Apr
19
Fri
NYC Wittgenstein Workshop presents Nickolas Pappas (CUNY): Plato on the Opposite of Philosophy @ New School, rm D1106
Apr 19 @ 4:00 pm – 6:00 pm

The New York City Wittgenstein Workshop has the following workshops scheduled for this semester and more planned workshops to be announced soon.

All workshops are on Fridays from 4 to 6 pm in room D1106.

2/22 — Zed Adams (the New School) — History of the digital/analogue distinction in philosophy
4/19 — Nickolas Pappas (CUNY) — “Plato on the Opposite of Philosophy”
4/26 — Larry Jackson
5/03 — Nuno Venturinha (Nova University of Lisbon) — “Autobiographical Writing, Self-knowledge, and the Religious Point of View.”
5/10 —  Pierre-Jean Renaudi (Lyon)

Nov
14
Thu
Aristotle’s concept of matter and the generation of animals. Anna Schriefl @ Wolff Conference Room, D1106
Nov 14 @ 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm

There is a broad consensus that Aristotle introduced the concept of matter in order to develop a consistent account of substantial change. However, it is disputed which role matter fulfills in substantial change. According to the traditional interpretation, matter persists while taking on or losing a substantial form. According to a rival interpretation, matter does not persist in substantial change; instead, it is an entity from which a new substance can emerge and which ceases to exist in this process. In my view, both interpretations are problematic in the light of Aristotle’s broader ontological project and are at odds with the way Aristotle describes the substantial generation of living beings. On the basis of Aristotle’s biological theory, I will suggest that Aristotelian matter is a continuant in substantial generation, but does not satisfy the common criteria for persistence that apply to individual substances.

Anna Schriefl
Anna Schriefl is Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin (assistant professor) at the University of Bonn, and currently a visiting scholar at the New School. She has published a book about Plato’s criticism of money and wealth, and most recently an introduction into Stoicism (both in German).

Mar
6
Fri
New York German Idealism Workshop @ New School, tba
Mar 6 @ 4:30 pm – 6:30 pm

Luca Corti (University of Padua) – March 6

Amy Allen (Penn State) – March 27

Andreja Novakovic (UC Berkeley) – April 3

Alberto Siani (University of Pisa) – May 8

May
8
Fri
New York German Idealism Workshop @ New School, tba
May 8 @ 4:30 pm – 6:30 pm

Luca Corti (University of Padua) – March 6

Amy Allen (Penn State) – March 27

Andreja Novakovic (UC Berkeley) – April 3

Alberto Siani (University of Pisa) – May 8

Sep
17
Fri
Alison Stone @ The New York German Idealism Workshop @ ZOOM - see site for details
Sep 17 @ 10:00 am – 12:00 pm

The New York German Idealism Workshop is pleased to announce the first talk of the semester. Alison Stone (Lancaster University) will be giving a talk entitled, “Bettina von Arnim’s Romantic Philosophy in Die Günderode” on September 17 from 10am-12pm EST. Giulia Valpione (Università degli Studi di Padova) will be providing comments.

Join Zoom Meeting https://NewSchool.zoom.us/j/93096095303?pwd=ZjVWaTdLZ0VlNTlPUHFuWmJDVE9DZz09


Please email nygermanidealism@gmail.com to request the paper (and join our listserv), which has already been distributed (as of 9/8/21).

Oct
15
Fri
Elisa Magrì @ The New York German Idealism Workshop @ ZOOM - see site for details
Oct 15 @ 4:30 pm – 6:30 pm

The second talk of the semester will be by Elisa Magrì (Boston College), who will be giving a talk entitled, “Sedimentation and Ethical Memory in Hegel’s Philosophy of Spirit.” The talk will take place on October 15 from 4:30-6:30pm EST.

A Zoom link will be provided in advance. Please stay tuned for a poster containing all the events for the fall semester.

Sep
23
Fri
Found or Sought? Hegel vs MacIntyre on the Good Life and the Virtues. Robert Stern (U Sheffield) @ New School M104 (The Bark Room), Sheila C. Johnson Design Center
Sep 23 @ 4:00 pm – 6:00 pm

We are excited to announce that the first workshop of the semester will take place in person on Friday, September 23rd from *4-6pm* (please note the change in the usual time). Robert Stern (University of Sheffield) will be giving a talk entitled, “Found or Sought? Hegel vs MacIntyre on the Good Life and the Virtues.” Please note that the talk will take place at The New School, Room M104 (The Bark Room), Sheila C. Johnson Design Center (The Sheila C. Johnson Design Center is on the southwest corner of 5th ave and 13th street)

To attend the talk in person you will need to be up-to-date with vaccinations and boosters and set up a CLEAR Health Pass account in advance. Directions for visitor access are below.

The event has been organized by the Wittgenstein Workshop.

Abstract: This paper draws a contrast between Hegel and MacIntyre, treating both as post-Kantian perfectionists. The claim is that while Hegel treats the good life as something found, and to be implemented in the rational state, MacIntyre treats it as something to be sought. This difference, it is argued, is reflected in their respective accounts of the virtues: for Hegel, the key virtue becomes rectitude, whereas for MacIntyre a wider range of virtues is required, to make this quest for the good achievable. Using the characters of Walt and Travis from Paris, Texas to illustrate the argument, it is suggested that the MacIntyrean option is to be preferred.

GUEST AND VISITOR ACCESS AND VACCINATION POLICY

Guests and visitors must be up-to-date with their COVID-19 vaccinations, including a booster when eligible.

Beginning Monday, August 15, The New School will use CLEAR’S Health Pass, an online tool that safely and simply verifies proof of COVID-19 vaccination, to issue guest passes. The CLEAR Health Pass replaces on-site manual vaccination checking and physical guest passes. CLEAR accounts should be set up in advance of arrival on campus and will remain active for a month, requiring only a selfie to reactivate. Details and instructions about creating and setting up a CLEAR account can be found on our website.

The Welcome Center Visitors Desk will remain open in a limited capacity to support the guests who may not be able to use CLEAR.

Before coming to campus, guests must verify vaccination records with the university.

If visitors are all of the below:

  • 18 years of age or older.
  • Or, are under 18 years of age and visiting campus with someone over 18.
  • Have access to a mobile device.
  • Have proof of vaccination accepted by CLEAR
  • Domestic: Pictures of CDC card and Smart QR Codes
  • International: EU Digital COVID Certification (DCC) and UK National Health Service (NHS) COVID Pass.
  • Have a picture ID with the name matching the name on the vaccination record.

If visitors are at least one of the below:

  • Under 18 years of age coming alone.
  • Do not have access to a mobile device.
  • Have proof of vaccination that is not accepted by CLEAR (e.g., other countries than the US, UK, EU).
  • Do not have a picture ID with the name matching the name on the vaccination record.
  • Cannot create or use a CLEAR account.

Use CLEAR to verify vaccination records and receive a guest pass in the app. 

We recommend creating and verifying your account in advance of coming to campus.

Nov
17
Thu
Rachana Kamtekar: What makes right acts right? A Stoic answer to Ross’s question @ Wolff Conference Room/D1103
Nov 17 @ 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm

What makes right acts right? A Stoic answer to Ross’s question.

When W.D. Ross poses the question, “what makes right acts right?” (The Right and the Good ch. 2), he is asking a question that is prior to the deliberative question, “how do I determine 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 theoretical part concerned with the end of goods and evils, which addresses such matters as whether all duties are perfect, whether some are more important than others, and what are the kinds of duties, and (2) a practical part which sets out rules (praecepta) by which our conduct can be made to conform with the end.  This paper focuses on (1) and in particular asks Ross’s question about Stoic right actions (kathêkonta).

 

The endpoint of Stoic deliberation is determining what token action is the right action.  The paper begins with the Stoic distinction between a thing’s choiceworthiness, its intrinsic disposition to elicit a choice response in a suitable subject, and its possession being to-be-chosen. The determination 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-called ‘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, and is given in its reasonable defense, is the same as what constitutes the rightness of a perfect (katorthôma) action.   The Stoic distinction between right and perfect action depends on the action’s moral goodness—not rightness—which is due to its causal origin.

Presented by Professor Rachana Kamtekar (Cornell University)

Feb
15
Wed
From Shapeless Abyss Towards Self-Developing Thought: Taking Hegel on Spinoza Seriously. James Kreines (Claremont McKenna) @ The New School L502
Feb 15 @ 4:00 pm – 6:00 pm

15 Feb, 4pm:

James Kreines (Claremont McKenna)

From Shapeless Abyss Towards Self-Developing Thought: Taking Hegel on Spinoza Seriously

@ The New School, Room L502, at 2 W 13th Street

Guests and visitors policies at the New School can be accessed via this website. You will have to download CLEAR and upload proof of vaccination or the results of a rapid test. Please try to arrive 15 minutes earlier so we can help you in case of complications.


Feb 24:

Georg Spoo (Freiburg)

Grounds and Limits of Immanent Critique: Kant, Hegel, Marx

@ Columbia


Mar 3:

Heikki Ikaheimo

Hegel, Humanity, and Social Critique

@ Zoom


Mar 24:

Stephen Howard (KU Leuven)

Kant’s Late Philosophy of Nature: The Opus Postumum

@ Columbia


Apr 11:

Karin de Boer

Does Kant’s Antinomy of Pure Reason Amount to an A Priori History of Rational Cosmology?

@ Columbia


Apr 15, 4pm:

Eva von Redecker

Co-sponsored by the New School Graduate Student Conference

@ The New School


Apr 21:

Giulia Battistoni

NAture, Life, Organizm: The Legacy of Romanticism and Classical German Philosophy in Jonas’ Philosophical Biology

@ The New School

 

 

Feb
23
Thu
Thinking About Death in Plato’s Euthydemus. @ Wolff Conference Room/D1103
Feb 23 @ 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm

Book discussion on Gwenda-lin Grewal’s, Thinking About Death in Plato’s Euthydemus. A Close Reading and New Translation (OUP 2022)

 

Speakers:

Gwenda-lin Grewal (NSSR)
Cinzia Arruzza (NSSR)
Nicholas Pappas (CUNY)

 

Thinking of Death places Plato’s Euthydemus among the dialogues that surround the trial and death of Socrates. A premonition of philosophy’s fate arrives in the form of Socrates’ encounter with the two-headed sophist pair, Euthydemus and Dionysodorus, who appear as if they are the ghost of the Socrates of Aristophanes’ Thinkery. The pair vacillate between choral ode and rhapsody, as Plato vacillates between referring to them in the dual and plural number in Greek. Gwenda-lin Grewal’s close reading explores how the structure of the dialogue and the pair’s back-and-forth arguments bear a striking resemblance to thinking itself: in its immersive remove from reality, thinking simulates death even as it cannot conceive of its possibility. Euthydemus and Dionysodorus take this to an extreme, and so emerge as the philosophical dream and sophistic nightmare of being disembodied from substance. The Euthydemus is haunted by philosophy’s tenuous relationship to political life. This is played out in the narration through Crito’s implied criticism of Socrates-the phantom image of the Athenian laws-and in the drama itself, which appears to take place in Hades. Thinking of death thus brings with it a lurid parody of the death of thinking: the farce of perfect philosophy that bears the gravity of the city’s sophistry. Grewal also provides a new translation of the Euthydemus that pays careful attention to grammatical ambiguities, nuances, and wit in ways that substantially expand the reader’s access to the dialogue’s mysteries.