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-7763@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T141730Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:New School for Social Research CONTACT:https://withinenvironments2022.weebly.com/ DESCRIPTION:
Since Plato\, western philosophy ha s been set down a path paved by a disavowal of the sensuous\, bracketed ma terial bodies\, and delimited aesthetic conceptions\, leaving human beings and their built environments separated from the natural world. Such exclu sions have left philosophy ill-equipped to deal with the various environme ntal crises we currently face\, as economic rationality and utilitarian lo gic further de-animate the world and sharpen the human/nature distinction. Even the concept “environment” often\, and ironically\, brings with it im plicit anthropocentric assumptions\, conceptualizing\, and thereby separat ing\, the human as independent from the surrounding world and reinforcing the human/nature divide. As a result\, our (mis)understandings of “nature” and “environment” may make us insensitive to and perpetuate\, rather than address\, climate change and other environmental catastrophes. To avoid a mbiguities and clarify our understanding\, we must ask: what role does Nat ure play within our theories and practices concerning so-called Environmen tal Philosophy? Furthermore\, what spaces\, practices\, and questions are made possible when we broaden our understanding of “environment” to includ e a more robust conceptualization of the natural world and how the human b eing ought to be contextualized within it?
\nThis conference asks ho w we might reorient the language and practices of philosophy in a way that can enable us to adequately respond to ongoing environmental crises. As a starting point\, we propose a need to reimagine the concepts “human\,” “n ature\,” and “environment\,” as well as the reciprocal relations that cons titute them. To recognize humans as natural organisms\, we must reevaluate the sensuous\, the material\, and the aesthetic and the roles they play i n our attempts to construct\, understand\, and preserve our environment(s) . How should we make sense of our practices and our relations to those wit h whom we share our surroundings? How can we re-situate the human with/in the environment? Do we have the right tools to guide these investigations? How might philosophy look beyond itself—to literature\, architecture\, mu sic\, film\, design—to better bring Environment\, and thus the world\, int o view? In the spirit of this\, we invite paper as well as project submiss ions from current graduate students in any discipline.
\nPos sible Topics:
\n● Environmental Aesthetics: Re-Consi dering Beauty + the Sublime
\n● Environmental Justice + Resto rative Justice + Transformative Justice
\n● Environmental Eth ics + Sustainable Practices
\n● Diversity + Biodiversity
\n● Capitalism and Climate
\n● Eco-phenomenology
\n● Eco-deconstruction
\n● Environmental Racism/Ra cist Environments
\n● Ecofeminist conceptions of nature
\n● Land Rights and Property Relations
\n● Posthumani sm + Object Ontologies
\n● Afrofuturism + Technological Utopi as
\n● Environmental Ethics In Narratives
\n● Ma stery of Nature in Philosophy
\n● Anarcho-primitivism
\n● Queer and Trans Ecologies
\n● Local and Global Ecol ogies
\n● Regionalisms and Globalisms in the Ecological Imagi nation
\n\n
Confirmed Conference Key notes:
\nSandra Shapshay\, CUNY Graduate Center\, New York< /p>\n
Emanuele Coccia\, École des hautes études en sciences sociales (EH ESS)\, Paris
\nDates and Location:
\nThis con ference will be held at the New School for Social Research in New York Cit y from Thursday\, April 14\, to Saturday\, April 16. While we (tentatively ) plan to hold the conference primarily in-person we would also like to pr ovide a hybrid option for those who would prefer to participate remotely. Following the conference\, on Sunday\, April 17\, all participants and att endees are invited to participate in a conference hike in Cold Spring\, NY (about an hour and a half north of NYC and accessible by the Metro North commuter train).
\nCall for Papers: Submission Procedure:
\nPlease submit complete papers (Word Limit: 3500) and an abs tract of 250 words or less by January 1st in the form of a Word attachment (.docx) or PDF to WithInEnvironments@gmail.com. Please prepare your submission for blind review by removing any identifying information from the body of the paper. In your email please include your name\, affiliation\, and paper t itle. Notification of acceptance will be sent by January 15.
\nPlease submit a project description (Word Limit: 1000) by December 1st in the form of a Word attachment (.docx) to WithInEnvironments@gmail.com\, as well as:
\nFor Visual Arts projects: submit 5 images of your work as .jpeg.
\nFor P erforming Arts projects: submit video/ audio of your work in .mp4 format p>\n
Please prepare your submission for blind review by removing any ide ntifying information. In your email please include your name\, affiliation \, and project title. Notification of acceptance will be sent by January 1 5.
\nIf you have any questions please email WithInEnvironments@gmail.com
\n\n\n
\n |
RSVP is required for both in-person and remote attendance. Click here to RSVP.
\nRutgers Workshop on Chinese Philosophy (RWCP) wa s launched in 2012. It is designed to build a bridge between Chinese philo sophy and Western analytic philosophy and to promote critical engagement a nd constructive dialogue between the two sides\, with the hope of bringing the study of Chinese philosophy into the mainstream of philosophical disc ourse within the Western academy. It is run every other year\, usually in late spring.
\nRutgers Workshop on Chinese Philos ophy (RWCP) was launched in 2012. It is designed to build a bridg e between Chinese philosophy and Western analytic philosophy and to promot e critical engagement and constructive dialogue between the two sides\, wi th the hope to diversify the practice of philosophy by bringing the study of Chinese philosophy into the mainstream of philosophical discourse withi n the Western academy. It is run every other year\, usually in late spring .
\nSixth RWCP\, “New Voices in Chinese Philosophy\,” will be held in person\, with live streaming throu gh Zoom\, on Friday\, April 28\, 2023. Six junior scholars of Chinese phil osophy\, representing new voices in the field\, will engage six more senio r scholars. This year’s workshop is co-sponsored by Rutgers Global\, Relig ion Department\, Rutgers Center for the Philosophy of Religion\, and Philo sophy Department. RSVP is required for attendance\, either in-person (limi ted to the room capacity) or online. Click here to register.
\n8:20a.m. Breakfast
\n8:50a.m. – 9:00a.m. Welcoming Remarks
\nKa
ren Bennett\, Chair of Philosophy Department\, Rutgers University
9:00a.m. – 10:00a.m. “Relational Normativity: Williams’s Thick Eth
ical Concepts in Confucian Ethical Communities”
\nPresenter:
Sai-Ying Ng (CUNY Graduate Center)
\nCommentator: Alex Guerrero (Rut
gers University)
\nModerator: Stephen Angle (Wesleyan University)
\nRapporteur: Esther Goh (Rutgers University)
10:00a.m. – 10:15a .m. tea break
\n10:15a.m. – 11:15a.m. “Paradoxes in the
Zhuangzi”
\nPresenter: Chun-Man Kwong (University of Ox
ford)
\nCommentator: Graham Priest (CUNY Graduate Center)
\nMode
rator: Karen Bennett (Rutgers University)
\nRapporteur: Adrian Liu (R
utgers University)
11:15a.m. – 11:30a.m. tea break
\n11:30a.
m. – 12:30p.m. “A Mohist Theory of Reference”
\nPres
enter: Susan Blake (Skidmore College)
\nCommentator: Jane Geaney (Uni
versity of Richmond)
\nModerator: Dean Zimmerman (Rutgers University)
\nRapporteur: Esther Goh (Rutgers University)
12:30p.m. – 1:3 0p.m. Lunch (onsite)
\n1:30p.m. – 2:30p.m.
“Wealth\, Poverty\, and Living a Moral Life: Confucius and Mencius”
\nPresenter: Frederick Choo (Rutgers University)
\nCommentato
r: Stephen Angle (Wesleyan University)
\nModerator: Tanja Sargent (Ru
tgers University)
\nRapporteur: Esther Goh (Rutgers University)
2:30p.m. – 2:45p.m. tea break
\n2:45p.m. – 3:45p.m. “Grat
itude and Debt in Western and Confucian Ethics”
\nPresenter:
Choo Lok-Chui (Nanyang Technological University)
\nCommentator: Fran
ces Kamm (Rutgers University)
\nModerator: Hagop Sarkissian (CUNY Bar
uch College)
\nRapporteur: Esther Goh (Rutgers University)
3: 45p.m. – 4:00p.m. tea break
\n4:00p.m. – 5:00p.m. “‘Flying b
y Not Having Wings’ — in and beyond the Zhuangzi”
\nPresenter: L. K. Gustin Law (University of Chicago)
\nCommentator:
Lincoln Rathnam (Duke Kunshan University)
\nModerator: George Tsai (U
niversity of Hawaii at Manoa)
\nRapporteur: Esther Goh (Rutgers Unive
rsity)
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-7682@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T141730Z 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:20240328T141730Z 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:20240328T141730Z 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:20240328T141730Z 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:20240328T141730Z 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-7896@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T141730Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:New School for Social Research CONTACT:https://event.newschool.edu/philosophycolloquiumanatmatar DESCRIPTION:Book panel: Anat Matar\, The Pover ty of Ethics (Verso books 2022)
\nParticipants:
\nAnat Matar (Senior Lecturer of Philosophy at Tel Aviv University)
\nSimon Critchley (Hans Jonas Professor of Philo sophy at NSSR)
\nRaef Zreik (Visiting Fellow at Yal e Law School\, and Associate Professor of Jurisprudence at Ono Academic Co llege)
\n\n
Abstract:
\nIt is a common assumption that ethics must serve as the cornerstone of politics. Yet abs tract moral arguments have always been used for justifying all kinds of at rocities\; ethical sensitivity and compassion have been expressed towards particular kinds of victims\, while totally ignoring others.
\nThe l iberal West\, in particular\, continually manifests such blindness. It is horrified by non-Western oppressive methods\, but turns a blind eye to the ir Western equivalents.
\nThe gratification of holding the moral hig h ground consistently serves as a political instrument in the hands of tho se seeking to shore up the existing order.
\nIn The Poverty of Ethic s\, philosopher and activist Anat Matar argues for the conceptual primacy of political discourse over ethics and claims that only the political forc e which stands for equality\, justice and democracy – the Left – can provi de the coordinates for an ethical life under conditions of global injustic e.
\nAppealing to philosophical ideas on the essence of language\, M atar shows how the ethos of the Left\, as it has evolved over years\, unde rlies and gradually forms the basis for ethics.
\nStruggles against slavery\, racism\, colonization and militarization\, protests against expl oitation and the capitalist order\, the feminist movement\, global demands for climate action – all these are primarily motivated by a deep understa nding of Left heritage rather than by abstract ethical requirements or by airy sensitivities. They\, in turn\, shape and reshape our notion of moral it
\nTickets: https://event.newschool.ed u/philosophycolloquiumanatmatar.
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20221110T180000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20221110T200000 GEO:+40.73702;-73.992243 LOCATION:Wolff Conference Room/D1103 @ 6 E 16th St\, New York\, NY 10003\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Philosophy Colloquium Book panel: Anat Matar “The Poverty of Ethics ” URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/philosophy-colloquium-bo ok-panel-anat-matar-the-poverty-of-ethics/ X-COST-TYPE:external X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:ethics\,political\,social X-TICKETS-URL:https://event.newschool.edu/philosophycolloquiumanatmatar END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7897@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T141730Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:New School for Social Research CONTACT:https://event.newschool.edu/philosophycolloquiumkamtekar DESCRIPTION:What makes right acts right? A Stoic answer to R oss’s question.
\nWhen W.D. Ross poses the question\, “what makes right acts right?” (The Right and the Good ch. 2)\, he is aski ng a question that is prior to the deliberative question\, “how do I deter mine the right thing to do?” The Stoics recognize this: in De Officiis 1.7 \, Cicero says that every inquiry about duty has two parts: (1) a theoreti cal part concerned with the end of goods and evils\, which addresses such matters as whether all duties are perfect\, whether some are more importan t than others\, and what are the kinds of duties\, and (2) a practical par t which sets out rules (praecepta) by which our conduct can be made to con form with the end. This paper focuses on (1) and in particular asks Ross’ s question about Stoic right actions (kathêkonta).
\n\n
The endpoint of Stoic deliberation is determining what token action is the rig ht action. The paper begins with the Stoic distinction between a thing’s choiceworthiness\, its intrinsic disposition to elicit a choice response i n a suitable subject\, and its possession being to-be-chosen. The determin ation of what is to-be-done is made by weighing against each other all the values of the relevant action types specified by their content (the so-ca lled ‘intermediate actions’) that are in accordance with nature\, as Stoic value theory says that according with nature is an objective reason to do an action. What constitutes the rightness of the token right action\, an d is given in its reasonable defense\, is the same as what constitutes the rightness of a perfect (katorthôma) action. The Stoic distinction betw een right and perfect action depends on the action’s moral goodness—not ri ghtness—which is due to its causal origin.
\nPresented by Professor< a href='https://philosophy.cornell.edu/rachana-kamtekar'> Rachana Kamtekar (Cornell University)
\nTickets: http s://event.newschool.edu/philosophycolloquiumkamtekar.
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20221117T180000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20221117T200000 GEO:+40.73702;-73.992243 LOCATION:Wolff Conference Room/D1103 @ 6 E 16th St\, New York\, NY 10003\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Rachana Kamtekar: What makes right acts right? A Stoic answer to Ro ss’s question URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/rachana-kamtekar-what-ma kes-right-acts-right-a-stoic-answer-to-rosss-question/ X-COST-TYPE:external X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:ancient\,ethics X-TICKETS-URL:https://event.newschool.edu/philosophycolloquiumkamtekar END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7954@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T141730Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://scienceandsociety.columbia.edu/events/cynthia-bennett-disab ility-accessibility-and-fairness-artificial-intelligence DESCRIPTION:Artificial intelligence (AI) promises to automate and scale solutions to perennial accessibility challenges (e.g.\, generating image d escriptions for blind users). However\, research shows that AI-bias dispro portionately impacts people already marginalized based on their race\, gen der\, or disabilities\, raising questions about potential impacts in addit ion to AI’s promise. In this talk\, Cynthia Bennett will overview broad co ncerns at the intersection of AI\, disability\, and accessibility. She wil l then share details about one project in this research space that led to guidance on human and AI-generated image descriptions that account for sub jective and potentially sensitive descriptors around race\, gender\, and d isability of people in images.
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20230206T130000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20230206T140000 GEO:+40.841243;-73.940971 LOCATION:Presbyterian Hospital Building (Room PH20-200) @ 622 W 168th St\, New York\, NY 10032\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Cynthia Bennett – Disability Accessibility and Fairness in Artifici al Intelligence URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/cynthia-bennett-disabili ty-accessibility-and-fairness-in-artificial-intelligence/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:artificial intelligence\,ethics END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7892@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T141730Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Independent CONTACT:https://events.nyas.org/event/aeb22abd-112e-4973-b86d-8a4a73b0c618/ websitePage:2b462a34-6b82-4e70-99c9-e8dd3c218e9b 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-7977@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T141730Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://universityseminars.columbia.edu/seminars/comparative-philos ophy/ DESCRIPTION:
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-7988@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T141730Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:New School for Social Research CONTACT:nycwittgensteinworkshop@gmail.com DESCRIPTION:
The NYC Wittgenstein Workshop presents:
\nMarch 31st — Sandra Laugier (Université Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne) will be presenting on Wittgenstein and Care Ethics
\nApril 14th — Camila Lobo (PhD cand idate in Philosophy at Nova University of Lisbon and visiting scholar) wil l be presenting on Wittgenstein and hermeneutical justice in connection wi th the so-called “problem of the new.”
\nApril 21st — Harmut von Sas s (Humboldt University Berlin and a visiting scholar) will be presenting o n gratitude.
\nApril 28th — Janna van Grunsven (Delft University of Technology) will be presenting on How Social Media Platforms Disrupt the F ield of Social Affordances and Threaten Human Flourishing.
\nWith th e exception of our last talk (which will take place over Zoom)\, workshops will be in person from 4 to 6 pm EST\, followed by a reception. As always \, snacks and drinks will be provided.
\nLook out for an email close r to each event with more details regarding the location and materials the speaker would like to circulate.
\nDTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20230331T160000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20230331T180000 GEO:+40.73702;-73.992243 LOCATION:New School D1001 @ 6 E 16th St\, New York\, NY 10003\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Wittgenstein and Care Ethics. Sandra Laugier (Université Paris 1 Pa nthéon Sorbonne) URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/wittgenstein-and-care-et hics-sandra-laugier-universite-paris-1-pantheon-sorbonne/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:ethics\,wittgenstein END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-8044@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T141730Z 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.
\nWhen W.D. Ross poses the question “what makes right acts rig ht?” (The Right and the Good\, ch. 2)\, he is asking a question t hat is prior to\, and has a bearing on\, the practical question “how do I determine the right thing to do?” The Stoics recognize this. Cicero (D e Officio\, where he is referring to Panaetius’ work Peri Kathêk ontos) tells us that every inquiry about duty has two parts: (1) a th eoretical part concerned with the end of good and evil deeds\, which addre sses such matters as whether all duties are perfect (omniane official perfecta sint)\, whether some are more important than others\, and wh at the kinds of duties are\, and (2) a practical part which sets out rules (praecepta) by which our conduct can be made to conform with the end (De Officiis\, 1.7). While Cicero himself focuses on the se cond\, this paper seeks the answer to the first part.
\n\n
Ra chana Kamtekar is a Professor of Philosophy and Classics at Cornell Univer sity and has written on many topics in ancient philosophy and contemporary moral psychology. Her monograph\, Plato’s Moral Psychology: Intellect ualism\, the Divided Soul and the Desire for Good\, was published in 2017. She is currently working on the relationship between action and cha racter in ancient Greek ethics.
\nDTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20231116T180000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20231116T200000 GEO:+40.73702;-73.992243 LOCATION:Wolff Conference Room/D1103 @ 6 E 16th St\, New York\, NY 10003\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Chrysippus on What Makes Right Acts Right. Rachana Kamtekar (Cornel l) URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/chrysippus-on-what-makes -right-acts-right-rachana-kamtekar-cornell/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:ancient\,ethics END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-8105@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T141730Z 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:
\nJoin u s for a special live taping of the Clearer Thinking podcast. Host Spencer Greenberg and guest Jeff Sebo will discuss the moral status of insects and AI systems\, as well as other thorny questions in global pr iorities research.
\n\n
About the speakers
\n\n
Jeff Sebo is Associate Professor of Environmental Studies\, Affiliated Professor of Bioethics\, Medical Ethics\, Philosophy\, and Law\, Director of the Animal Studies M.A. Program\, Director of the Mind\, Ethics\, and Po licy Program\, and Co-Director of the Wil d Animal Welfare Program at New York Univ ersity. He is the author of S aving Animals\, Saving Ourselves (2022) a nd co-author of Chimpanzee Rights (2018) and span>Food\, Animals\ , and the Environment (2018). He is also an executive committee member at the NYU Center for Environmental and Anim al Protection\, a board member at Minding Animals International\, an advis ory board member at the Insect Welfare Research Society\, a senior researc h fellow at the Legal Priorities Project\, and a mentor at Sentient Media.
\n\n
Spencer Greenberg is an entrepreneur and mathematician with a focus on improving human well-being. He’s the founder of < span class='C9DxTc aw5Odc '>ClearerThinking.org\, which provides 70 free\, digital tools to help people make better decisions and improve their lives\, as well as the host of the Clearer Th inking podcast. Spencer is also the founder of Spark Wave\, an organi zation that conducts psychology research and builds psychology-related pro ducts designed to help benefit the world. He has a Ph.D. in applied math f rom New York University\, with a specialty in machine learning\, and his w ork has been featured by numerous major media outlets\, including The Wall Street Journal\, the Independent\, the New York Times\, Gizmodo\, and mor e.
\n\n
Thank you to Effective Altruism New York City for their generous s upport of this event.
\nTickets: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/ e/1FAIpQLSc4SgsjvHXCueNASskgr5p2_ZXRNPh3bouT9NYbgLHtlc7_8A/viewform. p> DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20240130T180000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20240130T200000 GEO:+40.730098;-73.995693 LOCATION:Jurow Hall\, Silver Center @ 31 Washington Pl\, New York\, NY 1000 3\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:The Moral Status of Insects and AI Systems\, and Other Thorny Quest ions in Global Priorities Research. Jeff Sebo and Spencer Greenberg URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/the-moral-status-of-inse cts-and-ai-systems-and-other-thorny-questions-in-global-priorities-researc h-jeff-sebo-and-spencer-greenberg/ X-COST-TYPE:external X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:artificial intelligence\,bioethics\,ethics X-TICKETS-URL:https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSc4SgsjvHXCueNASskgr 5p2_ZXRNPh3bouT9NYbgLHtlc7_8A/viewform END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-8146@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T141730Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://universityseminars.columbia.edu/seminars/comparative-philos ophy/ DESCRIPTION:
How 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 BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-8156@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T141730Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://universityseminars.columbia.edu/seminars/comparative-philos ophy/ DESCRIPTION:- 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)
\nComparative philosophy is gaining traction in professional a cademic philosophy\, with specialist journals\, organizations\, books\, an d public campaigns. These inroads have been made in canonical areas of phi losophy\, including epistemology\, metaphysics\, logic\, and value theory. Yet comparative philosophy still plays little role in practical applied e thics\, an interdisciplinary research area in which work with practice and policy implications are dominated by the anglophone world. In this articl e\, I explain why comparative work might be especially difficult in this t ype of applied ethics\, and I suggest how comparative philosophers might o vercome these challenges to connect their theoretical work with contempora ry practical issues.
\nWith responses from Wenqing Zhao (CUNY Baruch)
\nNOTE ON ENTRY FOR NON-COLUMBIA GUESTS: The door to Philosoph y Hall will only open with a Columbia University ID card. If you do not ha ve this card please arrive early where someone will be standing outside un til the meeting begins. If you arrive late\, you can ask someone walking n earby to let you in or contact Cole at cf2798@columbia.edu. Please only cont act Cole as a final resource so as not to interrupt the talk.
\nRS VP IS REQUIRED FOR DINNER:. Dinner will take place at a nearby restaur ant. Please contact Cole at cf2798@columbia.edu for further information. RSV Ps are limited.
\n
\n\n
Comparative Philosophy Se minar:
\n\n
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20240405T173000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20240405T193000 GEO:+40.807536;-73.962573 LOCATION:Philosophy Hall\, Room 716\, @ 116th and Broadway\, New York\, NY 10027\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Comparative Philosophy and Practical Applied Ethics. Laura Specker Sullivan (Fordham) URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/comparative-philosophy-a nd-practical-applied-ethics-laura-specker-sullivan-fordham/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:applied\,comparative\,ethics END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR- January 19 – Alex Watson (Ashoka University)
\n< li>February 2 – Davey Tomlinson (Villanova University)\n- April 5 – Laura Specker (Fordham University)
\n- May 3 – Daniel Stephens (Uni versity at Buffalo)
\n