Calendar

2/7: Uriah Kriegel Philosophy, Rice University

2/21: Megan Peters Bioengineering, University of California, Riverside Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine

2/28: Iris Berent Psychology, Northeastern University

3/6: Michael Glanzberg Philosophy, Rutgers University

3/20: Sam Coleman Philosophy, University of Hertfordshire

4/3: Cameron Domenico Kirk-Giannini Philosophy, Rutgers University

4/26: Nicholas Shea Institute of Philosophy, University of London Philosophy, University of Oxford

5/8: Diana Raffman Philosophy, University of Toronto

2/7: Uriah Kriegel Philosophy, Rice University

2/21: Megan Peters Bioengineering, University of California, Riverside Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine

2/28: Iris Berent Psychology, Northeastern University

3/6: Michael Glanzberg Philosophy, Rutgers University

3/20: Sam Coleman Philosophy, University of Hertfordshire

4/3: Cameron Domenico Kirk-Giannini Philosophy, Rutgers University

4/26: Nicholas Shea Institute of Philosophy, University of London Philosophy, University of Oxford

5/8: Diana Raffman Philosophy, University of Toronto

2/7: Uriah Kriegel Philosophy, Rice University

2/21: Megan Peters Bioengineering, University of California, Riverside Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine

2/28: Iris Berent Psychology, Northeastern University

3/6: Michael Glanzberg Philosophy, Rutgers University

3/20: Sam Coleman Philosophy, University of Hertfordshire

4/3: Cameron Domenico Kirk-Giannini Philosophy, Rutgers University

4/26: Nicholas Shea Institute of Philosophy, University of London Philosophy, University of Oxford

5/8: Diana Raffman Philosophy, University of Toronto

2/7: Uriah Kriegel Philosophy, Rice University

2/21: Megan Peters Bioengineering, University of California, Riverside Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine

2/28: Iris Berent Psychology, Northeastern University

3/6: Michael Glanzberg Philosophy, Rutgers University

3/20: Sam Coleman Philosophy, University of Hertfordshire

4/3: Cameron Domenico Kirk-Giannini Philosophy, Rutgers University

4/26: Nicholas Shea Institute of Philosophy, University of London Philosophy, University of Oxford

5/8: Diana Raffman Philosophy, University of Toronto

2/7: Uriah Kriegel Philosophy, Rice University

2/21: Megan Peters Bioengineering, University of California, Riverside Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine

2/28: Iris Berent Psychology, Northeastern University

3/6: Michael Glanzberg Philosophy, Rutgers University

3/20: Sam Coleman Philosophy, University of Hertfordshire

4/3: Cameron Domenico Kirk-Giannini Philosophy, Rutgers University

4/26: Nicholas Shea Institute of Philosophy, University of London Philosophy, University of Oxford

5/8: Diana Raffman Philosophy, University of Toronto

Abstract. The Noble Lie proposed by Plato for the Just City in Republic III has been much misunderstood. Its agenda is twofold: to get the citizens of the City to see their society as a natural entity, with themselves as all ‘family’ and akin; and to get the Guardians in particular to make class mobility, on which the justice of the City depends, a top priority. Since the second is taken to depend on the first, the Lie passage amounts to an argument (1) that the survival of a just community depends on the existence of social solidarity between elite and mass, which allows for full class mobility and genuine meritocracy; (2) that this solidarity in turn depends on an ideology of natural unity; and (3) that such ideologies are always false. So the Lie really is a lie, but a necessary one; as such it poses an awkward ethical problem for Plato and, if he is right, for our own societies as well.

Presented by SWIP-NYC

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)

This event will feature a thought-provoking panel discussion with sexual and reproductive justice experts on the value of the sexual and reproductive justice framework and how it can be applied to diverse stakeholders, settings, and contexts. Panelists will also highlight examples from around the world of momentum towards sexual and reproductive justice.

Event Information

Free and open to the public; registration is required for both in-person and online attendance. For additional information, please visit the event webpage. Please email Malia Maier at mm5352@cumc.columbia.edu with any questions. All in-person attendees must follow Columbia’s COVID-19 policies.

Hosted by the Global Health Justice and Governance Program at Columbia University.