“I don’t know where the line is. … In most religions you’re taught that you’re not going to be judged by your actions; you’re going to be judged by your intent. … So if your intent is to gay-bash, yes, you are a gay-basher. Even when you don’t do it. If your intent is to not, then it’s not.
Now, it can still be offensive, but once you explain that to the person that made the mistake, you can pretty much be sure they will go back on that and try to rectify hurting you. Does this make sense?”
– Chris Rock on Fresh Air, 12/8/14
On Tuesday, November 3rd, Jennifer Ware (CUNY Graduate Center) comes to Brooklyn Public Philosophers to answer Chris Rock’s question. (The answer is no.) She’ll talk about stereotypes, slurs, and the psychological and social mechanisms through which jokes can hurt.
Here’s a bit more about the talk in Ware’s own words:
Unjust Kidding: The Insufficiency of Good Intentions
Careful analysis of humor is important because of the amnesty often granted to humorous speech acts. When someone tells a joke, they seemingly separate themselves from that which they express, and consequently we typically do not hold individuals to the same standards when they are apparently telling a joke. George Carlin, a comic famous for his off-color humor, made the following observation,
“Stand-up is a socially acceptable form of aggression. You get to name the targets, you get to fire the bullets… and the wonderful part is, after you’ve finished, you then say, ‘Hey, can’t you take a joke? This is humor, sir! What’s the matter with you?”
Individuals intending to express a vicious position without having to take full responsibility for their words may use this greater forgiveness divisively, and therefore we should be careful about granting such amnesty.
In this presentation, I will review some of the more common formal and colloquial accounts that aim to explain why and when jokes are offensive. I will go on to develop a position informed by empirical evidence that challenges the view that facts about the speaker largely, if not entirely, determine the moral character of a joke. Instead, I suggest the effects of jokes play a significant role in determining their moral characters.
Tell your friends/students/strangers! Bring someone who knows lots of jokes! See you there, I hope!
The Gotham Philosophical Society presents:
Life Unfree: Meaning, Purpose, and Punishment Without Free Will
Free will is an illusion. Who we are and what we do is the result of factors beyond our control. So claim many philosophers and cognitive scientists, armed with empirical data and reasoned arguments. But their conclusion seems intolerable. Without freedom, in what sense are our lives and actions really ours? And if what we do isn’t under our control, how can we be held responsible for our doing it? What sense could we make of the idea of criminal justice? Is a life without free will a life worth living? Philosopher and free will skeptic Gregg D. Caruso thinks it is. Join us as he discusses how we, as individuals and a society, can make sense of life without free will.
Monday, January 11, 2016 at 6pm at The Cornelia Street Café, located at 29 Cornelia Street, New York, NY 10014 (near Sixth Avenue and West 4th St.). Admission is $9, which includes the price of one drink. Reservations are recommended (212. 989.9319).
“All you need is love.” So sayeth the gospel of John (Lennon). But what is love? What sorts of things can be the object of our love? Do we love what we love in virtue of their qualities, in virtue of something else, or “just because.” How important is love? In recent years philosophers have addressed (or dodged) these questions. I’ll tell you something about what they’ve been saying and writing, but mostly I’ll be trying to get you to help me answer these questions.
Join philosopher Dale Jamieson in this collaborative investigation into the nature of love, that most essential and yet most intellectually elusive of human emotions.
Tuesday, May 17, at 6pm. This event is part of the Philosophy Series at The Cornelia Street Café, located at 29 Cornelia Street, New York, NY 10014 (near Sixth Avenue and West 4th St.). Admission is $9, which includes the price of one drink. Reservations are recommended (212. 989.9319)
Dale Jamieson is Chair of the Environmental Studies Department; Professor of Environmental Studies and of Philosophy; and the Founding Director of Environmental Studies and Animal Studies at New York University. He has written extensively on the environment, climate change, and our relationship to animals. He is the author of several works, including Reason in a Dark Time: Why the Struggle to Stop Climate Change Failed–and What It Means For Our Future and, most recently, Love in the Anthropocene (with Bonnie Nazdam).
The North American Society for Early Phenomenology
in conjunction with
The Max Scheler Society of North America
Presents
Feeling, Valuing, and Judging: Phenomenological Investigations in Axiology
May 19th-21st, 2016
St. John’s University – Manhattan Campus
Invited Speakers
- Anthony Steinbock (Southern Illinois University – Carbondale)
- John Drummond (Fordham University)
- James Dodd (New School for Social Research)
Call for Abstracts
Feelings, values, and judgements all played central roles in the philosophical writings of the early phenomenologists – from their discussions of formalism in ethics, to social ontology, the phenomenology of moods and emotions, and even the phenomenology of religion. Though heavily inspired by the work of Edmund Husserl, Max Scheler and the Munich phenomenologists conceived phenomenology as less a method and more an attitude, and developed their phenomenological investigations accordingly. With the phenomenological attitude, the meaning of the object of cognition is revealed. Doxic, volitional, and affective intentional attitudes gives rise to phenomenological descriptions of the world in terms of its meaning and value. Understood in this way, the early phenomenologists saw questions of value as arising alongside questions of ontology.
The theme of this conference will be phenomenological studies in axiology (ethics and aesthetics), and will look at the relationship of intuition, the emotions, and intersubjectivity to acts of feeling, valuing, and judging. Topics include phenomenological theories of valuation, the departure of later phenomenologists from Husserl’s and Brentano’s distinctions of types of mental phenomena, axiological properties of intentional objects, the self as a member of a community, sympathy and empathy, criteria for correct and incorrect value judgments, the difference between axiological and ontic characteristics and fact-value differentiation, axiology in universals and particulars, judgments of value and the role of implicit beliefs, phenomenological descriptions of striving, volition, emotions, moods, the beautiful and the sublime, etc. We encourage papers on the work of Franz Brentano, Edmund Husserl, Theodor Lipps, Max Scheler, Alexander Pfänder, Moritz Geiger, Josef Geyser, Dietrich von Hildebrand, Siegfried Hamburger, Nicolai Hartmann, Waldemar Conrad, Aurel Kolnai, Roman Ingarden, Edith Stein, Emmanuel Levinas, Hans Reiner, and others. We are also interested in papers proposing original phenomenological descriptions of emotions, feelings, volition, and judgments that follow the phenomenological tradition, and build upon these historical antecedents in new and interesting ways.
Abstracts should be 500-700 words, and include a short bibliography of primary and secondary sources. All abstracts must be prepared for blind review and sent via email in .doc or .docx format to Dr. Rodney Parker at: (rodney.k.b.parker@gmail.com).
Both senior researchers and graduate students are encouraged to submit.
Deadline for submissions is: December 15, 2015.
—————————————–
http://philevents.org/event/show/18534
The Max Scheler Society of North America (MSSNA) invites members of the international community of scholars to participate in their biannual meeting, which will be held at St. John’s University, Manhattan Campus. The 2016 meeting will take place in conjunction with the North American Society for Early Phenomenology (NASEP), with sessions from each society running concurrently.
Broadly conceived, the general theme of the meeting is the phenomenology of value or axiology. The MSSNA is particularly interested in papers examining Max Scheler’s contribution to the study of value and the relevance of his work to recent investigations. Papers examining the significance of value in Scheler’s thought are not restricted to his ethics and may concern any aspect of his work. For this meeting, the intent is to have a program that reflects the tremendous diversity of Scheler’s thought and relevance of value in human existence.
Participants will have approximately 35 minutes to present their work. Though completed papers are preferred, abstracts of at least 500 words in length will also be considered. Deadline for submission is December 15, 2015.
All submissions should be sent electronically to Dr. Zachary Davis (davisz@stjohns.edu). Because all submissions will be reviewed blindly by the selection committee, submissions should have a separate cover sheet with name and contact information. Notification of acceptance will be sent out by January 31.
Keynote speakers:
The Speculative Ethics Forum is a one day workshop-style event in which we’ll consider the most challenging matters of ethics. Ethical approaches of all sorts are welcomed–analytic, continental, ancient, medieval, Asian, and so on. Most papers are invited. However, there are two slots open for submissions. Any paper in ethical theory will be considered for acceptance. Bold and speculative inquiries are preferred to papers that primarily defend ground already gained or papers that are primarily scholarly. Our aim, in short, is to have a single day concentrated on expanding the horizons of ethics.
Our Invited Speakers Are:
Katja Vogt (Columbia University)
James Dodd (New School for Social Research)
Leo Zaibert (Union College)
Justin Clarke-Doane (Columbia University)
Organisers:
Register
November 17, 2017, 11:45pm EST
speculative.ethics.forum [at the host] gmail.com
There is only a perspectival seeing, only a perspectival ‘knowing’; and the more affects we allow to speak about a matter, the more eyes, different eyes, we know how to bring to bear on one and the same matter, that much more complete will our ‘concept’ of this matter, our ‘objectivity’ be.
Thus wrote Friedrich Nietzsche, and we at the Gotham Philosophical Society agree. We believe that to make sense of something, we need to see it from as many sides as possible.
That is why we are launching a new discussion series with the aim of contributing to the pursuit of New York’s objectivity. We will be taking on all manner of ideas, issues, and topics of significance to New Yorkers, and approaching them from legal, artistic, and philosophical perspectives. We believe that a philosophical understanding cut-off from our legal reality is irrelevant, and that laws uninspired by our poetic imagination are without soul.
With Dr. Joseph S. Biehl (Gotham Philosophical Society), Jane LeCroy, Shahabuddeen Ally
So please join us as we kick-off this series with a look at the concept of truth, the concept that is central to human discourse. What is truth? How can we know it? And what can it mean to say, as so many have, that we are now living in a ‘post-truth’ world? We’ll ask these questions and more, Monday, December 4, 2017, at Le Chélie NYC at 8pm.
A Lawyer, A Poet, and A Philosopher Walk into a Bar to talk about Truth in the City…
There is only a perspectival seeing, only a perspectival ‘knowing’; and the more affects we allow to speak about a matter, the more eyes, different eyes, we know how to bring to bear on one and the same matter, that much more complete will our ‘concept’ of this matter, our ‘objectivity’ be.
Thus wrote Friedrich Nietzsche, and we at the Gotham Philosophical Society agree. We believe that to make sense of something, we need to see it from as many sides as possible.
That is why we are launching a new discussion series with the aim of contributing to the pursuit of New York’s objectivity. We will be taking on all manner of ideas, issues, and topics of significance to New Yorkers, and approaching them from legal, artistic, and philosophical perspectives. We believe that a philosophical understanding cut-off from our legal reality is irrelevant, and that laws uninspired by our poetic imagination are without soul.
So please join us as we kick-off this series with a look at the concept of truth, the concept that is central to human discourse. What is truth? How can we know it? And what can it mean to say, as so many have, that we are now living in a ‘post-truth’ world? We’ll ask these questions and more.
Wednesday, January 17, 2018 at 8p.m. At Las Tapas Bar and Restaurant, 808 W 187th Street, New York, NY 10033. (Take the A Train) Admission is $15, which includes one complimentary tapa and drink. Reservations are recommended (646.590.0142)
Shahabuddeen Ally is a practicing lawyer specializing in the field of family law. He also teaches law at Long Island University. He was formerly Assistant Corporation Counsel at the New York City Law Department, as well as Staff Attorney for the City of New York, Administration for Children’s Services. Shah was recently reelected as Chairperson of Manhattan Community Board 12.
Jane LeCroy is a poet, performance artist and educator who fronts the band The Icebergs and was a part of Sister Spit, the famed west coast women’s poetry troupe. Since 1997 Jane has been publishing student work and teaching writing, literature and performance to all ages through artist-in-the-schools organizations such as Teachers & Writers Collaborative and DreamYard, and as adjunct faculty at the university level. Her poetry book, Names was published by Booklyn as part of the award winning ABC chapbook series, purchased by the Library of Congress along with her braid! Signature Play, her multimedia book from Three Rooms Press, features a poem that was nominated for a Pushcart Prize.
Joseph S. Biehl, earned earned a B.A. in philosophy from St. John’s University and a Ph.D. from the Graduate School and University Center, CUNY. He has written on ethics, meta-ethics, and politics. He has taught philosophy in New York and in Cork, Ireland, and is a member of the Governing Board and former co-director of the Felician Institute for Ethics and Public Affairs. He is the founder and executive director of the Gotham Philosophical Society and Young Philosophers of New York.
“Is Truth Dead?” asked Time Magazine last year. Since people clearly care about the truth, at least in mundane matters, truth is alive. If an airline agent tells you the flight to Dallas is leaving from Gate B16, you expect the flight to Dallas to be leaving from Gate B16, and complain sorely if it’s not.
But if the truth does still matter, why do we elect people who don’t seem to care what the truth is?
The answer to this question, argues philosopher Louise Antony, has partly to do with the structure of human knowledge, and partly to do with the structure of our society. We can’t do anything about the first matter, but we can do plenty about the second.
Louise Antony is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. She is the author of numerous essays on the philosophy of mind, epistemology, and feminist theory. She is also a past president of the Eastern Division of the American Philosophical Association.