speakers:
\nPe
ter Bratsis – CUNY
\nB. Ricardo Brown – Pratt Institute
\nMichae
l Denning – Yale
\nMichael Ferlise – Hudson Community College
\n
Barbara Foey – Rutgers University Newark
\nBruno Gulli – CUNY
\n
Josh Kolbo – Institute for the Radical Imagination
\nKristin Lawler –
College of Mt. St. Vincent
\nAndrew Long – Claremont College
\n
Michael Menser – CUNY
\nImmanuel Ness – CUNY
\nMichael Pelias –
LIU – Brooklyn
\nSohnya Sayers – Cooper Union
\nDavid van Arsdal
e – Syracuse University
\nCornel West – Union Theological Seminary
\nDavid Winters – Rutgers University
\nRichard Wolff – New School<
br />\nIvan Zatz – Pratt institute
\nSponsored by the MA Program in Liberal Studies: https://goo.gl/Qz8tLP
Co-sponsored by the Institute for the Radical Imagination: https://r adicalimagination.info
\nFor more information: pbratsis@bmcc.cuny .edu
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20230303 DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20230304 GEO:+40.748789;-73.984092 LOCATION:Skylight Room\, CUNY @ 365 5th Ave\, New York\, NY 10016\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:The Singularity of Stanley Aronowitz Conference URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/the-singularity-of-stanl ey-aronowitz-conference/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:social END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-8013@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:CUNY CONTACT:https://philevents.org/event/show/112490 DESCRIPTION:Keynote: Harry Brighouse (University of Wisconsin-Madison) p>\n
Pedagogy Workshop Leader: TBA
\nLocation: The Graduate Center \, CUNY—New York\, New York
\nAbstracts & Workshop Applications due: July 31st 2023
\nResponses: August 31st 2023
\nOrganizers: Mi chael Greer (CUNY)\, Maria Salazar (CUNY)
\nContact email: gscope.co mmittee@gmail.com
\nThe committee for the Graduate Student Conferenc e on Philosophy of Education (GSCOPE) invites abstracts for papers on the topic of Higher Education\, Democracy\, and Controversy. The theme of the conference & post-conference pedagogy workshop reflects the difficulty in creating and maintaining respectful discourse in higher-education classroo ms\, especially surrounding controversial empirical\, moral\, and politica l issues. Some argue that this is an equity issue. Undergraduate students who come from rural and/or underprivileged areas are more likely to experi ence alienation on campus\, sometimes because they have never been exposed to certain “politically correct” language or ideas\, and sometimes simply because they lack the financial and social capital that their peers have. It seems crucial (and follows from democratic and civic values) to foster safe learning environments for all students\, especially those students w ho are more likely to feel alienated on college campuses and in elite spac es. At the same time\, some argue that the aim of higher education is pure ly epistemological\, and not civic or democratic. Proponents of this view might hold that free speech and academic freedom must be properly protecte d for higher education to perform its proper social function: education. W hat is the appropriate relationship between higher education\, knowledge-p roduction\, teaching\, free speech\, and democracy? How can higher educati on instructors and professors be effective teachers in the light of these relationships?
\nPapers must pertain to higher educationbut maybe ab out anything from interpersonal classroom dynamicstoinstitutional policies to campus controversy. We are particularly interested in papers that expl ore the following topics:
\nWe especially welcome contributions that:
\nAbstracts should:
\n– Outline the paper’s principal
argument(s).
\n– Give a good sense of the paper’s philosophical and/o
r empirical contributions and methods.
\n– Be anonymized.
Pro posal Guidelines:
\nPlease submit abstracts of up to 500 words by mi dnight EST on Monday\, July 31\, 2023.
\nPDF or DOC.X by email to gs cope.committee@gmail.com
\nPost-Conference Pedagogy Workshop
\nThe theme of our conference Higher Education\, Democracy\, and Contro versy is relevant to graduate student educators\, who are routinely u nder-trained and under-equipped to engage with real-life problems they may encounter in the classroom. The lack of training for higher education tea chers is a growing iue in philosophy of education.
\nThis workshop a ttends to this issue by facilitating a space for graduate student educator s to reflect on how to foster good teaching environments for controversial issues\, and be good interlocutors with each other on controversial issue s. The workshop will also touch on promoting equity in classrooms. We will provide workshop participants with a certificate of completion.
\nh ttps://philevents.org/event/show/112546
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20231012 DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20231015 GEO:+40.748789;-73.984092 LOCATION:CUNY Grad Center @ 365 5th Ave\, New York\, NY 10016\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:GSCOPE 2023: Higher Education\, Democracy\, and Controversy URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/gscope-2023-higher-educa tion-democracy-and-controversy/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:cfp\,conference\,epistemology\,ethics\,social END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-8024@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://sofheyman.org/events/beyond-polarization-epistemic-distorti on-and-criticism DESCRIPTION:Individuals support forms of domination with varying levels of understanding that they are doing so. In many cases\, those very struct ures of domination distort our conceptions of them through mechanisms such as motivated reasoning\, implicit bias\, affected ignorance\, false consc iousness\, and belief polarization. These various epistemic distortions\, in turn\, cause social conflict\, notably by promoting political polarizat ion. Those worried by social conflict have spent a great deal of energy de crying the increasingly polarized contexts in which we live. However\, epi stemic distortions in our sociopolitical beliefs also misrepresent\, maint ain systems of domination and prevent human needs from being met.
\nThis workshop aims to go beyond pronouncements such as ‘we are polarized’ or that ‘partisanship is on the rise\,’ and begin to think through epistem ic distortions at the individual and intersubjective levels\, the role of criticism and critique in facilitating belief and social change\, and the idea of reconciliation\, by asking questions such as:
\nConvenors
\nEge Yumuşak is a philosopher\, specializing in epistemolo gy\, the philosophy of mind\, and social & political philosophy. She recei ved a PhD in Philosophy from Harvard University in 2022. Her research exam ines political disagreement—its material foundations\, psychological and s ocial manifestations\, and epistemic properties. She is currently writing a series of articles on the nature and significance of clashes of perspect ive in social life.
\nNicolas Côté is a postdoctoral res earcher at the University of Toronto. His research is mainly in normative ethics and social choice theory\, but they also dabble in applied ethics a nd issues of practical rationality. Côté’s doctoral dissertation work focu ses on the measurement of freedom\, especially on axiomatic approaches to the measurement question\, and on how deontic concerns for protecting indi vidual rights interact with welfarist concerns for improving the general w elfare. Côté’s current research focuses on the ethics of decision-making u nder radical uncertainty.
\nInvited speakers:
\nSabina Vaccarino Bremner\; Daniela Dover\; Cain Shelley
\nInvited commentators
\nTBA
Democracy is often presented as the sine qua non of politics today. Yet our own democratic political orders across the West c onsistently fail to deliver the desiderata they promise to provide. Does t his failure arise in part from the theoretical insufficiency of convention al diagnoses of democracy’s challenges and ills? As the primaries for the 2024 U.S. presidential election open\, we invite participants to consider critically the status of democracy with an eye toward the concerns that ha ve defined Telos over its 55-year history.
\nThe main advantage of d emocracy over other political forms is that\, by allowing broader particip ation in decision-making\, it prevents domination of the many by the few. In theory\, it also fosters decision-making that is comparatively effectiv e and meaningful by allowing views and information from the many to be com municated efficiently to political leaders\, while also holding the latter to account for their actions. At the same time\, a major difficulty of de mocracy is that the rule by the many requires some procedure for translati ng a multitude of opinions into unified decisions and action. In addition\ , precisely by exercising its majority will\, the many can trammel the int egrity of the individual—the key threat that liberalism seeks to hold at b ay.
\nThese advantages—and\, especially\, these challenges—have prod uced two competing visions of democracy in the contemporary West. Their di vision reflects differences about the politics of representation and decis ion-making. On one hand\, liberals view democracy as the following of appr opriate procedures for channeling the opinions of the multitude through th e election of representatives. On the other hand\, populists might disrega rd such procedural restrictions to arrive at outcomes that are acclaimed b y the people directly.
\nWhile both sides nod to the importance of t he popular will\, both are in fact willing to denigrate it. The liberal ca mp reacts in horror when democratic elections result in the election of po pulists\, who are said to lack proper governing expertise\, as in the 2016 victory of Donald Trump. The populist camp charges conspiracy when electo ral results fail to reflect their own conception of the people’s will\, as in Trump’s reaction to his 2020 ouster. Depending on which camp is descri bing the times\, the false mediator of popular will is either the demagogu e or the bureaucrat—Telos has long opposed both.
\nDifferent narrati ves\, in turn\, have taken hold about democracy’s present challenges. From the point of view of the liberal proceduralist critique of demagogues\, t he means of moving from a multiplicity of opinions to a unified decision i nevitably involves discourse within a public sphere. This discourse depend s on a common understanding of historical facts\, as well as a public sphe re that allows different perspectives to face each other in debate. In our contemporary world\, however\, the breakdown of previous limits to access ing the public sphere has led to an inability to arrive at a consensus on the difference between fact and fiction\, as well as an increasing tendenc y of citizens to exist within a social media echo chamber of their own vie ws\, undermining the common ground that a public sphere presupposes.
\nAt the same time\, public debate necessarily implicates values and iden tities that have an ultimately mythic basis that cannot be rationally dete rmined. People’s opinions\, moreover\, are invariably shaped by leaders as much as the people shape what leaders ought to do. Experts lament how thi s representational dynamic undermines the procedures that govern and chann el the representation of the popular will. Yet the narrative aspect of rep resentation is an ineradicable element of the way in which the popular wil l coalesces. The process of narrativized representation will never be an e ntirely rational one\, and the prominence of media personalities such as R eagan\, Trump\, and Zelensky as politicians underlines the futility of att empting to rid the public sphere of drama and spectacle.
\nFor the p opulist\, by contrast\, the primary threat to democracy lies in bureaucrac y. In his 2016 end run around the political establishment\, Trump’s electo ral success was driven by a broader critique of the administrative state’s undermining of democratic process. The rise of the managerial bureaucrati c state that was set in motion by the development of the welfare state in the twentieth century has created a class divide between managers and mana ged that has shifted decision-making power over the conditions of everyday life away from individuals and toward government and corporate bureaucrac ies. Because more and more of our economic and social welfare is under the direct influence of the state\, the resultant bloated administrative stat e has now become prey to a frenzy of lobbyists\, who further distance the people from political decision-making. The protections of minority rights that constitute the liberal aspect of today’s democracies have turned comm unities into special interests that lobby administrators to pass on privil eges to favored groups. The result has been a growing restriction of freed om of expression in the public sphere and an eroding of a unifying basis f or constructing a political order now dominated by the collusion of bureau cracy with corporations.
\nWhile the liberal critique of demagoguery resorts to more government controls that exacerbate the expansion of bure aucracy\, the populist critique of bureaucracy has attempted to dismantle government without considering how to establish mechanisms that would take over the functions that bureaucracies have coopted. Focusing on oppositio n to government\, the populist perspective often lacks any sense of altern ative institutional structures that could remedy the administration and co mmodification of everyday life.
\nBoth sides have contributed to a p olarization of views that threatens the underlying consensus necessary for democratic politics. The political gridlock that has ensued from their di verging diagnoses has meant that our political orders consistently fail to deliver peace\, prosperity\, and accountable government. Moreover\, regar dless of the rhetoric or credentials of those in power\, democracy today s eems always to leave us with broadly the same basic policies\, despite som e of them being deeply unpopular.
\nWe invite those who are interest ed in presenting at the 2024 Telos Conference to consider critically the s tatus of democracy today by addressing one or more of the following questi ons:
\nDemocratic Values
\nDemocracy and the Administrative State
\nDemocracy and the Public Sphere
\nDemocracy and Relig ion
\nDemocracy and Authorit arianism
\nAbstract Submi ssions
\nWhatever specific questions you address\, we invit e you to present your analysis with an eye toward the long-standing concer ns of the Telos-Paul Piccone Institute and thereby to help develop a trenc hant\, independent view of democracy that can inform both critique and pra ctical action within our present historical moment. Please submit a short c.v. and an abstract of up to 250 words by October 15\, 2023\, to telosnyc 2024@telosinstitute.net and place “The 2024 Telos Conference” in the email ’s subject line. Please direct questions to Professor Mark G. E. Kelly\, W estern Sydney University\, M.Kelly@westernsydney.edu.au.
\nC onference Location
\nThe conference will take place at the John D. Calandra Italian American Institute in New York City from Friday\, March 22\, to Saturday\, March 23\, 2024.
\n DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20240322 DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20240324 GEO:+40.754894;-73.981856 LOCATION:The Telos-Paul Piccone Institute @ 25 W 43rd St 17th Floor\, New Y ork\, NY 10036\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Democracy Today? URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/democracy-today/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:cfp\,conference\,legal\,political\,religion\,social END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7682@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://universityseminars.columbia.edu/seminars/comparative-philos ophy/ DESCRIPTION:ABSTRACT: The Shenzi Fragments\, numbering a mere 3\,000 or so characters in length\, is all that remains of a work attribut ed to Shen Dao (ca. 350-275 BCE). While perhaps best known for his appeara nce in the Han Feizi as an advocate for positional power (勢 shi)\, he also makes an appearance in the Xunzi as one who is blinded by his focus on 法 fa (models\, standards\, laws). We will examine the fragments that discus s fa in an attempt to come to a deeper understanding of the role that thes e fragments see for the fa\, how they are to be determined\, and why Shen Dao took them to be central to a strong\, stable\, and flourishing state. The fragments\, in classical Chinese with English translations (Harris 201 6)\, are included here as a PDF attachment.
\n\n
DA TE: October 22\, 2021
\nTIME: 7:00-8:30 pm
\n\n
This seminar will take place via Zoom (please scroll down for the full invitation). Below you will find the link to join the meeting. T he attached file is an instruction manual to help you familiarize yourself with the program. In addition to familiarizing yourself with the program’ s basic functions\, there are two things we ask you to do before the meeti ng can start. First\, you will need to sign in by typing your name in the chat. Subsequently\, we will have to agree on the privacy policy for the m eeting. The privacy policy provided by the Columbia University Seminars Of fice will be read aloud. To indicate your agreement\, you will raise your virtual Zoom hand in the Participants panel. In the manual\, you will find step-by-step instructions of how to sign in and to raise your hand.
\nLead Presenter: Eirik Lang Harris
\nDiscussan ts: Alejandro Bárcenas (Texas State University)\, Yutang Jin (Princeton University)\, Mercedes Valmisa < /a>(Gettysburg College)
\nNote Regarding Donations: Due to COVID-19\, donations are only accepted through Columbia University’s secu re online giving form\, Giving to Columbia.
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20211022T190000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20211022T203000 GEO:+40.712775;-74.005973 LOCATION:ZOOM - see site for details @ New York\, NY\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:A Discussion of Fa (法) in the Shenzi: Eirik Lang Harris URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/a-discussion-of-fa-%e6%b 3%95-in-the-shenzi-eirik-lang-harris/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:Chinese\,comparative END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7750@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://universityseminars.columbia.edu/seminars/comparative-philos ophy/ DESCRIPTION:THE COLUMBIA SOCI ETY FOR COMPARATIVE PHILOSOPHY
\n\n
< b>Presents: Li Zehou on the ‘Deep Str uctures of Confucianism’
\nLead Presenter: Andrew Lambert (College of Staten Island\ , CUNY)
\nDiscussa nts: Robert A. Carleo III (East China Normal University)\, Emma Bucht el (Hong Kong Education University)
\nABSTRACT: Contemporary Chinese intellectual Li Zeh ou’s cross-cultural methodology blends traditional Confucian thought with thinkers such as Kant and Marx. This seminar addresses the question of cul ture and its role in Li’s thought. Li has made several claims about how a settled cultural tradition influences the subjects within it. One such cla im concerns the existence of ‘deep structures’ of Confucianism\, as outlin ed in this preparatory reading . The idea is that culture\, history\, and social practice (col lectively\, a tradition) shape human psychology (including the formation o f concepts\, emotions\, and values) in ways not always apparent to the sub ject. Within the Chinese tradition\, Confucianism constitutes such a deep structure\, and its effects cannot be captured by textual studies alone\, nor studies of material culture. Rather\, the deep structure is articulate d in terms of an emergent shared subjectivity. Such traditions can evolve and ultimately dissolve\; nevertheless\, their effects are deep-rooted. Th is seminar meeting will aim to identify the parameters of Li’s ambitious t heoretical framework and its plausibility\, and to explore connections wit h current work in related fields\, such as cultural and empirical psycholo gy.
\nDATE: Ma rch 25\, 2022
\nTI ME: 6:30 – 8:00 pm EST
\nThis seminar will take place via Zoom (please scroll down for the full invitation). Below you will find the link to join the meeting. Here is an instruction manual to help you familiarize yourself with the program. In addition to fam iliarizing yourself with the program’s basic functions\, there are two thi ngs we ask you to do before the meeting can start. First\, you will need t o sign in by typing your name in the chat. Subsequently\, we will have to agree on the privacy policy for the meeting. The privacy policy provided b y the Columbia University Seminars Office will be read aloud. To indicate your agreement\, you will raise your virtual Zoom hand in the Participants panel. In the manual\, you will find step-by-step instructions of how to sign in and to raise your hand.
\nNote Regarding Donations: Due to COVID-19\, donations are only accepted through Columbia University’s secure online giving form \, Giving to Columbia.
\n\n
Accessibility Statement: Columbia University encourages p ersons with disabilities to participate in its programs and activities. Th e University Seminars participants with dis- abilities who anticipate need ing accommodations or who have questions about physical access may contact the Office of Disability Services at 212.85 4.2388 or disability@columbia.edu. Disabili ty accommodations\, including sign-language interpreters\, are available o n request. Requests for accommodations must be made two weeks in advance. On campus\, seminar participants with disabilities should alert a Public S afety Officer if they need assistance accessing campus.
\nPLEASE VISIT OUR WEBSITE: https://universityseminars.columbia.edu/seminars/co mparative-philosophy/
\nDTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20220325T183000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20220325T200000 GEO:+40.712775;-74.005973 LOCATION:Zoom @ New York\, NY\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Li Zehou. Deep Structures of Confucianism URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/li-zehou-deep-structures -of-confucianism/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:Chinese\,comparative\,Confucianism END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7774@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://universityseminars.columbia.edu/seminars/comparative-philos ophy/ DESCRIPTION:
THE COLUMBIA SOCI ETY FOR COMPARATIVE PHILOSOPHY
\nWelcomes you to an IN-PERSON meeting:
\n< p class='gmail-p2'>Allison Aitken (Columbia University)\n« A Case against Simple-mindedness: Śrīgupta on Mental Mereology »< /p>\n
With responses from Ale xander Englert (Princeton University)
\nABSTRACT: There’s a c ommon line of reasoning which supposes that the phenomenal unity of consci ous experience is grounded in a mind-like simple subject. To the contrary\ , Mādhyamika Buddhist philosophers beginning with Śrīgupta (seventh-eighth century) argue that any kind of mental simple is incoherent and thus meta physically impossible. Lacking any unifying principle\, the phenomenal uni ty of conscious experience is instead an ungrounded illusion. In this talk \, I will present an analysis of Śrīgupta’s “neither-one-nor-many argument ” against mental simples and show how his line of reasoning is driven by a set of implicit questions concerning the nature of and relation between c onsciousness and its intentional object. These questions not only set the agenda for centuries of intra-Buddhist debate on the topic\, but they are also questions to which any defender of unified consciousness or a simple subject of experience arguably owes responses.
\nDTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20220513T173000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20220513T193000 GEO:+40.807536;-73.962573 LOCATION:Faculty House\, Columbia U @ New York\, NY 10027\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:A Case against Simple-mindedness: Śrīgupta on Mental Mereology. All ison Aitken\, Columbia URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/a-case-against-simple-mi ndedness-srigupta-on-mental-mereology-allison-aitken-columbia/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:Buddhism\,comparative\,mind END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7870@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://universityseminars.columbia.edu/seminars/comparative-philos ophy/ DESCRIPTION:
With responses from Mark Siderits (Illinois State University)
\nABSTRACT: Budd hist philosophers often draw a distinction between two different kinds of truth: conventional truth (saṃvṭi-satya) and ultimate truth (paramārtha-sa tya). Abhidharma Buddhists philosophers typically understand this distinct ion in terms of an ontological distinction between two different kinds of entities: ultimately real entities (paramārtha-sat) and conventionally rea l entities (saṃvṛti-sat). Similar to contemporary philosophical discussion s about ordinary objects\, Buddhist philosophers debate the ontological st atus of conventional entities and the semantics of discourse concerning th em. Mark Siderits (2015\, 2021\, 2022) has influentially argued for an eli minitivist position he calls “Buddhist reductionism” that interprets the A bhidharma position as one that denies conventional entities exist but that retains discourse involving apparent reference to them. However\, in a re cent article Kris McDaniel (2019)\, a prominent defender of ontological pl uralism\, challenges that view by proposing that the Abhidharma Buddhist d istinction between conventional truth and ultimate truth be “defined up” f rom a more basic distinction between two different ways an entity can exis t: conventionally or ultimately. In this paper I argue that Saṃghabhadra’s account of conventional reality and truth does lends itself well to McDan iel’s proposal but I will also argue that the account of conventional and ultimate truth that results differs in important ways from the models he o ffers. I will end by offering a modification of McDaniel’s account of conv entional truth that is derived from Saṃghabhadra’s pluralist ontology. Tha t view will\, unlike the views suggested by both Siderits and McDaniel\, a llow for there to be ultimate truths about what is conventionally true.
\n\n
Dinner will be kindly offered by the Columbia University Seminars.
\nRSVP is required for dinner. Please email Lucilla with eating requirements at lm3335@columb ia.edu.
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20220930T173000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20220930T193000 GEO:+40.806753;-73.959136 LOCATION:Faculty House\, Columbia U @ 64 Morningside Dr\, New York\, NY 100 27\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Buddhist Conventional Truth and Ontological Pluralism. Laura P. Gue rrero (William & Mary) URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/buddhist-conventional-tr uth-and-ontological-pluralism-laura-p-guerrero-william-mary/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:Buddhism\,metaphysics\,truth END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7872@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://universityseminars.columbia.edu/seminars/comparative-philos ophy/ DESCRIPTION:With responses from Timothy Connolly (East Stroudsburg University)
\nABSTRACT: Recent philosophical discussions on compassion focus on the value and the
nature of compassion as an emotion. Ancient Asian philosophical tradition
s such as Confucianism and Buddhism\, however\, emphasize compassion as a
character trait that should be nurtured. This paper examines the insights
drawn from these traditions to help inform the nurturing of compassion. Fo
r example\, is empathy a necessary tool? What is the role of love and car
e? Does self-reflection contribute to the process?
\n
\n
Dinner will be kindly o ffered by the Columbia University Seminars.
\nRSVP is required for dinner. Please email Lucilla with eating requ irements at lm3335@columbia.edu.< span class='gmail-Apple-converted-space'>
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20221014T173000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20221014T193000 GEO:+40.806753;-73.959136 LOCATION:Faculty House\, Columbia U @ 64 Morningside Dr\, New York\, NY 100 27\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:How to nurture compassion? Some lessons from Asian philosophical tr aditions. Sin Yee Chan (U Vermont) URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/how-to-nurture-compassio n-some-lessons-from-asian-philosophical-traditions-sin-yee-chan-u-vermont/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:Buddhism\,Confucianism END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7880@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://philosophy.columbia.edu/news/celebrating-recent-work-michel e-m-moody-adams DESCRIPTION:
\nby Michele M Moody-Adams
From nineteenth-century abolitionism to Black Lives Matter today\, pr ogressive social movements have been at the forefront of social change. Ye t it is seldom recognized that such movements have not only engaged in pol itical action but also posed crucial philosophical questions about the mea ning of justice and about how the demands of justice can be met.
\nM ichele Moody-Adams argues that anyone who is concerned with the theory or the practice of justice—or both—must ask what can be learned from social m ovements. Drawing on a range of compelling examples\, she explores what th ey have shown about the nature of justice as well as what it takes to crea te space for justice in the world. Moody-Adams considers progressive socia l movements as wellsprings of moral inquiry and as agents of social change \, drawing out key philosophical and practical principles. Social justice demands humane regard for others\, combining compassionate concern and rob ust respect. Successful movements have drawn on the transformative power o f imagination\, strengthening the motivation to pursue justice and to crea te the political institutions and social policies that can sustain it by i nspiring political hope.
\nMaking Space for Justice contend s that the insights arising from social movements are critical to bridging the gap between discerning theory and effective practice—and should be tr ansformative for political thought as well as for political activism.
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20221026T181500 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20221026T191500 GEO:+40.807325;-73.958831 LOCATION:Heyman Center\, 2nd floor common room @ 74 Morningside Dr\, New Yo rk\, NY 10027\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Celebrating Recent Work by Michele Moody-Adams URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/celebrating-recent-work- by-michele-moody-adams/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:political\,social END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7861@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://nygiw.tumblr.com/post/694621478841450496 DESCRIPTION:Please join us for a talk by Eric-John Russell (Unive rsität Potsdam)\, who will present chapters from his recently published bo ok\, Why Everything is as it Seems: Hegel and Debord. Jacob McNu lty (University College London) will provide a response followed by a Q&A with our audience.
\nGuy Debord has been called many things: pse udo-philosopher\, nihilist\, filmmaker\, megalomaniac\, strategist\, third -rate Mephistopheles. His book The Society of the Spectacle (1967) has fallen into a similarly motley reception\, frequently enveloped within the discourses of postmodernism\, media and cultural studies\, and avant- garde art history. My research however\, dispenses with such narratives an d instead offers a sustained examination of the concept of the society of the spectacle through the two pillars upon which Debord understood his own work as a critical theory of society: Marx’s critique of political econom y and Hegel’s speculative philosophy. It is the latter that will be the fo cus of my paper\, first by offering some introductory remarks on Debord’s theory of the spectacle but then arguing that it precisely the specula tive dimension of Hegel’s dialectic that remains central for Debord’s diagnosis of twentieth century capitalism\, with emphasis placed on the im portance of Hegel’s Wesenslogik. I will conclude with the historica l significance of Debord’s “heretical Hegelianism\,” specifically as an in tervention within the atmosphere of the French Hegelianism of the interwar and postwar period.
\nDTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20221216T170000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20221216T190000 GEO:+40.807536;-73.962573 LOCATION:Philosophy Hall\, rm 716 @ New York\, NY 10027\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Why Everything is as it Seems: Hegel & Debord. Eric-John Russell URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/why-everything-is-as-it- seems-hegel-debord-eric-john-russell/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:German\,Hegel\,idealism END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7957@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://scienceandsociety.columbia.edu/events/sexual-and-reproducti ve-justice-vehicle-global-progress DESCRIPTION:
This event will feature a thought-provoking panel discussion with sexual and reproductive justice experts on the value of the sexual a nd reproductive justice framework and how it can be applied to diverse sta keholders\, settings\, and contexts. Panelists will also highlight example s from around the world of momentum towards sexual and reproductive justic e.
\nFree and open to the public\; regis tration is required for both in-person and < a class='external' href='https://www.eventbrite.com/e/sexual-reproductive- justice-vehicle-for-global-progress-online-tickets-525885948027' target='_ blank' rel='noopener'>online attendance. For additional information\, please visit the event webpage. Please em ail Malia Maier at mm5352@cumc.c olumbia.edu with any questions. All in-person attendees must follow Co lumbia’s COVID-19 policies.
\nHosted by the Global Health Justice and Governance Program at Columbia University.
\n DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20230213T100000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20230213T110000 GEO:+40.816253;-73.958389 LOCATION:Forum\, Columbia University @ 601 W 125th St\, New York\, NY 10027 \, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Sexual and Reproductive Justice: Vehicle for Global Progress URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/sexual-and-reproductive- justice-vehicle-for-global-progress/ X-COST-TYPE:external X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:justice\,medical\,reproductive\,social X-TICKETS-URL:https://www.eventbrite.com/e/sexual-reproductive-justice-vehi cle-for-global-progress-in-person-tickets-523893077297 END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7964@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U\,New School for Social Research CONTACT:https://nygiw.tumblr.com/post/708636328395472896/21523-james-kreine s DESCRIPTION:15 Feb\, 4pm:
\nJames Kreines (Claremont McKenna)
\nFrom Shapeless Abyss Towards Self-Developing Thought: Taking Hegel on Spinoza Seriously
\n@ The New School\, Room L502\, at 2 W 13th Stre et
\nGuests and visitors policies at the New School can be accessed via this website. You will have to download CLEAR an d upload proof of vaccination or the results of a rapid test. Please try t o arrive 15 minutes earlier so we can help you in case of complications. p>\n
Feb 24:
\nGeorg Spoo (Freiburg)
\nGrounds and L imits of Immanent Critique: Kant\, Hegel\, Marx
\n@ Columbia
\nMar 3:
\nHeikki Ikaheimo
\nHegel\, Humanity\, and Soc ial Critique
\n@ Zoom
\nMar 24:
\nStephen Howard (KU Leuven)
\nKant’s Late Philosophy of Nature: The Opus Postumum p>\n
@ Columbia
\nApr 11:
\nKarin de Boer
\nDo es Kant’s Antinomy of Pure Reason Amount to an A Priori History of Rationa l Cosmology?
\n@ Columbia
\nApr 15\, 4pm:
\nEva von Redecker
\nCo-sponsored by the New School Graduate Student Confe rence
\n@ The New School
\nApr 21:
\nGiulia Batt istoni
\nNAture\, Life\, Organizm: The Legacy of Romanticism and Cla ssical German Philosophy in Jonas’ Philosophical Biology
\n@ The New School
\n\n
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20230215T160000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20230215T180000 GEO:+40.735225;-73.994325 LOCATION:The New School L502 @ 2 W 13th St\, New York\, NY 10011\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:From Shapeless Abyss Towards Self-Developing Thought: Taking Hegel on Spinoza Seriously. James Kreines (Claremont McKenna) URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/german-idealism-workshop -3/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:German\,Hegel\,idealism\,Spinoza END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7963@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://universityseminars.columbia.edu/seminars/comparative-philos ophy/ DESCRIPTION:
The COVID-19 pandemic is said to be a once-in-a-century incident\, and it brought to us a sense of crisis at v arious levels. What is a crisis\, though? Can any unnerving moment or peri od be called a crisis\, or are there different dimensions of a crisis to w hich we need to be attentive? Is solidarity possible after experiencing a crisis like Covid-19? Can Buddhism make any contribution to facilitating s olidarity? This presentation explores the meaning and nature of a crisis a nd our responses to it by drawing on modern Korean political thinker Pak C h’iu’s (1909–1949) analysis of crisis and feminist-Buddhist thinker Kim Ir yŏp’s (1896–1971) Buddhist philosophy. By doing so\, this presentation con siders what social\, political\, existential\, and even religious meaning we can draw from our experience of crises\, and what questions these insig hts present to us.
\nWith responses from Karsten Struhl (John Jay College of Criminal Ju stice\, CUNY)
\nPresented by THE COLUMBIA SOCIETY FOR COMPARATIVE PHILOSOPHY
\nRSVP is required for dinne r. If you would like to participate in our dinner\, a $30 fee is requi red. Please contact Lucilla at lm3335@columbia.edu for further information.
\nDTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20230303T173000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20230303T193000 GEO:+40.806753;-73.959136 LOCATION:Faculty House\, Columbia U @ 64 Morningside Dr\, New York\, NY 100 27\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Philosophy of Crisis and a Question of Solidarity. Jin Y. Park (Ame rican) URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/philosophy-of-crisis-and -a-question-of-solidarity-jin-y-park-american/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:Buddhism\,comparative\,existentialism\,Korean\,politi cal\,religion\,social END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7976@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:CUNY CONTACT: DESCRIPTION:
This talk will develop the idea that racial identities are b est understood as formed through large scale historical events\, and that this genesis can only be obscured by disavowals of racial categories as co nceptually mistaken and inevitably morally pernicious. In this sense\, ra ces are formed not simply as ideas\, or ideologies and policies\, as many social constructivists about race argue\, but as forms of life with associ ated patterns of subjectivity including\, as a wealth of social psychology has shown\, presumptive attitudes and behavioral dispositions (Jeffers 20 19\; Steele 2010\; Sullivan 2005). Because they are historical form ations\, racial identities are thoroughly social\, contextual\, variegated internally\, and dynamic. It is history that will alter them\, not merely policy changes.
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20230316T160000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20230316T180000 GEO:+40.748789;-73.984092 LOCATION:CUNY Grad Center 5318 @ 365 5th Ave\, New York\, NY 10016\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:The Historical Formation of Races. Linda Alcoff URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/the-historical-formation -of-races-linda-alcoff/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:history\,race\,social END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7981@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:CUNY CONTACT:swipnyc@gmail.com DESCRIPTION:SWIP–NYC Sue Weinberg Lecture Series
presents:
Grit & Imposter SyndromeJoint Lectures
by
Je
nnifer Morton (University of Pe
nnsylvania)
Talk Title: Interpreting
Obstacles
&
Leonie Smith (Unive
rsity of Manchester)
Talk Title: Class\, Academia\, and Imposter Syn
drome
Friday\, March 17
5–7 p.m.
CUNY Graduate Center
365 5th Avenue
QUESTIONS? EMAIL swipnyc@g
mail.com
Conceptual misalignment is a pervasive phenomenon in the stu dies of Non-Western philosophy and the History of Philosophy (NW&HP). Howe ver\, conceptual misalignment is often undetected\, unsuspected\, or seen as a hurdle that NW&HP materials need to overcome to contribute to contemp orary discussions. Specifically\, conceptual misalignment refers to the fo llowing: In the process of crystalizing NW&HP materials\, a linguistic coo rdination of concepts is formed between the speaker\, i.e.\, NW&HP\, and i ts context of contemporary anglophone philosophy. However\, in philosophic ally meaningful ways\, the original NW&HP concept and its anglophone count erpart misalign. This misalignment is particularly intricate and hard to d etect when it comes to emotion concepts\, as they are thought to involve p henomenal and/or intentional features. Through investigating the concept o f emotion in Chinese philosophy\, I propose a refocusing on conceptual mis alignment as a method of cross-cultural comparative and history of philoso phy. Moreover\, I argue that conceptual misalignment is an important resou rce for contemporary conceptual engineering and amelioration projects.
\nWith responses from Andrew Lambert (College of Staten Island\, CUNY)
\nRSVP is required for dinner. Dinner will take place at a nearby restaurant. Please contact Lucilla at lm3335@columbia.edu for fu rther information.
\nDTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20230317T173000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20230317T193000 GEO:+40.807527;-73.960864 LOCATION:Philosophy Hall\, Columbia @ 1150 Amsterdam Ave\, New York\, NY 10 027\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:From Conceptual Misalignment to Conceptual Engineering: A Case Stud y on Emotion from Chinese Philosophy. Wenqing Zhao (Whitman) URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/from-conceptual-misalign ment-to-conceptual-engineering-a-case-study-on-emotion-from-chinese-philos ophy-wenqing-zhao-whitman/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:Chinese\,comparative\,emotion END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7951@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://sofheyman.org/events/an-afternoon-with-judith-butler DESCRIPTION:
The pandemic compels us to ask fundamental questions about o ur place in the world: the many ways humans rely on one another\, how we v itally and sometimes fatally breathe the same air\, share the surfaces of the earth\, and exist in proximity to other porous creatures in order to l ive in a social world. What we require to live can also imperil our lives. How do we think from\, and about\, this common bind?
\nIn
Exposing and opposing forms of injustice t hat deny the essential interrelationship of living creatures\, Butler argu es for a radical social equality and advocates modes of resistance that se ek to establish new conditions of livability and a new sense of a shared w orld.
\nSpeaker
\nJudith Butler is a Distinguished Professor in th e Graduate School at the University of California\, Berkeley. They are the author of several books\, most recently The Force of Nonviolence: An Ethico-Political Bind (2020). Butler’s previous Columbia University P ress books include Parting Ways: Jewishness and the Critique of Zionis m (2012)\, Antigone’s Claim: Kinship Between Life and Death (2000)\, and Subjects of Desire: Hegelian Reflections in Twentieth-Cen tury France (1987).
\nRespondents
\nMia Florin-Seft on is a Ph.D. candidate and University Writing Instructor in the English & Comparative Literature Department at Columbia University\, w here she specializes in 20th and 21st-century transatlantic anglophone lit eratures and culture. She is also working on a project that looks at the h istory of sex glands and early history of hormone replacement therapy in t he context of theories of racial degeneration and eugenics post-World War I.
\nProfessor Goyal is an Assistant Professor of Emergency Medicine at the Columbia Unive rsity Medical Center and founding director of the major in Medical Humanit ies. Professor Goyal completed his residency in Emergency Medicine as Chie f Resident while finishing his PhD in English and Comparative Literature. His research interests include the health humanities\, the study of the no vel\, and medical epistemology. His writing has appeared in The Living Handbook of Narratology\, Aktuel Forskning\, Litteratur\, Kultur og Medier\, and The Los Angeles Review of Books\, among oth er places. He is a Co-Founding Editor of the online journal\, Synapsis: A Health Hum anities Journal
\nMa rianne Hirsch is the William Peterfield Trent Professor Emeri ta of English and Comparative Literature at Columbia University and Profes sor in the Institute for the Study of Sexuality and Gender. She is a membe r of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a former President of t he Modern Language Association of America. Along with a group of local sch olars\, artists and activists\, Hirsch is currently co-directing the Zip Code Memory Project\, an initiative that seeks to find art and community-ba sed ways to repair the devastating losses resulting from the Coronavirus p andemic while also acknowledging its radically differential effects on Upp er New York City neighborhoods.
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20230324T160000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20230324T173000 GEO:+40.807536;-73.962573 LOCATION:Jerome Greene Hall (Law School) Rm 101 @ New York\, NY 10027\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:An Afternoon with Judith Butler: On the Pandemic and Our Shared Wor ld URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/an-afternoon-with-judith -butler-on-the-pandemic-and-our-shared-world/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:medical\,phenomenology\,social END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-8044@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:http://universityseminars.columbia.edu/seminars/comparative-philoso phy/ DESCRIPTION:What is an appropriate response to humiliating treatm ents such as insults? This question is not only relevant to today’s discou rse but has also piqued the curiosity of thinkers in classical Chinese phi losophy. The Warring States period debate regarding whether one’s inner se nse of shame can shield one from insulting situations and from experiencin g shame is frequently presented as a one-sided narrative that focuses on t he Confucian texts. Meanwhile\, the views of their rival thinkers\, such a s the Daoist\, legalist\, or much-neglected Songzi (3rd century BCE)\, are rarely the focus of attention. This paper brings Songzi\, a key player in the debate of emotions as responses to external triggers\, into the pictu re and restores the historical intellectual discourse over the topic of wh at constitutes an appropriate response to humiliating situations such as i nsults. More importantly\, I point out the philosophical significance of t his debate\, namely how Songzi prompts Xunzi to respond to an ambiguity wi thin the Confucian doctrine: The early Confucians appear to think that an individual’s internal virtues can isolate and shield one from hostile exte rnal stimuli while also maintaining that the external environment impacts one’s moral cultivation and moral life in significant ways. Xunzi’s strate gic move\, I argue\, is to give credit to both an inner sense of shame and the function of external stimuli in inducing negative emotions\, thus mak ing an important philosophical concession compared to Confucius and Menciu s.
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n< p>With responses from Nalei Chen (New York University)\n\n
ABSTRACT: Yogācāra Buddhists articulated in the 3-5th c. CE India an explicit model of how we collectively\, yet mostly unconsciously\, constru ct our shared social realities\, our cultures. These “worlds” are supporte d by cognitive processes informed by cultural influences occurring outside our conscious awareness\, in the “store-house consciousness” (ālaya-vijñā na). Through development and socialization\, we come to identify with thes e cultural norms\, thinking “I am this” and “this is mine.” Moreover\, and in agreement with cognitive scientists\, Yogācārins argue that humans hav e developed to be “innate essentialists\,” so that we imagine that our con structed social and cultural identities have their own essential\, intrins ic characteristics\, set apart from all others\, generating the “us/them” dichotomies that underlie conflicts between groups. We can counteract thes e harmful patterns\, Yogācārins say\, by analyzing how our social and cult ural “realities” are collectively constructed\, and by showing how—through logical\, psychological\, and contemplative exercises—we may weaken our u nreflective\, knee-jerk reaction to different peoples and cultures\, and t hereby foster more tolerance\, empathy and understanding for all beings. I n sum\, Yogācāra Buddhism offers a rigorous and nuanced analysis of the or igins of our prejudices and a set of methods to overcome them\, rooted in ancient traditions yet relevant to contemporary issues.
\nWith re sponses from Jonathan Gold (Princeton University)
\nDA TE: October 13th\, 2023
\nTIME: 5:30 pm EST
\nLO CATION: Philosophy Hall\, Room 716\, Columbia University
\n1150 Amsterdam Ave\, New York\, NY 10027
\nNOTE ON ENTRY FOR NON-COLUM BIA GUESTS: The door to Philosophy Hall will only open with a Columbia University ID card. If you do not have this card please arrive early wher e someone will be standing outside until the meeting begins. If you arrive late\, you can ask someone walking nearby to let you in or contact Cole a t cf27 98@columbia.edu. Please only contact Cole as a final resource so as no t to interrupt the talk.
\nThe speaker will be Prof. Lewis Gordon of the University of Connecticut\, on “From Harlem to the World: Philosophy from a Center of th e Black World with Questions for the 21st Century.” Gordon will talk about worldliness and public aspects of philosophy\, placing them in the contex t of Harlem both at City College and the public world of Africana philosop hy from Du Bois to Malcolm X to contemporaries such as Nathalie Etoke. He will conclude with a set of questions for 21st century philosophy to consi der.
\nLewis R. Gordon is Professor and Head of the Department of Philosophy at UCONN-Storrs\; Honorary President of the Global Center for Advanced Studies\; Honorary Professor in the Unit for th e Humanities at Rhodes University\, South Africa\; and Distinguished Schol ar at The Most Honourable PJ Patterson Centre for Africa-Caribbean Advocac y at The University of the West Indies\, Mona. He co-edits the journal Phi losophy and Global Affairs\, the Rowman & Littlefield book series Global C ritical Caribbean Thought\, and the Routledge-India book series Academics\ , Politics and Society in the Post-Covid World. He is the author of many b ooks\, including\, most recently\, Freedom\, Justice\, and Decolonization (Routledge\, 2021) and Fear of Black Consciousness (hardcover\, NY: Farrar \, Straus and Giroux\, 2022\; in the UK\, London: Penguin Books\, 2022)\, Picador paperback 2023. He is the 2022 recipient of the Eminent Scholar Aw ard from the Global Development Studies division of the International Stud ies Association.
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20231116T180000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20231116T191500 GEO:+40.820047;-73.949272 LOCATION:North Academic Building\, rm 1/201 @ 160 Convent Ave\, New York\, NY 10031\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:From Harlem to the World: Philosophy from a Center of the Black Wor ld with Questions for the 21st Century. Lewis Gordon (UConn) URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/from-harlem-to-the-world -philosophy-from-a-center-of-the-black-world-with-questions-for-the-21st-c entury-lewis-gordon-uconn/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:African\,race\,social END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-8105@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T184157Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://universityseminars.columbia.edu/seminars/comparative-philos ophy/ DESCRIPTION:The first section of the talk will give an account of the Hi ndu-Buddhist debate about the existence of selves. The particular Hindu / Brāhmaṇical tradition concentrated on is Nyāya\, and ‘Buddhism’ is used t o refer specifically to Dharmakīrtian Buddhism with its doctrine of moment ariness. The second section looks at a Nyāya argument against Buddhism. I will argue that it is not difficult for the Buddhist to come up with a s atisfactory response. The third section will introduce the view of Rāmaka ṇṭha (950–1000 CE) and look at three of his arguments against the Buddhist view. These I view as more difficult for the Buddhist to respond to. Th e fourth section introduces the view of Galen Strawson\, relates it to the Buddhist view\, and considers the extent to which it is susceptible to Rā makaṇṭha’s arguments.
\nWith responses from Martin Lin (Ru tgers University)
\nNOTE ON ENTRY FOR NON-COLUMBIA GUESTS: b>The door to Philosophy Hall will only open with a Columbia University ID card. If you do not have this card please arrive early where someone will be standing outside until the meeting begins. If you arrive late\, you ca n ask someone walking nearby to let you in or contact Cole at cf2798@columbia.ed u. Please only contact Cole as a final resource so as not to interrupt the talk.
\nNOTE REGARDING DONATIONS: Due to COVID-19\, dona tions are only accepted through Columbia University’s secure online giving form\, Giving to Columbia.
\nRSVP is required for dinner. Di nner will take place at a nearby restaurant. Please contact Cole at cf2798@colum bia.edu for further information.
\nComparative Philosophy Semina r:
\nHow doe s the imagination change us? Why should picturing ourselves a certain way have any real effect on what we are? These questions are central to debate s in Buddhist tantric literature regarding the generation stage (utpatt ikrama)\, wherein practitioners visualize themselves as buddhas enscon sed in magnificent mandala-palaces. For some\, this practice is what sets Buddhist tantra apart: through this “yoga of the imagination\,” as David S hulman puts it\, a practitioner can achieve buddhahood in a single lifetim e. And yet\, as the Buddhist tantric author Indrabhūti (8th century) argue s\, a pauper who imagines himself to be a king does not thereby become one —so\, in the same way\, practitioners who visualize themselves as buddhas will not thereby become buddhas. The mental imagery (ākāra) involve d in this practice is just so much unreal fabrication. Why should it have real transformative effects? I’ll consider here how these debates played o ut in Sanskrit Buddhist tantric texts from the 10th–11th centuries. I’ll f ocus on early authors in the Kālacakra tradition\, who upheld Indrabhūti’s critique of the generation stage\, and authors like Ratnākaraśānti\, Vāgī śvarakīrti\, and Advayavajra (aka Maitrīpa)\, who each in their own way cr itiqued mental imagery yet defended the importance and effectiveness of ge neration-stage practice. In the first part of the paper\, I’ll consider ar guments against mental imagery as these appear in generation-stage practic e texts and the early Kālacakra tradition. In the second part\, I’ll turn to why we might think unreal mental imagery can nevertheless have real tra nsformative effects\, paying special attention to the ways Buddhist tantri c authors writing in Sanskrit take up ideas from the tradition of dramatic theory (nāṭyaśastra) and Sanskrit culture more broadly.
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nW ith responses from Thomas Yarnall (Columbia University)
\n div>\nDATE: February 2nd\, 2024 p>\n
TIME: 5:30 pm EST
\nLOCATION: Philosophy Hall\, Room 716\, Columbia University
\n1150 Amsterdam Ave\, New York\, NY 10027
\nNOTE ON ENTRY FOR NON-COLUMBIA GUESTS: The door to P hilosophy Hall will only open with a Columbia University ID card. If you d o not have this card please arrive early where someone will be standing ou tside until the meeting begins. If you arrive late\, you can ask someone w alking nearby to let you in or contact Cole at cf2798@columbia.edu. Please o nly contact Cole as a final resource so as not to interrupt the talk.
\nNOTE REGARDING DONATIONS: Due to COVID-19\, donations are only accepted through Columbia University’s secure online giving form\, Giving to Columbia.
\nRSVP is required for dinner. Dinner will take place at a nearby restaurant. Please contact Cole at cf2798@columbia.edu fo r further information.
\nACCESSIBILITY STATEMENT: Columbia Un iversity encourages persons with disabilities to participate in its progra ms and activities. The University Seminars’ participants with dis- abiliti es who anticipate needing accommodations or who have questions about physi cal access may contact the Office of Disability Services at 212.854.2388 o r disability@columbia.edu. Disability accommodations\, including sign-la nguage interpreters\, are available on request. Requests for accommodation s must be made two weeks in advance. On campus\, seminar participants with disabilities should alert a Public Safety Officer if they need assistanc e accessing campus.
\nPLEASE VISIT OUR WEBSITE: https://universityseminars.columbia.edu/seminar s/comparative-philosophy/
\n(Please do not reply to this anno uncement. You may contact the Co-Chairs using the link above.)
\n< p>Comparative Philosophy Seminar:\n\n
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20240202T173000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20240202T193000 GEO:+40.811099;-73.962729 LOCATION:Columbia Religion @ 80 Claremont Ave\, New York\, NY 10027\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Mental Imagery\, Tantric Practice\, and the Drama of the Imaginatio n. Davey K. Tomlinson (Villanova) URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/mental-imagery-tantric-p ractice-and-the-drama-of-the-imagination-davey-k-tomlinson-villanova/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:Buddhism\,comparative\,imagination END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR- January 19 – Alex Watson (Ashoka University)
\n- February 2 – Davey Tomlinson (Villanova Univ ersity)
\n- April 5 – Laura Specker (Fordham University)
\n- M ay 3 – Daniel Stephens (University at Buffalo)
\n