Calendar

The philosophical traditions of India offer contemporary researchers an unparalleled and mostly untapped resource for fresh thinking about attention, its relations to mind and world. From Nyāya manas-theory to the extensive Buddhist theories about attention’s relationship with consciousness, and from precise taxonomies of the varieties of attention to discussions about the norms governing attention, epistemic, moral, and practical, the wealth and sophistication of Indian analysis is astounding. Our workshop will look at the ways in which Indian, including Buddhist, philosophical theory can enrich contemporary discussion, and there will be presentations by a world-class panel of speakers.

We hope too that this workshop will serve as a catalyst to Indian philosophical studies in the New York area. The workshop is open to everyone, free and without registration, and the program is here.

April 25, 2019|DAY 1 

8:45 am – 9:00 am

Coffee & Welcome  (Jonardon Ganeri NYU)

9:00 am – 10:45 am

Panel 1. Attending to Oneself

Chair: Nic Bommarito (Buffalo)

        9:00 am – 9:50 am

Sharon Street (NYU, via video conferencing)

  “On Recognizing Oneself in Others: A Meditation-Based Response to Mackie’s Argument from Queerness”

        9:55 am – 10:45 am

Muhammad Faruque (Fordham)

“Attending to Oneself: Muḥammad Iqbāl and his Indian Contemporaries”

10:45 am – 11:00 am

   Morning Break

11:00 am – 12:45 pm 

Panel 2. Attention and Affect

Chair: Joerg Tuske (Salisbury)

11:00 am – 11:50am

Evan Thompson (British Columbia)

    “Affect Biased Attention and Concept Formation”

11:55 am – 12:45 pm

Sonam Kachru (Virginia)

    “Attention and Affect: A View from Indian Buddhist Philosophy”

12:45 pm – 2:00 pm

Lunch Break

2:00 pm – 3:45 pm 

Panel 3. Decision and Exclusion

Chair: Emily McRae (New Mexico)

2:00 pm – 2:50 pm

Arindam Chakrabarti (Stonybrook)

     “Deciding to Attend and the Problem of Disjunctive Attention”

2:55 pm – 3:45 pm

Catherine Prueitt (George Mason)

“At the Limits of Pain: Attention, Exclusion, and Self-Knowledge in Pratyabhijñā Śaivism.”

   3:45 pm – 4:00 pm

Afternoon Break

   4:00 pm – 5:45 pm 

Panel 4. The Ethics of Attention

Chair: Eyal Aviv (George Washington)

        4:00 pm – 4:50 pm

   Curie Virag (Edinburgh)

“Attention as Cognitive Resonance”

       4:55 pm – 5:45 pm

   Shalini Sinha (Reading)

   “The Ethics of Attention in Śāntideva and Simone Weil”

April 26, 2019|DAY 2 

10:15 am – 10:30 am

Coffee

10:30 am – 12:15 pm

Panel 5. Self-Awareness and Attention

Chair: Payal Doctor (LaGuardia)

       10:30 am – 11:20 am

Amit Chaturvedi (Hong Kong)

“Phenomenal Priority and Reflexive Self-Awareness: Watzl meets Yogācāra”

       11:25 am – 12:15 pm

Nilanjan Das  (University College London)

“Śrīharṣa on Self-knowledge and the Inner Sense”

12:15 pm – 1:30 pm

Lunch Break

   1:30 pm – 3:15 pm

Panel 6. Mindfulness and Justification

Chair: Bryce Huebner (Georgetown)

         1:30 pm – 2:20 pm

Georges Dreyfus (Williams)

   “But What is Mindfulness? A Phenomenological Approach”

         2:25 pm – 3:15 pm

Anand Vaidya (San Jose)

    “Attention and Justification”

   3:15 pm – 3:30 pm

Afternoon Break

3:30 pm – 5:15 pm

Panel 7. The Wandering Self

Chair: Adriana Renero (NYU)

         3:30 pm – 4:20 pm

Carolyn Jennings (UC Merced)

    “From Attention to Self”

         4:25 pm – 5:15 pm

Zac Irving (Virginia)

    “Harnessing the Wandering Mind”

https://philevents.org/event/show/71418

This conference will discuss the role of digital spaces such as social media in being a public philosopher or theologian. The conference will choose papers that explore different digital platforms, how these platforms can aid in being a public philosopher or theologian, as well as the specific challenges these spaces pose. Sessions will explore how digital spaces have become arenas for philosophers and theologians to discuss ideas with other scholars and with the public, and how the discussion of concepts in this format affects the delivery and reception of the ideas. We will solicit papers that specifically discuss how digital spaces can positively facilitate the goals of public philosophy. Internet spaces are an important tool for the contemporary public philosopher and the full implications of their usage has not yet been fully explored.

Main speakers: Barry Lam, Vassar College

Contact Information

http://connect.molloy.edu/s/869/alumni/index.aspx?sid=869&pgid=2173&gid=1&cid=3727&ecid=3727&post_id=0

Ronald Dworkin’s work always spanned a wide array of topics, from the most abstract jurisprudence through the details of American constitutional law all the way over to political philosophy and theories of justice and equality. In the last decades of his life, however, Dworkin’s work flowered in ways that went beyond even this prodigious range. Though he continued his central work in the philosophy of law and constitutional theory, he also addressed issues in international law, human dignity, the philosophy of religion, the relation between ethics, morality and legal theory, and the unity of practical thought generally. This conference will explore some of these themes in Dworkin’s late work. Beginning with a panel on his understanding of religion, we will also convene discussions of his work on legal integrity, international law, and the relation between law and morality. There will be a total of nine presentations, with plenty of time for discussion. All are welcome.

Panel 1 (Friday 1:30 p.m.): Dworkin’s Religion without God.
Eric Gregory (Princeton),
Moshe Halbertal (NYU and Hebrew U.) Ronald Dworkin Religion Without God: Morality and the Transcendent
Larry Sager (Texas) Solving Religious Liberty

Panel 2 (Friday 4:30 p.m.): Dworkin on international law.
Samantha Besson (Fribourg)
The Political Legitimacy of International Law: Sovereign States and their International Institutional Order

John Tasioulas (King’s College, London)

Panel 3 (Saturday 10 a.m.): The idea of integrity in Law’s Empire.
Andrei Marmor (Cornell) Integrity in Law’s Empire
Jeremy Waldron (NYU)  The Rise and Decline of Integrity

Panel 4 (Saturday 2:15 p.m.): Law and morality in Justice for Hedgehogs.
Mark Greenberg (UCLA)
What Makes a Moral Duty Legal?  Dworkin’s Judicial Enforcement Theory Versus the Moral Impact Theory

Ben Zipursky (Fordham)

The 2020 Annual Telos-Paul Piccone Institute Conference
Keynote Speaker: Catherine Malabou, Kingston University and University of California, Irvine.

Conference Description

Although the rise of populism has often been interpreted as the atavistic return of racism and nationalism, the underlying sources have more to do with the collapse of the welfare state model in advanced post-industrial countries, which has resulted in the search for new forms of solidarity that could replace welfare state structures. These structures were first developed in the early twentieth century when a new type of nation-state and industrial economy came into being along with the developing capitalist regime of accumulation. Such a regime brought about the destruction of the existing networks of solidarity—based primarily on family, religious community, and workplace ties—thereby leading the state to intervene in different social services, including health, employment, and senior care, as well as in labor policy regarding such issues as the minimum wage, the length of the working day, retirement, and accident insurance. However, these interventions by the state, whether they responded to labor union protests or arose from anti-socialist preemptive actions by conservative forces, have been accompanied by the growing bureaucratization of its practices, which have come to constitute, along with capitalist commodification, one of today’s fundamental sources of inequalities and conflicts.

The shifting line between the private and the public has had ambiguous effects. In the end, state intervention was carried out not in the form of a true democratization but through the imposition of new forms of subordination. The social result with greater globalization and deindustrialization in most of the advanced industrial countries has been a sense of abandonment, as well as a loss of empowerment and autonomy in all segments of the population. At the same time, with the emergence of post-Fordist capitalism in the late twentieth century, this subordination to the state has taken the opposite form—that of a reduction of state intervention and care, based on the idea that the endless expansion of state services cannot serve as a panacea for all problems. As a result, new distortions in the private/public divide recently have appeared. In turn, the private sphere has become increasingly contentious, first, because of growing privatization of previously public services and, second, because gaining access to those services is left to individual initiative.

The feeling that governments are incapable of dealing with social problems has regenerated the awareness that collective self-management is perhaps inevitable, at both micro- and macroscopic levels: from neighborhood collectives up to lending circles, non-profit societies, religious organizations, and solidarity economies. The contemporary interest in structures of mutual aid relates to the fact that we are living in an era that is clearly looking for new models of human flourishing and social development. Not only must we deal with multiple and recurring crises (finance, food, energy, and environment), but there is a growing recognition that today’s normative agenda has to be much more encompassing and holistic, including issues of gender equality, fair trade, environment, and cultural and religious diversity.

A need to reconceptualize the concepts of the “common good” and “collective interest” is developing out of this set of conditions, leading to new definitions of civic sense, responsibility, and autonomy. The need for intermediary structures between the private and public sphere frames the space of intervention for mutual aid as a new form of social coherence.

But the concept of mutual aid has a complex and contradictory history. According to Peter Kropotkin, there is an innate biological evolutionary tendency toward mutualism in all living beings, an immanent social rationality that orients humanity toward a self-regulated political organization and society. Against social Darwinism, Kropotkin argues that species not only compete but also, and mainly, collaborate. Such an evolutionary vision later formed the core of Edward Wilson’s sociobiology, marking the beginning of the altruism/selfishness debates within which the problematic of mutual help has remained enclosed for decades. Libertarianism, for example, presupposes that individuals’ social behavior is grounded in a natural principle of selfishness that should then become the basis of aid. This vision allows for a deterministic idea of the capitalist economy in which Robert Nozick argues for the principle of a “minimal state” grounded on the fact that no distributive justice can come from above. Similarly, Friedrich Hayek argues that the “true” nature of liberalism lies in the doctrine that seeks to reduce to the minimum the power of the state. Democracy is then only the means for collective decision-making or a utilitarian apparatus for safeguarding internal peace and individual freedom. The capitalist free market, in turn, is said to be the only type of social organization that respects the principle of individual liberty.

If the theory of mutual aid can no longer be grounded in an opposition between the two poles of society and the state, but must be reconceptualized in terms of the mediation between both, the modes of its mediation become the key to the implementation of mutual aid practices. Ideas of family, nation, and religion thus take on new potential significance as the forms of mediation between individuals that can create the basis for networks of mutual aid. Are these the key categories that would embed mutual aid in broader affective, ethical, and metaphysical frameworks, or are there alternative possibilities that would establish new types of networks?

This conference seeks to develop new concepts of mutual aid that are not predetermined by conceptions of biological, economic, or political certainties. Key questions include:

• Why is mutual aid not linked with theories of social contract, and how do we determine its degrees of separation from the state?
• How can mutual aid be reconceptualized by renewing intellectual traditions?
• What are the moral implications and requisites of the concept of mutual aid today?
• What are the privileged domains of application for mutual aid and what are the organizational principles underlying them?
• Does mutual aid imply a reorganization of the economy, or is it compatible with or even essential to a capitalist organization of economic life?
• Does the concept of mutual aid offer tools for reimagining socialism in a way that avoids an overreliance on state power?
• Does mutual aid require a reconstitution of subjectivity that moves it away from the autonomous individual of liberal theory?
• What are the prospects and problems of religious frameworks, such as Pentecostalism, that function as the basis for mutual aid?
• Can the rise of populism be understood as part of a search for new networks for mutual aid? Does mutual aid imply the restriction of its networks to limited groups, implying a relationship to political identity?
• How does the concept of mutual aid relate to state power and the sovereignty of the state?

Abstract Submissions

Please note: Abstracts for this conference will only be accepted from current Telos-Paul Piccone Institute members. In order to become a member, please visit our membership enrollment page. Telos-Paul Piccone Institute memberships are valid until the end of the annual New York City conference.

We invite scholars from all disciplines to submit 250-word abstracts along with a short c.v. to telosnyc2020@telosinstitute.net by September 30, 2019. Please place “The 2020 Telos Conference” in the email’s subject line.

https://philevents.org/event/show/73818

The Long Island Philosophical Society is seeking submissions for its Spring 2020 conference which will be held Saturday, April 18th 2020 on the attractive campus of Molloy College, located in Rockville Centre, NY. 

The Long Island Philosophical Society has been a dynamic forum for the exchange of ideas since 1964.  LIPS is an internationally recognized organization that is a valuable philosophical resource for the Greater New York area. Its conferences have drawn scholars from over 30 states and from the international community, including Brazil, Canada, Ukraine, Israel, and Egypt.

Papers can be on any topic of philosophical interest. Presentations are limited to 25-30 minutes, to be followed by a 10-15 minute discussion period. Both professional philosophers (full-time, part-time, unaffiliated) and graduate students are welcome to submit.  Paper submissions are also welcome from those in different disciplines who have an interest in philosophical issues.

The submission deadline is Friday, March 13, 2020. 

Please submit papers, including contact information and affiliation (if any) to Dr. Glenn Statile at StatileG@stjohns.eduor Dr. Leslie Aarons at  laarons@lipsociety.org.

Since its inception, phenomenology has been understood as a method of philosophizing or philosophical attitude rather than a system of philosophy. Husserl encouraged his students to apply this method to all types of philosophical questions and across all fields of research. As a result, phenomenological analysis was used by a wide range of disciplines, from philosophy and psychology to literature, history, sociology, mathematics, cosmology, and religious studies. The phenomenological method itself has been refined according to the insights achieved as a result of its interdisciplinary nature. However, the core tenets of this method and characterization of this attitude have long been a point of debate among phenomenologists.

This conference will explore the nature of the phenomenological method, its interdisciplinary applications, and how research in parallel fields informed the work of the early phenomenologists.

As always, we encourage submissions dealing with the thought of the full spectrum of early phenomenologists (including Edmund Husserl, Franz Brentano, Carl Stumpf, Theodor Lipps, Alexander Pfänder, Max Scheler, Moritz Geiger, Hedwig Conrad-Martius, Eugen Fink, Roman Ingarden, Edith Stein, Dietrich Von Hildebrand, Adolf Reinach, Martin Heidegger, Maximilian Beck, Jean Hering, et al.) as well as figures who were in conversation with the early phenomenological movement.

Abstracts should be 400-600 words, and include a short bibliography. Abstracts must be prepared for blind review and sent to Charlene Elsby (elsbyc@pfw.edu)

EXTENDED Deadline for submissions is 26 January 2020.

Decisions will be sent out no later than 7 February 2020.

Click here to download this call

https://philevents.org/event/show/79866

THE MAX SCHELER SOCIETY OF NORTH AMERICA

IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE

NORTH AMERICA SOCIETY FOR EARLY PHENOMENOLOGY

Theme:
Phenomenology as Attitude and/or Method
St. John’s University — New York, NY
(Queens and/or Manhattan campus)
April 22-24, 2020

The Max Scheler Society of North America (MSSNA) invites members of the international community of scholars to participate in their biannual meeting. The 2020 meeting will take place in conjunction with the North American Society for Early Phenomenology (NASEP), with sessions from each society running concurrently. Each society is having an independent call for papers. Papers and abstracts submitted for the MSSNA should be sent to the contact information below. All submissions for NASEP should be directed to the attention of Dr. Rodney Parker (rodney.k.b.parker@gmail.com).

Broadly construed, the general theme of the meeting is the distinctiveness of Scheler’s phenomenological approach. We are seeking papers that explore the development of Scheler’s understanding of phenomenology and how this development enabled Scheler to test the limits of phenomenology in examining such experiences as religious experiences, aging and death, other “minds” and persons, reality, and the emotions. The MSSNA is particularly interested in papers examining Max Scheler’s contribution to recent investigations related to the continued development of phenomenology.

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 January 15, 2020.

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.

Conference Begins 8:00 am
Breakfast/Registration: 8:00 am – 9:00 am (Kellenberg Hall – Reception Room)
Morning Sessions – (9:00 am – Noon) (Kellenberg Hall = K)

Session 1: (Philosophy and the Catholic Novel)
Chairperson: Glenn Statile (St. John’s University)
Room = K006
1. Father Robert Lauder (Saint John’s University) – “[Maritain, Marcel, Haught]: Philosophical
Resources for Analyzing the Catholic Novels of Graham Greene”
2. Brother Owen Sadlier O.S.F. (Cathedral Seminary; Saint Francis College – emeritus) –
“Philosophical Reflections on Diary of a Country Priest”
3. Glenn Statile (Saint John’s University) – “Brideshead Revisited: Aesthetic, Theological, and
Philosophical Reflections”

Session 2: (Ancient Philosophy)
Chairperson: Chryssoula Gitsoulis (Baruch College – CUNY)
Room = K015
1. Chryssoula Gitsoulis (Baruch College – CUNY) – “The Individual vs the State”: A Study of
Socrates and Antigone”
2. Eric Wickey (Saint Peter’s College) – “A Change of Mind”
3. Mark Zelcer (Queensborough Community College) – “Socrates and the Demos”
4. Alan Kim (Stony Brook University) – “Animal Farm”

Session 3: (Epistemology, Logic, and the Nature of Philosophy)
Chairperson: Christopher French (SUNY Farmingdale)
Room = K020
1. Joseph Biehl (Saint John’s University) – “Selling Truth Short”
2. Jason Costanzo (Conception Seminary College) – “The Fourth Observer: Philosophy and its
Epistemic Paths”
3. Partha Das (Saint John’s University) – “On Double Negation”

Session 4: (Modern Philosophy, Descartes, Hume)
Chairperson: Robert Delfino (Saint John’s University)
Room – K021
1. Sophie Berman (Saint Francis College) – “Descartes on the Infinite Freedom of the Finite
Mind”
2. Rocco Astore (Saint John’s University) – “Devotion Begins in Freedom: An Analysis of the
Relation Between True Love and Freedom in Descartes’s Principles of Philosophy and Passions
of the Soul”
3. Robert Devall (Independent Scholar) – “Hume, the Ideal Critic, and the Problem of Taste”

Session 5: (Political Philosophy, Cities, Confucius, Dasein, Boredom)
Chairperson: Margaret Cuonzo (LIU Brooklyn)
Room – K202
1. Margaret Cuonzo (LIU Brooklyn) – “A Somewhat Paradoxical Argument for the Rights of
Cities”
2. Peter Li (Saint John’s University) – “Political Confucianism and Global Justice”
3. Brandon Kaiser (Boston College) – “Of Dasein and Discourse: Examining the Everydayness
of the Political”
4) Henry Curcio (Western Michigan University) – “Boredom”

Session 6: (Cancer and Brain Death)
Chairperson: John DeCarlo (Hofstra University)
Room = K211
1. Paul Rezkalla (Hillsdale College) – “Elizabeth Anscombe on Brain Death”
2. John DeCarlo (Hofstra University) – “Consciousness and Cancer: An Interdisciplinary
Dialogue”
3. Seth Goldwasser (University of Pittsburgh) – “Finding Normality in Abnormality: On the
Ascription of Normal Functions to Parts of Cancers”

Session 7: (Healing and the Pandemic)
Chairperson: Jennifer Scuro (Molloy College)
Room – K211A
1. Jennifer Scuro (Molloy College) – “Re–narrating Care Work in the Wake of a Pandemic”
2. Keith Bannerman (Stony Brook University) – “An Ancient Approach to the Pandemic
Problem”
3. Cara Cummings (Johns Hopkins University) – “Healing Akrasia and Vice”

Session 8: (Mental Illness, Humor, Unconscious Morality, Moral Nihilism)
Chairperson: Lewis Williams (Oxford University)
Room – K204
1. Heather Rivera (LSU, Shreveport) – “America’s Cruel Treatment of the Mentally Ill and
Criminally Insane”
2. Maksim Vak (Saint John’s University) – “To Genealogy of Jokes or on the Dialectic of
Ressentiment”
3. Sabina Schrynemakers (Independent Scholar) – “Unconscious Moral Choices”
4. Lewis Williams (Oxford University) – “Rehabilitating Moral Nihilism”

Session 9: (Ethics 1)
Chairperson: David Kaspar (Saint John’s University)
Room = K319
1. Clayton Shoppa (Saint Francis College) – “Second–Guessing the Good: Discernment and
Moral Realism”
2. Charles Duke (University of South Florida) – “Purposive Evil?: Experience, Virtue, and the
Prospects of Human Flourishing”
3. Joe Shin (University of Michigan) – “Must Blame: Self vs Others”
4. Rob Lovering (CUNY College of Staten Island) – “A Case for Legalizing Recreational Drug
Use”

Session 10: (The Sublime and Plasticity)
Chairperson: Leslie Aarons (CUNY Laguardia Community College)
Room – K319A
1. Addison Hinton (Stony Brook University) – “The Function of the Sublime in Spirit’s Pursuit
of the Ethical”
2. Wenshu Zheng (Stony Brook University) – “Subjectivity and Alterity: Reconciling Derrida’s
Mourning and the Sublime”
3. Michael Barr (Stony Brook University) – “The Goal of Plasticity: Affects, Signifiers and the
Infinite Judgement from Hegel to Johnston”

Afternoon Sessions – (2:30 pm –5:00 pm) (Kellenberg Hall)

Session 11: (Science and Modern Philosophy)
Chairperson: Glenn Statile (St. John’s University)
Room = K006
1. Yual Chiek (Saint John’s University) – “Leibniz on the Contingency of the Laws of Motion:
The Transference Thesis”
2. Joel Alvarez (University of South Florida) – “Interpreting Leibniz Counterpart Theory or
Transworld Identity”
3. Glenn Statile (Saint John’s University) – “Analogy and the Integrity of Science”

Session 12: (Darwinism, Evolutionary Psychology, and Autopoiesis)
Chairperson: Lowell Kleiman (SUNY Suffolk Community College)
Room = K015
1. Christopher Petersen (Florida State University) – “Is Evolutionary Psychology Impossible in
Principle? A Reply to S.E. Smith’s Matching Problem Argument”
2. Jacob Koval (Florida State University) – “In Defense of Distortion: A Reply to Shafer–Landau
and Vanova”

3. Matthew Menchaca (CUNY Graduate Center) – “Enactive Autopoiesis and the Future of
Dynamic Affective Science”

Session 13: (Aesthetics and Philosophy of Literature)
Chairperson = Margaret Cuonzo (LIU Brooklyn)
Room = K020
1. Brother Owen Sadlier O.S.F. (Cathedral Seminary; Saint Francis College – Emeritus) –
“The Anatomy of an Artificial Body: Aesthetic Reflections on Hobbes’ Leviathan”
2. Alexia Papigiotis (CUNY Graduate Center) – “Rooting for the Devil: Relatability Approach
for Sympathy for Immoral Characters”
3. Joseph Jordan (Holy Apostles College and Seminary) – “A Boethian Response to
Machiavelli, Marx, and Jordan Peterson”

Session 14: (Indian Philosophy, Rhetoric, Borges)
Chairperson: John F. DeCarlo (Hofstra University)
Room = K021
1. Basilio Monteiro (Saint John’s University) – “Sadharanikaran: Exploring Indian
Communicative Philosophy”
2. Meaghan Dunn (Saint John’s University) – “ Philosophy and Rhetoric: A Curious
Ontological Coupling that Once Was? Or Still Is?”
3. Bartholomew Slaninka (University of Massachusetts, Boston) – “Borges’ “The Aleph” and
Problems in Representing Totality”

Session 15: (Ethics 2)
Chairperson: Lewis Williams (Oxford University)
Room = K202
1. Paul Gyllenhammer (Saint John’s University) – “Mill and Sartre on Oppression,
Individuality, and Virtue”
2. Daniel Doviak (Muhlenberg College) – “Moral Pluralism and the Problem Weight of
Determination for Conflicting Duties”
3. Miriam Ambrosino (Stony Brook University) – “Scheler’s Notion of (Inter) Personal Agency
Founded in Loving”
4. John Park (California State University, Sacramento) – “The Mental and Physical Health
Argument Against Hate Speech”

Session 16 : (Holism, Metaphysics, Heidegger)
Chairperson: Henry Curcio (Western Michigan University)
Room = K211
1. Partha Das (Saint John’s University) – “Holism: A Comparative Study”

2. Jake Khawaja (Rutgers University) – “Actualism, Presentism, and Ontological Commitment”
3. Weian Ding (Loyola Marymount University) – “Become the Becoming: A Heideggerian
Lesson from the Embers and the Stars”

Session 17: (Silence, Ethics, Education, Philanthropy)
Chairperson: Christine Salboudis (Saint John’s University)
Room – K211A
1. Christine Salboudis (Saint John’s University) – “On Silence”
2. Alina Anjum Ahmed (University of Georgia) – “DeCentering Power: Arguing for a
Mandatory Undergraduate Course that Teaches Anti–Oppressive Allyship”
3. Lorenzo Francesco Manuali (Stanford University) – “The Normative Importance of Donor
Self–Legitimation in Philanthropy”
4. Josue Miguel Pineiro (University of Georgia) – “Audiential Injustice and Epistemic
Exclusion”

Session 18: (Theism, Aquinas, Rahner. Ecclesiastes, Scotus)
Chairperson: Seth Goldwasser (University of Pittsburgh)
Room – K204
1. David Kovacs (Loyola Marymount University) – “Toward a New Approach to Theism”
2. Kevin McShane (Saint John’s University) – “Aquinas and Rahner”
3. Vincent Alexis Peluce (CUNY Graduate Center) – “Nothing New Under the Sun:
Ecclesiastian Optimism”
4. Jay Park (Independent Scholar) – “Will and Necessity: Reading Scotus Between Ontological
Priority and Ontological Order”

Session 19: (Ethics, Boethius, Human Dignity)
Chairperson: Alec Koppers (Western Michigan University)
Room – K319
1. Stephen Morris (CUNY College of Staten Island) – “On the Moral Status of Historic Figures
and the Removal of Public Monuments”
2. Matthew Konig (SUNY Suffolk County Community College) – “The Nature of Moral Facts”
3. Arich Hluch (Ohio State University) – “Human Dignity, Autonomy, and Altruism: Reframing
the Debate on Organ Markets”

Session 20: Room – K319A: This room is reserved as a discussion lounge for conference participants