Calendar

Even though ancient philosophy and rhetoric have many overlapping interests (education, persuasion, politics, etc.), their relationship has long been a contentious subject, especially among ancient philosophers. Contemporary scholarship on the topic is equally divided: philosophers tend to approach the topic primarily through the works of Plato and Aristotle and regard rhetoric (and rhetorical compositions) as a second-rate notion/discipline which has little interest in shedding light on philosophically relevant questions about human nature and society, whereas classicists research oratorical compositions to get a better understanding of Greek prose style, historical details and context, but often shy away from philosophical questions that the texts might hint at. This workshop aims to bring together scholars working on ancient rhetoric and argumentative techniques on the one hand, and scholars working on ancient philosophy, on the other in order to open up a space for a constructive engagement with philosophy/rhetoric, one which might enrich our understanding of ancient texts as well as the context in which they were produced.

Confirmed speakers: Jamie Dow (Leeds), Richard Hunter (Cambridge), Joel Mann (St Norbert), Jessica Moss (NYU), Usha Nathan (Columbia), James Porter (Berkeley), Edward Schiappa (MIT), Nancy Worman (Barnard). All papers will be followed by a response and general discussion.

Attending the workshop is free, but in order to have an idea of numbers it would be greatly appreciated if those interested in participating in the event would email the organizers, Laura Viidebaum and Toomas Lott.

This Workshop is generously sponsored by the Department of Philosophy (NYU), Department of Classics (NYU) and NYU Center for Ancient Studies.

The aim of this conference is to bring scholars from numerous disciplines into conversation across the historical timeline. Just as freedom and liberty are slippery concepts, so are ideas of debt, value, and payment. But rather than simply viewing these terms as rhetorical devices that make freedom seem worthwhile, we deploy debt, value,and payment as analytical tools for understanding how freedom works – while also keeping in mind that these are concepts that themselves demand investigation. These ideas unite the discourses of freedom and liberty, from ethical and economic discourses, which describe freedom as either physical labor or a mental activity, as well as the language of religion and science. Often our innumerable ways of assessing value bleed one into another, especially in conversations regarding individual and shared liberties.

By explicitly juxtaposing the different methodologies used in asking “what does freedom cost?” from Greco-Roman antiquity to the present, we hope to explore overlapping areas of research and help expand the existing conversations in each discipline. In addition to providing vocabularies, practices and theories of freedom that we still use today, Ancient Greece and Rome provide many examples of peoples who lacked freedom but strove to obtain it, including slaves, women and conquered peoples. By simultaneously examining the Greco-Roman antiquity and modernity, we bring to light recurrent historical patterns of the costs that people have and continue pay for freedom.

We will be offering a minimum of six bursaries of up to 500 dollars to be awarded on the basis of greatest need, taking into account access to institutional funding and the distance of the conference from the participant’s home institution.

31 October 2016 is the deadline for the submission of abstracts. Please include the following as separate files:  (1) title, abstract of 300-500 words, a one page bibliography (no self identifying information please!); (2) your name, title of your proposed talk, institutional affiliation, short academic bio, and an indication of whether you’d like to be consider for a bursary, a budget for the amount requested, and any information we should take into consideration when making our bursary allocations.

The full program can be viewed here.

The workshop will bring together philosophers working in ancient epistemology with those working in contemporary epistemology to discuss issues relevant to the debates in both fields.

It was assumed until recently that the distinction between doxa and epistêmê, key players in ancient epistemology, maps directly onto the contemporary distinction between knowledge and belief. Recent interpreters of Plato and Aristotle have challenged this assumption.  Some argue that epistêmê is closer to understanding than to knowledge because (for example) it requires explanation rather than justification, cannot be transmitted by testimony, is hard to come by, and can only be had of a restricted range of objects. Others argue that doxa is narrower than belief, perhaps closer to opinion, because (for example) doxa is excluded by epistêmê while belief is entailed by knowledge, doxa is imprecise and unclear while these are not essential features of belief, and doxa too has a restricted range of objects.

Contemporary epistemology tackles issues that are related to the debates above. Is knowledge to be distinguished from understanding and if so, which one should be seen as the proper goal of inquiry? Does understanding have value over and above the value of knowledge? Much like Plato and Aristotle, epistemologists aim to elucidate the conceptual relations between knowledge, understanding, justification, explanation, epistemic authority, and testimony. In addition, contemporary epistemologists sometimes produce fictional genealogies of epistemic concepts to arrive at an improved understanding of our epistemic practices. If epistêmê and doxa are distinct from knowledge and belief in a way indicated above, then it seems appropriate to raise the question whether the actual history of epistemic concepts can help to improve these fictional genealogies.

The presentations are followed by a response and a general discussion.Papers by speakers who specialize in Ancient epistemology will be assigned to commentators who specialize in contemporary epistemology and vice versa.

Presenters: Gail Fine (Cornell), Richard Foley (NYU), Jane Friedman (NYU), Allison Hills (Oxford), Robert Pasnau (Colorado), Whitney Schwab (Baltimore/NYU), Katja Vogt (Columbia), Ralph Wedgwood (USC).

Respondents: John Bengson (Harvard), Hugh Benson (Oklahoma), Paul Boghossian (NYU), Toomas Lott (NYU/Tartu), Jessica Moss (NYU), James Pryor (NYU), Michael Strevens (NYU).

Organisers:

How is the ancient exhortation to “know thyself” related to consolation, virtue, and the study of nature? How did the commitment to self-knowledge shift over the centuries in writings by Islamic, Jewish, Christian, and early modern natural philosophers? How did medieval women contribute to modern notions of self, self-knowledge, and knowledge of nature? This conference explores the meditative “reflective methodology” from its ancient roots, through medieval Christian, Muslim, and Jewish traditions to the so-called “new” methodologies of early modern science. Speakers include Souleymane Bachir Diagne, Pierre Force, Clémence Boulouque, Christia Mercer, and Pamela Smith.

Points of focus will be: (1) the relation between the ancient imperative to “know thyself” and medieval concerns to reflect on one’s self as a means to find ultimate truths; (2) the meditative genre as it developed from Augustine’s Confessions through Christian and Islamic spiritual exercises to late medieval Christian meditations and early modern kabbalist writings; (3) the continuity between medieval meditations and the reflective methodology of early modern science; and (4) the meditative genre’s afterlife in Freud, Foucault, Arendt, and contemporary science.

Conference co-sponsored by the Center for New Narratives in Philosophy, the Institute for Social and Economic Research and Policy, the Departments of Philosophy, French, English and Comparative Literature and the Maison Française

To download a PDF about this event click here.