Socratesâ close association of madness and philosophy from the Phaedrusâ Palinode has puzzled interpreters. How can philosophy be equated to irrationality? In this paper I argue against interpretations that either deny that the association of madness and philosophy ought to be taken seriously or downplay this association by considering madness as akin to the unreflective inspiration characterizing only the first stages of philosophizing but subsequently overcome by the mature philosopher. I show that the association of madness and philosophy is an integral part of Socratesâ polemics against what he calls âhuman moderationâ, characterized by a cold calculation of costs and benefits. And, moreover, that madness is an ongoing feature of philosophy and of the philosopher, who is never fully in possession of all his rational and cognitive processes but has to constantly work on them in an effort of self-clarification.
External visitors must comply with the university’s guest policy as outlined here: https://www.newschool.edu/covid-19/campus-access/?open=visitors.
Audience members must show proof of a full COVID-19 vaccination series (and booster if eligible), ID, and remain masked at all times.
Book Panel with:Â
Chiara Bottici (NSSR and Lang College), Judith Butler (UC Berkeley and NSSR) and Romy Opperman (NSSR and Lang College).
Abstract:Â
How can we be sure the oppressed do not become oppressors in their turn? How can we envisage a feminism that doesn’t turn into yet another tool for oppression? By arguing that there is no single arche explaining the oppression of women and LGBTQI+ people, Chiara Bottici proposes a radical anarchafeminist philosophy inspired by two major claims: that there is something specific to the oppression of ‘the second sexes’, and that, in order to fight that, we need to untangle all other forms of oppression and the anthropocentrism they inhabit. On the basis of a Spinozist philosophy of transindividuality, Anarchafeminism calls for a decolonial and deimperial attitude and for a renewed awareness of the somatic communism connecting all different life forms on the planet. In this revolutionary vision, feminism does not mean the liberation of the lucky few, but liberation of the planet from both capitalist exploitation and an anthropocentric politics of domination. Either the entire planet, or none of us will be free.
External visitors must comply with the university’s guest policy as outlined here: https://www.newschool.edu/covid-19/campus-access/?open=visitors.
Audience members must show proof of a full COVID-19 vaccination series (and booster if eligible), ID, and remain masked at all times.
Sponsored by the NSSR Philosophy Department & The Gender and Sexualities Studies Institute (GSSI)
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, âFound or Sought? Hegel vs MacIntyre on the Good Life and the Virtues.â 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 CLEARâS 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 CLEARÂ to verify vaccination records and receive a guest pass in the app.Â
We recommend creating and verifying your account in advance of coming to campus.
11:00am: Cinzia Arruzza and James Dodd, Greetings and Introduction
Part 1. Celebrating Ross Poole
11:05-12:35am: Ben Nienass, âThe Force of Memoryâ and Basak Ertur, “Learning to Live with Ghosts”
12:35-12:40 pm: Coffee Break
12:40-1:30 pm: Roundtable Discussion
Participants:
Omri Boehm, Lynne Segal and Mick Taussig
1:30-3:30 pm: Lunch Break
Part 2. Celebrating Bernard Flynn
3:30-6:00pm: Roundtable Discussion on the Work of Bernard Flynn
Participants:
Peg Birmingham, James Dodd, Frank Chouraqui, and Simon Critchley
External visitors must comply with the university’s guest policy as outlined here: https://www.newschool.edu/covid-19/campus-access/?open=visitors.
Audience members must show proof of a full COVID-19 vaccination series (and booster if eligible), ID, and remain masked at all times.
 9:30am EST OPENING REMARKS
Scott Shushan, Visiting Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Sarah Lawrence College
Dr. RenĂŠe T. White, Provost and Professor of Sociology, The New School
Alice Crary, University Distinguished Professor of Philosophy, The New School for Social Research
9:45-11:15 PHILOSOPHY AS PEDAGOGY
Karen Ng (moderator), Associate Professor of Philosophy, Vanderbilt University
Roy Ben-Shai, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Sarah Lawrence College
Megan Craig, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Stony Brook University
Judith Friedlander, Professor Emerita of Anthropology, Hunter College, and former Dean of The New School for Social Research
11:30-1:00 PHILOSOPHY AND THE PUBLIC GOOD
Simona Forti (moderator), Professor of Political Philosophy, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy
Axel Honneth, Jack C. Weinstein Professor for the Humanities, Columbia University
Philip Kitcher, John Dewey Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, Columbia University
Joel Whitebook, Professor, Columbia University Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research
1:00â2:00pm Lunch Break
2:00 REFLECTION
Cinzia Arruzza, Associate Professor of Philosophy, The New School for Social Research
2:10-3:50 PHILOSOPHY IN A PLURALIST SPIRIT
David Clinton Wills (moderator), Professor, New York University-Gallatin
MarĂa PĂa Lara, Professor and Researcher, Universidad AutĂłnoma Metropolitana
Chiara Bottici, Associate Professor of Philosophy and Director of Gender and Sexuality Studies,The New School for Social Research
Lucius Outlaw, Jr., W. Alton Jones Professor of Philosophy, Vanderbilt University
Charles Taylor, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, McGill University
4:05-5:35 DEMOCRACY AS A TASK BEFORE US
Dmitri Nikulin (moderator), Professor of Philosophy, The New School for Social Research
Seyla Benhabib, Eugene Meyer Professor of Philosophy and Political Science. Emerita, Yale University and Senior Research Fellow, Columbia Law School and Columbia Center for Contemporary Critical Theory
Rainer Forst, Professor of Political Theory and Philosophy, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main
Nancy Fraser, Henry A. and Louise Loeb Professor of Political and Social Science, The New School for Social Research
Organized by Marcia Morgan and Scott Shushan in collaboration with the Department of Philosophy at The New School for Social Research.Â
Abstract:
As a specific form of rights insecurity the revocability of reproductive rights manifests contradictory understandings (privative and productive) of the political status of pregnancy.
I ask how and why we should understand reproductive rights as revocable, giving a broad meaning to the term ârevocability,â and suggesting a conjoined vocabulary that includes conditionality, exceptionality, and disqualifying qualification.
I ask: what kind of grammar might help us understand more specifically how the concurrent action of conflicting combinations of power (such as sovereignty, discipline, security, necropower, and neoliberal expectation) coordinate together in relation to reproductive rights-bearing, and how heterogeneous combinations of power also produce a mutual disruptiveness, even auto-critique, manifesting as conflictual embodiment.
External visitors must comply with the university’s guest policy as outlined here:Â https://www.newschool.edu/covid-19/campus-access/?open=visitors.
Audience members must show proof of a full COVID-19 vaccination series (and booster if eligible), ID, and remain masked at all times.
Even on a close reading of Hobbesâs corpus, it is difficult to extract a clear picture of his views on gender.
In the history of philosophy, most of the âgreatâ philosophers engaged with questions about womenâs ânatureâ and the appropriate role for women in the family, society, and state.
Hobbes, however, seems to have far less to say on the subject than most, and what he does say is often ambiguous or paradoxical.
It is a fundamental tenet of Hobbesâs political theory that all people are equal in the state of nature, women included; yet he makes reference to the general superiority of men as regards physical strength, courage, wit, and suitability for rule.
Hobbes denies the naturalness, inevitability, and godliness of patriarchy, and he even argues for natural maternal right; however, he describes families in civil societies in terms of fathers ruling over their servants and childrenâleaving women out of the picture altogether.
His texts are peppered with various offhand comments, allusions, and intimations about women and sexuality more generally, many of which are provocative and undeveloped.
One of the most intriguing parts of his analysis is his repeated appeal to the example of the ancient Amazonian warrior women who engaged in procreative contracts with men from neighboring tribes.
In this paper, the speaker uses Hobbesâs discussion of the Amazons to examine his views about gender and, thereby, his place in the history of philosophy as seen from a feminist perspective.Â
External visitors must comply with the university’s guest policy as outlined here:
https://www.newschool.edu/covid-19/campus-access/?open=visitors
Audience members must show proof of a full COVID-19 vaccination series (and booster if eligible), ID, and remain masked at all times.
Book panel: Anat Matar, The Poverty of Ethics (Verso books 2022)
Participants:
Anat Matar (Senior Lecturer of Philosophy at Tel Aviv University)
Simon Critchley (Hans Jonas Professor of Philosophy at NSSR)
Raef Zreik (Visiting Fellow at Yale Law School, and Associate Professor of Jurisprudence at Ono Academic College)
Abstract:
It is a common assumption that ethics must serve as the cornerstone of politics. Yet abstract moral arguments have always been used for justifying all kinds of atrocities; ethical sensitivity and compassion have been expressed towards particular kinds of victims, while totally ignoring others.
The liberal West, in particular, continually manifests such blindness. It is horrified by non-Western oppressive methods, but turns a blind eye to their Western equivalents.
The gratification of holding the moral high ground consistently serves as a political instrument in the hands of those seeking to shore up the existing order.
In The Poverty of Ethics, philosopher and activist Anat Matar argues for the conceptual primacy of political discourse over ethics and claims that only the political force which stands for equality, justice and democracy â the Left â can provide the coordinates for an ethical life under conditions of global injustice.
Appealing to philosophical ideas on the essence of language, Matar shows how the ethos of the Left, as it has evolved over years, underlies and gradually forms the basis for ethics.
Struggles against slavery, racism, colonization and militarization, protests against exploitation and the capitalist order, the feminist movement, global demands for climate action â all these are primarily motivated by a deep understanding of Left heritage rather than by abstract ethical requirements or by airy sensitivities. They, in turn, shape and reshape our notion of moralit
What makes right acts right? A Stoic answer to Rossâs question.
When W.D. Ross poses the question, âwhat makes right acts right?â (The Right and the Good ch. 2), he is asking a question that is prior to the deliberative question, âhow do I determine the right thing to do?â 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 Rossâs question about Stoic right actions (katheĚkonta).
The endpoint of Stoic deliberation is determining what token action is the right action. The paper begins with the Stoic distinction between a thingâs 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 âintermediate actionsâ) 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 (katorthoĚma) action.  The Stoic distinction between right and perfect action depends on the actionâs moral goodnessânot rightnessâwhich is due to its causal origin.
Presented by Professor Rachana Kamtekar (Cornell University)
General Description:
This semester, the Philosophy Film Club at The New School is hosting a series of films to consider the notion of founding myths — the inspiring, frightening, and defining speculative fictions that ground our sense of belonging to place, community, and a way of life. Each screening will begin and conclude with a discussion facilitated by a member of the NSSR Philosophy Department. In the spirit of community, all are welcome!
Philosophy Film Club hosts a screening of the post-
apocalyptic drama Mad Max: Fury Road directed by George Miller. Join us for a screening and post-film discussion of this style-redefining vision of a future “in which men have become the pawns of insane leaders and women hold fiercely onto [while fighting fiercely for] the last vestiges of hope.”
Location: Bark Room (M104), Sheila C. Johnson Design Center (ground floor), 2 W. 13th Street at Fifth Avenue
For more information or to be added to the mailing list, email: veronica@newschool.edu