Luca Corti (University of Padua) – March 6
Amy Allen (Penn State) – March 27
Andreja Novakovic (UC Berkeley) – April 3
Alberto Siani (University of Pisa) – May 8
The New York German Idealism Workshop is pleased to announce the first talk of the semester. Alison Stone (Lancaster University) will be giving a talk entitled, “Bettina von Arnim’s Romantic Philosophy in Die Günderode” on September 17 from 10am-12pm EST. Giulia Valpione (Università degli Studi di Padova) will be providing comments.
Join Zoom Meeting https://NewSchool.zoom.us/j/93096095303?pwd=ZjVWaTdLZ0VlNTlPUHFuWmJDVE9DZz09
Please email nygermanidealism@gmail.com to request the paper (and join our listserv), which has already been distributed (as of 9/8/21).
The second talk of the semester will be by Elisa Magrì (Boston College), who will be giving a talk entitled, “Sedimentation and Ethical Memory in Hegel’s Philosophy of Spirit.” The talk will take place on October 15 from 4:30-6:30pm EST.
A Zoom link will be provided in advance. Please stay tuned for a poster containing all the events for the fall semester.
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, “Found or Sought? Hegel vs MacIntyre on the Good Life and the Virtues.” 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 CLEAR’S 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 CLEAR to verify vaccination records and receive a guest pass in the app.
We recommend creating and verifying your account in advance of coming to campus.
9:30am EST OPENING REMARKS
Scott Shushan, Visiting Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Sarah Lawrence College
Dr. Renée 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
1:00–2:00pm 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
María Pía Lara, Professor and Researcher, Universidad Autónoma 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.
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 “revocability,” 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: 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 – the Left – 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 – 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 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)
15 Feb, 4pm:
James Kreines (Claremont McKenna)
From Shapeless Abyss Towards Self-Developing Thought: Taking Hegel on Spinoza Seriously
@ The New School, Room L502, at 2 W 13th Street
Guests and visitors policies at the New School can be accessed via this website. You will have to download CLEAR and upload proof of vaccination or the results of a rapid test. Please try to arrive 15 minutes earlier so we can help you in case of complications.
Feb 24:
Georg Spoo (Freiburg)
Grounds and Limits of Immanent Critique: Kant, Hegel, Marx
@ Columbia
Mar 3:
Heikki Ikaheimo
Hegel, Humanity, and Social Critique
@ Zoom
Mar 24:
Stephen Howard (KU Leuven)
Kant’s Late Philosophy of Nature: The Opus Postumum
@ Columbia
Apr 11:
Karin de Boer
Does Kant’s Antinomy of Pure Reason Amount to an A Priori History of Rational Cosmology?
@ Columbia
Apr 15, 4pm:
Eva von Redecker
Co-sponsored by the New School Graduate Student Conference
@ The New School
Apr 21:
Giulia Battistoni
NAture, Life, Organizm: The Legacy of Romanticism and Classical German Philosophy in Jonas’ Philosophical Biology
@ The New School
Book discussion on Gwenda-lin Grewal’s, Thinking About Death in Plato’s Euthydemus. A Close Reading and New Translation (OUP 2022)
Speakers:
Gwenda-lin Grewal (NSSR)
Cinzia Arruzza (NSSR)
Nicholas Pappas (CUNY)
Thinking of Death places Plato’s Euthydemus among the dialogues that surround the trial and death of Socrates. A premonition of philosophy’s fate arrives in the form of Socrates’ encounter with the two-headed sophist pair, Euthydemus and Dionysodorus, who appear as if they are the ghost of the Socrates of Aristophanes’ Thinkery. The pair vacillate between choral ode and rhapsody, as Plato vacillates between referring to them in the dual and plural number in Greek. Gwenda-lin Grewal’s close reading explores how the structure of the dialogue and the pair’s back-and-forth arguments bear a striking resemblance to thinking itself: in its immersive remove from reality, thinking simulates death even as it cannot conceive of its possibility. Euthydemus and Dionysodorus take this to an extreme, and so emerge as the philosophical dream and sophistic nightmare of being disembodied from substance. The Euthydemus is haunted by philosophy’s tenuous relationship to political life. This is played out in the narration through Crito’s implied criticism of Socrates-the phantom image of the Athenian laws-and in the drama itself, which appears to take place in Hades. Thinking of death thus brings with it a lurid parody of the death of thinking: the farce of perfect philosophy that bears the gravity of the city’s sophistry. Grewal also provides a new translation of the Euthydemus that pays careful attention to grammatical ambiguities, nuances, and wit in ways that substantially expand the reader’s access to the dialogue’s mysteries.