Sep
15
Fri
“Relative Fundamentality” Karen Bennett, SWIP-Analytic Workshop @ CUNY Grad Center, rm 5307
Sep 15 @ 11:00 am – 1:00 pm

Karen Bennett (Cornell), September 15, The Graduate Center, CUNY

Patricia Blanchette (Notre Dame), October 20, NYU Philosophy Department

Nina Emery (Mount Holyoke), November 3, The Graduate Center, CUNY

Oct
5
Thu
Overturning the narrative: Maimon vs. Kant, Gideon Freudenthal @ Wolff Conference Room, D1103
Oct 5 @ 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm

In my talk, I wish to outline an alternative to a chapter in the history of modern philosophy, and present Kant’s tenets in the Critique of Pure Reason in the spirit of the Vienna Circle, the origin of analytic philosophy.

According to the traditional narrative, Kant overcame the limitations of British empiricism (Hume) and German rationalism (Leibniz) and with his “transcendental philosophy” raised philosophy to a new and superior level. Contemporary Leibnizian critics failed to appreciate the novelty of his approach. Although Kant complimented Salomon Maimon (1753-1800) for having best understood him among his critics, he saw no reason to accept Maimon’s criticism.

From the point of view of the Vienna Circle in the 1920-1930, the traditional narrative should be reversed. In the view of its members, there are no synthetic judgments a priori, and the Kantian project was therefore misconceived in principle. The “Kantian intermezzo”, as Neurath called it, should be skipped and philosophy should rather return to Hume and Leibniz. Exactly this was Maimon’s position. He characterized himself as a “rational dogmatist and empirical skeptic”, referring explicitly to Leibniz and Hume respectively.

I will present Maimon’s criticism of Kant’s synthetic judgments a priori and claim that it is valid. With this, questions concerning the progress of philosophy and its historiography will naturally rise.

Gideon Freudenthal is professor emeritus at the Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Ideas, Tel-Aviv University.

He is the author (or co-author) of:

Atom and Individual in the Age of Newton (1986)

Exploring the Limits of Preclassical Mechanics (1991)

Classical Marxist Historiography of Science: The Hessen-Grossmann-Thesis (2009)

No Religion without Idolatry. Mendelssohn’s Jewish Enlightenment (2012)

Presented by The New School for Social Research (NSSR) Philosophy Department.

Oct
20
Fri
“What Does a Model Show?” Patricia Blanchette (Notre Dame) @ NYU Philosophy Dept. rm 202
Oct 20 @ 11:00 am – 1:00 pm

The standard way to show the consistency of a theory, or the independence of a given statement from that theory, is to exhibit a model. But there’s more than one thing that’s been called a “model” as this notion has evolved from its original role in 19th century foundations of geometry to its current role as a universallyapplicable tool in logic. This talk investigates some of the changes that bring us to the modern notion, and asks to what extent various kinds of model do, or don’t, successfully demonstrate various kinds of consistency and independence.

When: Friday October 20, 11:00am-1:00pm (with reception to follow)
Where: NYU Philosophy Department, 5 Washington Place, Room 202

 

Nina Emery (Mount Holyoke), November 3, The Graduate Center, CUNY

SWIP-Analytic Workshop @ CUNY Grad Center, rm tba
Oct 20 @ 12:00 pm

Karen Bennett (Cornell), September 15, The Graduate Center, CUNY

Patricia Blanchette (Notre Dame), October 20, NYU Philosophy Department

Nina Emery (Mount Holyoke), November 3, The Graduate Center, CUNY

Feb
15
Thu
CUNY-Milan Annual Interdisciplinary Workshop on Belief @ CUNY Grad Center, Philosophy Dept.
Feb 15 – Feb 16 all-day

CUNY-Milan Annual Interdisciplinary Workshop in Philosophy, a joint initiative of both institutions’ philosophy departments, is aimed at promoting advanced studies in core analytic topics. This year’s workshop, first in a series of annual events, will focus on belief. Albeit this workshop’s main objective is to advance research in Philosophy of Mind and Logic, the organizers are committed to maintain the interdisciplinary character of the workshop.

This year’s inaugural conference will focus on belief. It is the aim of the organizers to provide an interdisciplinary perspective on the topic of belief. Some of the topics to be discussed include:

Mental states/attitudes and beliefs; the connection between imagination and belief; group beliefs; logic of belief; belief and logical omniscience; beliefs about blame and forgiveness; the difference between conscious and unconscious beliefs; confabulations of belief; the experience of belief; what it is like to believe; norms of beliefs; knowledge and belief; metaphysics of belief; religious beliefs; political beliefs; manipulation of belief; content of belief; belief and bias; belief and language; belief as constituting sexual, racial and gender based identity; delusional beliefs; continental perspectives on belief; historical perspectives on belief.

Keynote speakers:

Sergei Artemov
City University of New York
David Rosenthal
City University of New York
Giuliano Torrengo
University of Milan

Organisers:

Daniel Boyd
CUNY Graduate Center
Kasey Mallette
CUNY Graduate Center
V. Alexis Peluce
CUNY Graduate Center
Daria Vitasovic
University of Milan
Mar
8
Thu
Round Table Women in Philosophy: Publishing, Jobs, and Fitting In @ CUNY Grad Center
Mar 8 @ 4:30 pm – 7:30 pm

SWIP-Analytic Schedule for Spring 2018

Here is a sneak peak at our exciting line-up of speakers and events for Spring 2018. Some times and rooms TBA.

Elanor Taylor, February 8, CUNY Graduate Center, The Committee for Interdisciplinary Science Studies, Room 5307, 4:00-6:00pm

Virginia Aspe Armella and Ma. Elena García Peláez Cruz (co-sponsored with SWIP-Analytic Mexico), March 2, NYU Room 202, 2:00-4:30pm

Round Table Women in Philosophy: Publishing, Jobs, and Fitting In (co-sponsored with NYSWIP), March 8, CUNY Graduate Center, The Committee for Interdisciplinary Science Studies, Room 5307, 4:30-7:30pm

Graduate Student Essay Prize Winner Presentation, April 12

Sophie Horowitz (UMass, Amherst), April 26

Sep
20
Thu
Temporal Discounting in Psychology and Philosophy: Four Proposals for Mutual Research Aid – Meghan Sullivan (Notre Dame) @ CUNY Grad Center, rm 9205
Sep 20 @ 4:00 pm – 6:00 pm

SWIP-Analytic Fall 2018 Events

Thursday, September 20, 4:00pm-6:00pm
CUNY Graduate Center, Room 9205
Meghan Sullivan (Notre Dame), “Temporal Discounting in Psychology and Philosophy: Four Proposals for Mutual Research Aid”

Thursday, October 18, 4:00pm-6:00pm
Location TBA
Amie Thomasson (Dartmouth), Title TBA

Thursday, November 8, 4:00pm-6:00pm
Location TBA
Jessica Wilson (Toronto), Title TBA

More details will be added as they become available. Click here to download the flyer as a PDF.

Oct
18
Thu
Amie Thomasson (Dartmouth) @ CUNY Grad Center
Oct 18 @ 4:00 pm – 6:00 pm

SWIP-Analytic Fall 2018 Events

Thursday, September 20, 4:00pm-6:00pm
CUNY Graduate Center, Room 9205
Meghan Sullivan (Notre Dame), “Temporal Discounting in Psychology and Philosophy: Four Proposals for Mutual Research Aid”

Thursday, October 18, 4:00pm-6:00pm
Location TBA
Amie Thomasson (Dartmouth), Title TBA

Thursday, November 8, 4:00pm-6:00pm
Location TBA
Jessica Wilson (Toronto), Title TBA

More details will be added as they become available. Click here to download the flyer as a PDF.

Nov
8
Thu
Causal Composition, Jessica Wilson (Toronto) @ CUNY Grad Center
Nov 8 @ 4:00 pm – 6:00 pm

On the face of it, we live in a world rife with materially composed objects. But what is it exactly for some (smaller, spatiotemporally located) objects to materially compose, or ‘make up’, another? Intuitively, this has something to do with causal interactions among the parts, but causal accounts of composition have been surprisingly rare, due to their seeming to face pressing difficulties associated with extensional inadequacy, vague existence, and causal overdetermination. Here I motivate, present, and defend a causal account of composition, highlighting along the way its advantages over accounts based in classical mereology.

SWIP-Analytic Fall 2018 Events

Thursday, September 20, 4:00pm-6:00pm
CUNY Graduate Center, Room 9205
Meghan Sullivan (Notre Dame), “Temporal Discounting in Psychology and Philosophy: Four Proposals for Mutual Research Aid”

Thursday, October 18, 4:00pm-6:00pm
Location TBA
Amie Thomasson (Dartmouth), Title TBA

Thursday, November 8, 4:00pm-6:00pm
Location TBA
Jessica Wilson (Toronto), Title TBA

More details will be added as they become available. Click here to download the flyer as a PDF.

Apr
26
Fri
So You Want to Diversify Philosophy: Some Thoughts on Structural Change. Leah Kalmanson (Drake) @ Columbia University Religion Dept. 101
Apr 26 @ 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm

Efforts to diversify philosophy, at the curricular level, often focus on increasing the content covered in a semester: i.e., making room for more women on the syllabus, making room for more non-Western texts and thinkers, etc. Similarly, efforts to diversify philosophy, at the professional level, often focus on making room for marginalized topics and/or members of under-represented groups at conferences, in anthologies, and among faculty (both in terms of demographics and research specializations). This all serves to create an antagonistic situation where marginalized voices must fight to be heard and those in the discipline must make “tough choices” about where to cede precious resources such as syllabus space, publication credits, and faculty hires. I suggest that part of the antagonism, at least in the case of Asian philosophy, arises because we are trying to fit non-European texts and thinkers into disciplinary structures that are themselves designed to accommodate a Eurocentric model for philosophy. By “disciplinary structures” I mean the philosophical canon and historical narrative as well as departmental course offerings, curricular requirements for majors and minors, classroom pedagogical practices, and academic research methodologies. Truly transformative change must take place at the structural level. In this brief talk, I consider the scope of such changes, in concrete terms, and raise questions about the effects these changes would have on the disciplinary identity of philosophy as we know it today.

With a response from:

Andrew Lambert (College of Staten Island, CUNY)