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-7991@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T092843Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:CUNY CONTACT:https://philevents.org/event/show/109665 DESCRIPTION:Speakers:\n\n\n Angela Condello \n(unaffiliated)\n\n\n Julie St one Peters \n(unaffiliated)\n\n\n Katrin Trüstedt \nLEIBNIZ CENTER FOR LIT ERARY AND CULTURAL RESEARCH (ZFL BERLIN)\n\n\n Jesus Velasco \n(unaffiliat ed)\n\n\n Marco Wan \n(unaffiliated)\n\n\nOrganisers:\n\n\nPeter Goodrich \nYeshiva University DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20230402 DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20230403 GEO:+40.734628;-73.994256 LOCATION:Yeshiva University Room 1008 @ Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law/B rookdale Center\, 55 5th Ave\, New York\, NY 10003\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Law as Performance URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/law-as-performance/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:\\n\\n
\\nHow does the brain cope with Complexity? How do we make decisions when confronted with practically infinite streams of information?
\nThe conference showca ses cutting edge research on these questions in Neuroscience and Psycholog y (neural mechanisms of cognitive control\, exploration\, decision-making\ , information demand\, memory and creativity)\, Computer Science (artifici al intelligence of curiosity and intrinsic motivation) and Economics (deci sion making and information demand). Alongside formal presentations\, the conference will encourage ample interactions among faculty\, students and postdocs through informal discussions and poster presentations.
\nSu bmissions for poster presentations and travel awards are due February 15\, 2023. Please visit the call fo r submissions for complete requirements.
\nFree and open to the public. Registration is required and will open shortly. All in-person attendees must follow Columbia’s COV ID-19 policies. Visitors will be asked to provide proof of COVID-19 va ccination. Online attendees will receive a Zoom link. Please email events@zi.columbia.edu with any quest ions.
\n X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:artificial intelligence\,decision theory\,mind\,psych ology END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-8039@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T092843Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://philevents.org/event/show/113918 DESCRIPTION:Professor Joseph Raz\, to many of us a lifelong mentor\, collea gue and dear friend\, passed away on May 2nd\, 2022. In recognition of Raz ’s enormous influence in philosophy and legal theory\, organizers of the t win conferences in tribute to his work invite you to attend one or both co nferences and to participate in the discussions. The papers will be made a vailable for download in advance of each conference\, and participants wil l be assumed to have read the papers in advance. The sessions will be devo ted to open discussion. This event is open to all.\n\n Emad H. Atiq \nCorn ell University\n\n\n Brian Bix \nUniversity of Minnesota\n\n\n Ulrike Heue r \nUniversity College London\n\n\n Claire Kirwin \nNorthwestern Universit y\n\n\n Elinor Mason \n(unaffiliated)\n\n\n T.m. Scanlon \nHarvard Univers ity\n\n\n Ashwini Vasanthakumar \nQueen’s University\n\n\n Ralph Wedgwood \nUniversity of Southern California\n\n\n Daniel Marc Weinstock \nUniversi té de Montréal\n\n\nOrganisers:\n\n\n Ahmad Ashraf \n(unaffiliated)\n\n\n Kimberley Brownlee \nUniversity of British Columbia\n\n\n Mala Chatterjee \nStanford University\n\n\n David Enoch \nHebrew University of Jerusalem\n \n\n Andrei Marmor \nCornell University\n\n\n Daniel Viehoff \nNew York Un iversity\n\n\n Jeremy Waldon \nNew York University\n\n\n\nTopic areas\n\nV alue Theory\n\n\n\nTalks at this conference\nAdd a talk\n\nDetails\n\n \n https://www.law.columbia.edu/faculty-scholarship/workshops-lectures-colloq uia-and-conferences/twin-conferences-tribute-philosophy-joseph-raz \n\n\nT ickets: https://forms.gle/rzEaVneRo3ohK5nu9. DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20230923 DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20230925 GEO:+40.806777;-73.960523 LOCATION:Columbia Law School @ 435 W 116th St\, New York\, NY 10027\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Twin Conferences in Tribute to The Philosophy of Joseph Raz URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/twin-conferences-in-trib ute-to-the-philosophy-of-joseph-raz/ X-COST-TYPE:external X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:\\n\\n\\nTickets: https:/ /forms.gle/rzEaVneRo3ohK5nu9.
X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:conference\,legal\,value X-TICKETS-URL:https://forms.gle/rzEaVneRo3ohK5nu9 END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-8014@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T092843Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:CUNY CONTACT:https://www.telosinstitute.net/conference2024/ DESCRIPTION:Democracy is often presented as the sine qua non of politics to day. Yet our own democratic political orders across the West consistently fail to deliver the desiderata they promise to provide. Does this failure arise in part from the theoretical insufficiency of conventional diagnoses of democracy’s challenges and ills? As the primaries for the 2024 U.S. pr esidential election open\, we invite participants to consider critically t he status of democracy with an eye toward the concerns that have defined T elos over its 55-year history.\nThe main advantage of democracy over other political forms is that\, by allowing broader participation in decision-m aking\, it prevents domination of the many by the few. In theory\, it also fosters decision-making that is comparatively effective and meaningful by allowing views and information from the many to be communicated efficient ly to political leaders\, while also holding the latter to account for the ir actions. At the same time\, a major difficulty of democracy is that the rule by the many requires some procedure for translating a multitude of o pinions into unified decisions and action. In addition\, precisely by exer cising its majority will\, the many can trammel the integrity of the indiv idual—the key threat that liberalism seeks to hold at bay.\nThese advantag es—and\, especially\, these challenges—have produced two competing visions of democracy in the contemporary West. Their division reflects difference s about the politics of representation and decision-making. On one hand\, liberals view democracy as the following of appropriate procedures for cha nneling the opinions of the multitude through the election of representati ves. On the other hand\, populists might disregard such procedural restric tions to arrive at outcomes that are acclaimed by the people directly.\nWh ile both sides nod to the importance of the popular will\, both are in fac t willing to denigrate it. The liberal camp reacts in horror when democrat ic elections result in the election of populists\, who are said to lack pr oper governing expertise\, as in the 2016 victory of Donald Trump. The pop ulist camp charges conspiracy when electoral 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 describing the times\, the false mediat or of popular will is either the demagogue or the bureaucrat—Telos has lon g opposed both.\nDifferent narratives\, in turn\, have taken hold about de mocracy’s present challenges. From the point of view of the liberal proced uralist critique of demagogues\, the means of moving from a multiplicity o f opinions to a unified decision inevitably involves discourse within a pu blic sphere. This discourse depends on a common understanding of historica l facts\, as well as a public sphere that allows different perspectives to face each other in debate. In our contemporary world\, however\, the brea kdown of previous limits to accessing the public sphere has led to an inab ility to arrive at a consensus on the difference between fact and fiction\ , as well as an increasing tendency of citizens to exist within a social m edia echo chamber of their own views\, undermining the common ground that a public sphere presupposes.\nAt the same time\, public debate necessarily implicates values and identities that have an ultimately mythic basis tha t cannot be rationally determined. People’s opinions\, moreover\, are inva riably shaped by leaders as much as the people shape what leaders ought to do. Experts lament how this representational dynamic undermines the proce dures that govern and channel the representation of the popular will. Yet the narrative aspect of representation is an ineradicable element of the w ay in which the popular will coalesces. The process of narrativized repres entation will never be an entirely rational one\, and the prominence of me dia personalities such as Reagan\, Trump\, and Zelensky as politicians und erlines the futility of attempting to rid the public sphere of drama and s pectacle.\nFor the populist\, by contrast\, the primary threat to democrac y lies in bureaucracy. In his 2016 end run around the political establishm ent\, Trump’s electoral success was driven by a broader critique of the ad ministrative state’s undermining of democratic process. The rise of the ma nagerial bureaucratic state that was set in motion by the development of t he welfare state in the twentieth century has created a class divide betwe en managers and managed that has shifted decision-making power over the co nditions of everyday life away from individuals and toward government and corporate bureaucracies. Because more and more of our economic and social welfare is under the direct influence of the state\, the resultant bloated administrative state has now become prey to a frenzy of lobbyists\, who f urther distance the people from political decision-making. The protections of minority rights that constitute the liberal aspect of today’s democrac ies have turned communities into special interests that lobby administrato rs to pass on privileges to favored groups. The result has been a growing restriction of freedom of expression in the public sphere and an eroding o f a unifying basis for constructing a political order now dominated by the collusion of bureaucracy with corporations.\nWhile the liberal critique o f demagoguery resorts to more government controls that exacerbate the expa nsion of bureaucracy\, the populist critique of bureaucracy has attempted to dismantle government without considering how to establish mechanisms th at would take over the functions that bureaucracies have coopted. Focusing on opposition to government\, the populist perspective often lacks any se nse of alternative institutional structures that could remedy the administ ration and commodification of everyday life.\nBoth sides have contributed to a polarization of views that threatens the underlying consensus necessa ry for democratic politics. The political gridlock that has ensued from th eir diverging diagnoses has meant that our political orders consistently f ail to deliver peace\, prosperity\, and accountable government. Moreover\, regardless of the rhetoric or credentials of those in power\, democracy t oday seems always to leave us with broadly the same basic policies\, despi te some of them being deeply unpopular.\nWe invite those who are intereste d in presenting at the 2024 Telos Conference to consider critically the st atus of democracy today by addressing one or more of the following questio ns:\nDemocratic Values\n\nDoes democracy have a value of its own independe nt of its practical consequences?\nWhat kinds of basic agreements on princ iples are necessary to maintain a democracy?\nIs there a limit to diversit y in a democracy?\nTo what extent is polarization itself a threat to democ racy?\nWhat is the relationship between democracy and liberalism?\n\nDemoc racy and the Administrative State\n\nTo what extent is the consistent real ity of all self-styled “democracies” of the world today a form of manageri al governance that resists change from below?\nWhat role is left in an age of managerialism for the popular will?\nMight the appropriate response to managerialism not be more democracy\, both at the level of the state but also inside corporate and workplace structures\, e.g.\, through workers’ s elf-management?\n\nDemocracy and the Public Sphere\n\nWhat is the role of representation in a democracy\, and how do today’s representational proces ses threaten democratic decision-making?\nHow have social media and artifi cial intelligence changed the way in which democratic processes function\, and what changes to these processes might be necessary in the future to a ccommodate these new technological developments?\nTo what extent and in wh at ways does the public sphere function in today’s democracies? What kinds of limitations are necessary to guarantee the functioning of the public s phere as a space for democratic debate and decision-making?\n\nDemocracy a nd Religion\n\nWhat role is there for religion in today’s democracies?\nTo what extent does either secularization or religion pose a threat to democ racy?\n\nDemocracy and Authoritarianism\n\nWhat is the relationship betwee n democracy and authoritarianism? Do the current ills of democracy promote a global shift toward authoritarian government?\nWhat are the key compone nts of democracy that differentiate it from authoritarianism? Where do cou ntries such as Hungary\, Turkey\, India\, and Russia fall on the continuum from democracy to authoritarianism?\n\nAbstract Submissions\nWhatever spe cific questions you address\, we invite you to present your analysis with an eye toward the long-standing concerns of the Telos-Paul Piccone Institu te and thereby to help develop a trenchant\, independent view of democracy that can inform both critique and practical action within our present his torical moment. Please submit a short c.v. and an abstract of up to 250 wo rds by October 15\, 2023\, to telosnyc2024@telosinstitute.net and place “T he 2024 Telos Conference” in the email’s subject line. Please direct quest ions to Professor Mark G. E. Kelly\, Western Sydney University\, M.Kelly@w esternsydney.edu.au.\nConference Location\nThe conference will take place at the John D. Calandra Italian American Institute in New York City from F riday\, March 22\, to Saturday\, March 23\, 2024.\n https://www.telosinsti tute.net/conference2024/ 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-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:\\n\\n\\nDemocracy is often presented as the sine qua non of politics today. Yet our ow n democratic political orders across the West consistently fail to deliver the desiderata they promise to provide. Does this failure arise in part f rom the theoretical insufficiency of conventional diagnoses of democracy’s challenges and ills? As the primaries for the 2024 U.S. presidential elec tion open\, we invite participants to consider critically the status of de mocracy with an eye toward the concerns that have defined Telos over its 5 5-year history.
\nThe main advantage of democracy over other politic al forms is that\, by allowing broader participation in decision-making\, it prevents domination of the many by the few. In theory\, it also fosters decision-making that is comparatively effective and meaningful by allowin g views and information from the many to be communicated efficiently to po litical leaders\, while also holding the latter to account for their actio ns. At the same time\, a major difficulty of democracy is that the rule by the many requires some procedure for translating a multitude of opinions into unified decisions and action. In addition\, precisely by exercising i ts majority will\, the many can trammel the integrity of the individual—th e key threat that liberalism seeks to hold at bay.
\nThese advantage s—and\, especially\, these challenges—have produced two competing visions of democracy in the contemporary West. Their division reflects differences about the politics of representation and decision-making. On one hand\, l iberals view democracy as the following of appropriate procedures for chan neling the opinions of the multitude through the election of representativ es. On the other hand\, populists might disregard such procedural restrict ions to arrive at outcomes that are acclaimed by the people directly.
\nWhile both sides nod to the importance of the popular will\, both are in fact willing to denigrate it. The liberal camp reacts in horror when d emocratic elections result in the election of populists\, who are said to lack proper governing expertise\, as in the 2016 victory of Donald Trump. The populist camp charges conspiracy when electoral results fail to reflec t their own conception of the people’s will\, as in Trump’s reaction to hi s 2020 ouster. Depending on which camp is describing the times\, the false mediator of popular will is either the demagogue or the bureaucrat—Telos has long opposed both.
\nDifferent narratives\, in turn\, have taken hold about democracy’s present challenges. From the point of view of the liberal proceduralist critique of demagogues\, the means of moving from a multiplicity of opinions to a unified decision inevitably involves discour se within a public sphere. This discourse depends on a common understandin g of historical facts\, as well as a public sphere that allows different p erspectives to face each other in debate. In our contemporary world\, howe ver\, the breakdown of previous limits to accessing the public sphere has led to an inability to arrive at a consensus on the difference between fac t and fiction\, as well as an increasing tendency of citizens to exist wit hin a social media echo chamber of their own views\, undermining the commo n ground that a public sphere presupposes.
\nAt the same time\, publ ic debate necessarily implicates values and identities that have an ultima tely mythic basis that cannot be rationally determined. People’s opinions\ , moreover\, are invariably shaped by leaders as much as the people shape what leaders ought to do. Experts lament how this representational dynamic undermines the procedures that govern and channel the representation of t he popular will. Yet the narrative aspect of representation is an ineradic able element of the way in which the popular will coalesces. The process o f narrativized representation will never be an entirely rational one\, and the prominence of media personalities such as Reagan\, Trump\, and Zelens ky as politicians underlines the futility of attempting to rid the public sphere of drama and spectacle.
\nFor the populist\, by contrast\, th e primary threat to democracy lies in bureaucracy. In his 2016 end run aro und the political establishment\, Trump’s electoral success was driven by a broader critique of the administrative state’s undermining of democratic process. The rise of the managerial bureaucratic state that was set in mo tion by the development of the welfare state in the twentieth century has created a class divide between managers and managed that has shifted decis ion-making power over the conditions of everyday life away from individual s and toward government and corporate bureaucracies. Because more and more of our economic and social welfare is under the direct influence of the s tate\, the resultant bloated administrative state has now become prey to a frenzy of lobbyists\, who further distance the people from political deci sion-making. The protections of minority rights that constitute the libera l aspect of today’s democracies have turned communities into special inter ests that lobby administrators to pass on privileges to favored groups. Th e result has been a growing restriction of freedom of expression in the pu blic sphere and an eroding of a unifying basis for constructing a politica l order now dominated by the collusion of bureaucracy with corporations. p>\n
While the liberal critique of demagoguery resorts to more governmen t controls that exacerbate the expansion of bureaucracy\, the populist cri tique of bureaucracy has attempted to dismantle government without conside ring how to establish mechanisms that would take over the functions that b ureaucracies have coopted. Focusing on opposition to government\, the popu list perspective often lacks any sense of alternative institutional struct ures that could remedy the administration and commodification of everyday life.
\nBoth sides have contributed to a polarization of views that threatens the underlying consensus necessary for democratic politics. The political gridlock that has ensued from their diverging diagnoses has mean t that our political orders consistently fail to deliver peace\, prosperit y\, and accountable government. Moreover\, regardless of the rhetoric or c redentials of those in power\, democracy today seems always to leave us wi th broadly the same basic policies\, despite some of them being deeply unp opular.
\nWe invite those who are interested in presenting at the 20 24 Telos Conference to consider critically the status of democracy today b y addressing one or more of the following questions:
\nDemoc ratic Values
\nDemocracy a nd the Administrative State
\nD emocracy and the Public Sphere
\nDemocracy and Religion
\nDemocracy and Authoritarianism
\nAbstract Submissions
\nWh atever specific questions you address\, we invite you to present your anal ysis with an eye toward the long-standing concerns of the Telos-Paul Picco ne Institute and thereby to help develop a trenchant\, independent view of democracy that can inform both critique and practical action within our p resent historical moment. Please submit a short c.v. and an abstract of up to 250 words by October 15\, 2023\, to telosnyc2024@telosinstitute.net an d place “The 2024 Telos Conference” in the email’s subject line. Please di rect questions to Professor Mark G. E. Kelly\, Western Sydney University\, M.Kelly@westernsydney.edu.au.
\nConference Location
\nThe conference will take place at the John D. Calandra Italian A merican Institute in New York City from Friday\, March 22\, to Saturday\, March 23\, 2024.
\n\n X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:cfp\,conference\,legal\,political\,religion\,social END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7644@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T092843Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:NYU CONTACT:https://www.law.nyu.edu/centers/lawphilosophy/colloquium DESCRIPTION:The Colloquium in Legal\, Political\, and Social Philosophy was founded by Ronald Dworkin and Thomas Nagel in 1987. It is the original mo del for all of NYU Law’s colloquia. The Colloquium is now convened by Liam Murphy\, Samuel Scheffler\, and Jeremy Waldron\, two of whom will host in any given year.\nEach week on Thursday a legal theorist or moral or polit ical philosopher presents a paper to the group\, which consists of student s\, faculty from the Law School and other departments of NYU\, and faculty from other universities. The choice of subject is left to the paper’s aut hor\, within the general boundaries of the Colloquium’s subjects\, and the discussions are therefore not connected by any structured theme for the t erm as a whole\, though in past years certain central topics were canvasse d in several weeks’ discussion. The Colloquium aims\, not to pursue any pa rticular subject\, but to explore new work in considerable depth and so al low students to develop their own skill in theoretical analysis.\nEach wee k’s paper is posted at least a week in advance on this page\, and particip ants are expected to have read it.\nThe public sessions of the colloquium will take place on Thursdays\, in Lester Pollock Colloquium Room\, Furman Hall\, 9th floor\, from 4:00 to 7:00 pm. \nColloquium 2021\nProfessors Li am Murphy and Samuel Scheffler\nSeptember 2nd\nKim Ferzan\, University of Pennsylvania\, Law\nRethinking Credit for Time Served\nSeptember 9th\nLiam Murphy\, NYU\nInternational Responsibility for Global Environment Harm: C ollective and Individual\nSeptember 17th ( Friday 2.00-5.00)\nMoshe Halber tal\, NYU\nOn Being Human\nSeptember 23rd\nJeff McMahan\, Oxford\nSeptembe r 30th\nEmma Kaufman\, NYU Law\nOctober 7th\nRick Pildes\, NYU Law\nOctobe r 14th\nSamuel Scheffler\, NYU\nOctober 21st\nSteve Darwall\, Yale\, Philo sophy\nOctober 28th\nChris Kutz\, University of California\, Berkeley\, La w\nNovember 4th\nAnthony Appiah\, NYU\nNovember 11th\nJohann Frick\, Unive rsity of California\, Berkeley\, Philosophy\nNovember 18th\nTeresa Bejan\, Oxford\nDecember 2nd\nRuth Chang\, Oxford DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20210902T160000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20210902T190000 EXDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20210917T160000 GEO:+40.730147;-73.998916 LOCATION:Lester Pollock Colloquium Room\, Furman Hall\, 9th floo @ 245 Sull ivan St\, New York\, NY 10012\, USA RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20210909T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20210917T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20210923T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20210930T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20211007T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20211014T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20211021T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20211028T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20211104T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20211111T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20211118T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20211202T160000 SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Colloquium in Legal\, Political\, and Social Philosophy URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/colloquium-in-legal-poli tical-and-social-philosophy-7/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:\\n\\n\\nThe Colloquiu m in Legal\, Political\, and Social Philosophy was founded by Ronald Dwork in and Thomas Nagel in 1987. It is the original model for all of NYU Law’s colloquia. The Colloquium is now convened by Liam Murphy\, Samuel Scheffl er\, and Jeremy Waldron\, two of whom will host in any given year.
\nEach week on Thursday a legal theorist or moral or political philosopher presents a paper to the group\, which consists of students\, faculty from the Law School and other departments of NYU\, and faculty from other unive rsities. The choice of subject is left to the paper’s author\, within the general boundaries of the Colloquium’s subjects\, and the discussions are therefore not connected by any structured theme for the term as a whole\, though in past years certain central topics were canvassed in several week s’ discussion. The Colloquium aims\, not to pursue any particular subject\ , but to explore new work in considerable depth and so allow students to d evelop their own skill in theoretical analysis.
\nEach week’s paper is posted at least a week in advance on this page\, and participants are e xpected to have read it.
\nThe public sessions of the colloquium will take place on Thursdays\, in Lester Pollock Colloquium Roo m\, Furman Hall\, 9th floor\, from 4:00 to 7:00 pm.
\nProfessors Liam Murphy and S amuel Scheffler
\nSeptember 2nd
\nKim Ferzan\, Univers
ity of Pennsylvania\, Law
Rethinki ng Credit for Time Served
\nSeptember 9th
\nLiam Murphy\, N
YU
Internatio nal Responsibility for Global Environment Harm: Collective and Individual< /a>
\nSeptember 17th ( Friday 2.00-5.00)
\nMos
he Halbertal\, NYU
September 23rd\nJeff McMahan\, Oxford
\nSeptember 30th
\nEmma Kaufman\, N
YU Law
October 7th
\nRick Pildes\, NYU Law
October 14
th
\nSamuel Scheffler\, NYU
October 21st
\nSteve Darwall
\, Yale\, Philosophy
October 28th
\nChris Kutz\, University o
f California\, Berkeley\, Law
November 4th
\nAnthony Appiah\,
NYU
November 11th
\nJohann Frick\, University of California\
, Berkeley\, Philosophy
November 18th
\nTeresa Bejan\, Oxford
December 2nd
\nRuth Chang\, Oxford
The Colloquiu m in Legal\, Political\, and Social Philosophy was founded by Ronald Dwork in and Thomas Nagel in 1987. It is the original model for all of NYU Law’s colloquia. The Colloquium is now convened by Liam Murphy\, Samuel Scheffl er\, and Jeremy Waldron\, two of whom will host in any given year.
\nEach week on Thursday a legal theorist or moral or political philosopher presents a paper to the group\, which consists of students\, faculty from the Law School and other departments of NYU\, and faculty from other unive rsities. The choice of subject is left to the paper’s author\, within the general boundaries of the Colloquium’s subjects\, and the discussions are therefore not connected by any structured theme for the term as a whole\, though in past years certain central topics were canvassed in several week s’ discussion. The Colloquium aims\, not to pursue any particular subject\ , but to explore new work in considerable depth and so allow students to d evelop their own skill in theoretical analysis.
\nEach week’s paper is posted at least a week in advance on this page\, and participants are e xpected to have read it.
\nThe public sessions of the colloquium will take place on Thursdays\, in Lester Pollock Colloquium Roo m\, Furman Hall\, 9th floor\, from 4:00 to 7:00 pm.
\nProfessors Liam Murphy and S amuel Scheffler
\nSeptember 2nd
\nKim Ferzan\, Univers
ity of Pennsylvania\, Law
Rethinki ng Credit for Time Served
\nSeptember 9th
\nLiam Murphy\, N
YU
Internatio nal Responsibility for Global Environment Harm: Collective and Individual< /a>
\nSeptember 17th ( Friday 2.00-5.00)
\nMos
he Halbertal\, NYU
September 23rd\nJeff McMahan\, Oxford
\nSeptember 30th
\nEmma Kaufman\, N
YU Law
October 7th
\nRick Pildes\, NYU Law
October 14
th
\nSamuel Scheffler\, NYU
October 21st
\nSteve Darwall
\, Yale\, Philosophy
October 28th
\nChris Kutz\, University o
f California\, Berkeley\, Law
November 4th
\nAnthony Appiah\,
NYU
November 11th
\nJohann Frick\, University of California\
, Berkeley\, Philosophy
November 18th
\nTeresa Bejan\, Oxford
December 2nd
\nRuth Chang\, Oxford
A number of a uthors have pointed out that the standard arguments for perception’s havin g nonconceptual content tell us nothing about the content of a state per s e\, but only instead about the sorts of capacities a subject must have in order to be in some state (i.e.\, whether the subject need or need not pos sess the specifying concepts in order to be in some state). Others have ar gued in response that the only reason for two states to require different conceptual capacities of the subject is precisely because they have differ ent sorts of contents\, and so there is no substantive difference between a ‘content’ view and a ‘state’ view. Here\, I present evidence for states that do\, in fact\, share the same content but differ in the required conc eptual capacities: exogenous perceptual states\, and endogenous\, voluntar ily produced perceptual states. I argue that this functional difference—vo luntary versus involuntary production—constitutes the difference in concep t-dependence. I then look to three possibilities for how this claim could affect our understanding of the relationship between cognition and percept ion.
\n X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:psychology END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7711@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T092843Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Independent CONTACT:https://bkpp.tumblr.com/ DESCRIPTION:Brooklyn Public Philosophers is a forum for philosophers in the greater Brooklyn area to discuss their work with a general audience\, hos ted by the Brooklyn Public Library. Its goal is to raise awareness of the best work on philosophical questions of interest to Brooklynites\, and to provide a civil space where Brooklynites can reason together about the phi losophical questions that matter to them.\nIf you’re interested in finding out more\, or if you’d like to give a talk\, please e-mail Ian Olasov at his first and last name at gmail.com. DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20220422T193000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20220422T204500 GEO:+40.672511;-73.9682 LOCATION:Info Commons Lab\, Brookly Public Library @ 10 Grand Army Plaza\, Brooklyn\, NY 11238\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Justin Garson: On biological function and mental illness URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/justin-garson-on-biologi cal-function-and-mental-illness/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:\\n\\n\\nBrooklyn Publ ic Philosophers is a forum for philosophers in the greater Brooklyn area t o discuss their work with a general audience\, hosted by the Brooklyn Publ ic Library. Its goal is to raise awareness of the best work on philosophic al questions of interest to Brooklynites\, and to provide a civil space wh ere Brooklynites can reason together about the philosophical questions tha t matter to them.
\nIf you’re interested in finding out more\, or if you’d like to give a talk\, please e-mail Ian Olasov at his first and las t name at gmail.com.
\n X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:biology\,mind\,psychology\,science END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-7831@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T092843Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Columbia U CONTACT:https://philosophy.columbia.edu/content/colloquium-lectures-2022-20 23 DESCRIPTION:Naked Statistical Evidence and Verdictive Justice DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20221027T161000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20221027T180000 GEO:+40.807536;-73.962573 LOCATION:716 Philosophy Hall @ New York\, NY 10027\, USA SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Naked Statistical Evidence and Verdictive Justice. Sherri Roush (UC LA) URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/sherri-roush-ucla/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:\\n\\n\\nNaked Statist ical Evidence and Verdictive Justice
\n X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:legal\,statistics END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-8029@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T092843Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:NYU CONTACT:https://www.law.nyu.edu/centers/lawphilosophy/colloquium DESCRIPTION:Colloquium 2023\nProfessors Jeremy Waldron and Liam Murphy\nSep tember 7th\nBonnie Honig\, Brown University\nFatal Forgiveness: Euripides\ , Austin\, Arendt\, Cavell\nSeptember 14th\nJeremy Waldron\, NYU\nSeptembe r 21st\nAlice Crary\, The New School\nSeptember 28th\nDavid Enoch\, Univer sity of Oxford\nOctober 5th\nGina Schouten\, Harvard University\nOctober 1 2th\nDaryl Levinson\, NYU\nOctober 19th\nBarbara Levenbook\, North Carolin a State University\nOctober 26th\nRob Howse\, NYU\nNovember 2nd\nTrevor Mo rrison\, NYU\nNovember 9th\nJohn Goldberg\, Harvard University\nNovember 1 6th\nCourtney Cox\, Fordham University\nNovember 30th\nJuliana Bidadanure\ , Stanford University\n \nThe Colloquium in Legal\, Political\, and Social Philosophy was founded by Ronald Dworkin and Thomas Nagel in 1987. It is the original model for all of NYU Law’s colloquia. The Colloquium is now c onvened by Liam Murphy\, Samuel Scheffler\, and Jeremy Waldron\, two of wh om will host in any given year.\nEach week on Thursday a legal theorist or moral or political philosopher presents a paper to the group\, which cons ists of students\, faculty from the Law School and other departments of NY U\, and faculty from other universities. The choice of subject is left to the paper’s author\, within the general boundaries of the Colloquium’s sub jects\, and the discussions are therefore not connected by any structured theme for the term as a whole\, though in past years certain central topic s were canvassed in several weeks’ discussion. The Colloquium aims\, not t o pursue any particular subject\, but to explore new work in considerable depth and so allow students to develop their own skill in theoretical anal ysis.\nEach week’s paper is posted at least a week in advance on this page \, and participants are expected to have read it. DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20230907T160000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20230907T190000 GEO:+40.730147;-73.998916 LOCATION:Lester Pollock Colloquium Room\, Furman Hall\, 9th flr @ 245 Sulli van St\, New York\, NY 10012\, USA RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20230921T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20230928T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20231005T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20231012T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20231019T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20231026T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20231102T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20231109T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20231116T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20231130T160000 SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Colloquium in Legal\, Political\, and Social Philosophy URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/colloquium-in-legal-poli tical-and-social-philosophy-9/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:\\n\\n\\nCollo quium 2023
\nProfessors Jeremy Waldron and Liam Mur phy
\nSeptember 7th
\nBonnie Honig\, Brown University<
br />\nFatal Forgiveness: Euripides\, Austin\, Arendt\, Ca
vell
September 14th
\nJeremy Waldron\, NYU
Septem
ber 21st
\nAlice Crary\, The New School
September 28th
\nDavid Enoch\, University of Oxford
October 5th
\nGina Schou
ten\, Harvard University
October 12th
\nDaryl Levinson\, NYU<
/p>\n
October 19th
\nBarbara Levenbook\, North Carolina State Unive
rsity
October 26th
\nRob Howse\, NYU
November 2nd
\nTrevor Morrison\, NYU
November 9th
\nJohn Goldberg\, Harv
ard University
November 16th
\nCourtney Cox\, Fordham Univers
ity
November 30th
\nJuliana Bidadanure\, Stanford University<
/p>\n
\n
The Colloquium in Legal\, Political\, and Social Philoso phy was founded by Ronald Dworkin and Thomas Nagel in 1987. It is the orig inal model for all of NYU Law’s colloquia. The Colloquium is now convened by Liam Murphy\, Samuel Scheffler\, and Jeremy Waldron\, two of whom will host in any given year.
\nEach week on Thursday a legal theorist or moral or political philosopher presents a paper to the group\, which consi sts of students\, faculty from the Law School and other departments of NYU \, and faculty from other universities. The choice of subject is left to t he paper’s author\, within the general boundaries of the Colloquium’s subj ects\, and the discussions are therefore not connected by any structured t heme for the term as a whole\, though in past years certain central topics were canvassed in several weeks’ discussion. The Colloquium aims\, not to pursue any particular subject\, but to explore new work in considerable d epth and so allow students to develop their own skill in theoretical analy sis.
\nEach week’s paper is posted at least a week in advance on thi s page\, and participants are expected to have read it.
\n X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:legal\,political\,social END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ai1ec-8108@www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress DTSTAMP:20240328T092843Z CATEGORIES;LANGUAGE=en-US:Fordham CONTACT:abagchi@law.fordham.edu\; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DNgHQ XWhXRqJ8ALCoYyZHAVSbiY9z8jC/edit DESCRIPTION:Th 1/25/24: Kate Manne\nTh 2/1/24: Scott Shapiro\nTh 2/8/24: Ek ow Yankah\nTh 2/15/24: Tommie Shelby\nTh 2/22/24 Gideon Rosen\nTh 2/29/24: Sabeel Rahman\nTh 3/7/24: Amy Sepinwall\nTh 3/14/24: Erik Encarnacion\nTh 3/21/24: Seyla Benhabib\nTh 4/4/24: Amalia Amaya\nTh 4/11/24: Debbie Hell man\nTh 4/18/24: Mala Chatterjee\nTh 4/25/24: Liam Murphy\nContact Aditi B agchi: https://www.fordham.edu/school-of-law/faculty/directory/full-time/a diti-bagchi/ DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20240125T160000 DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20240125T190000 GEO:+40.861457;-73.885277 LOCATION:Fordham Law @ Bronx County\, Bronx\, NY 10458\, USA RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20240201T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20240208T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20240215T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20240222T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20240229T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20240307T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20240314T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20240321T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20240404T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20240411T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20240418T160000 RDATE;TZID=America/New_York:20240425T160000 SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:Law & Philosophy Colloquium URL:https://www.noahgreenstein.com/wordpress/event/law-philosophy-colloquiu m/ X-COST-TYPE:free X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:\\n\\n\\nTh 1/25/24: K ate Manne
\nTh 2/1/24: Scott Shapiro
\nTh 2/8/24: Ekow Yankah< /p>\n
Th 2/15/24: Tommie Shelby
\nTh 2/22/24 Gideon Rosen
\nTh 2/29/24: Sabeel Rahman
\nTh 3/7/24: Amy Sepinwall
\nTh 3/14 /24: Erik Encarnacion
\nTh 3/21/24: Seyla Benhabib
\nTh 4/4/24 : Amalia Amaya
\nTh 4/11/24: Debbie Hellman
\nTh 4/18/24: Mala Chatterjee
\nTh 4/25/24: Liam Murphy
\nContact Aditi Bagchi: https://www.fordham.edu/school-of-law/faculty/directory/fu ll-time/aditi-bagchi/
\n X-TAGS;LANGUAGE=en-US:legal END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR