The conference “Lotze to Husserl” will explore the interdisciplinary origins of the phenomenological movement through a careful examination of the figures and developments that dominated the intellectual milieu in Göttingen during the formative years of phenomenology. We consider the interdisciplinary background to Husserl's thought, focusing on the radical innovations in psychology and mathematics that informed his thinking and served as catalysts to his revolutionary transcendental phenomenology. We also evaluate the influence of the Göttingen philosopher Hermann Lotze, a preeminent figure of mid and late nineteenth-century German philosophy.
Speakers:
Kimberly Baltzer-Jaray
Jason Bell
Christian Beyer
Catharina Bonnemann
Stefania Centrone
José Ferreirós
Denis Fisette
Tibor Földes
Guillaume Frechette
Alessandro Salice
Thomas Szanto
Panos Theodorou
Marta Ubiali
Basil Vassilicos
","Conference or similar","","Hayden Kee","Husserl Archives, KU Leuven, KU Leuven","Leuven, Flanders, Belgium","","Romerozaal (COVE 02.10) Collegium Veteranorum","4.70109","50.8765","Not Specified","","http://hiw.kuleuven.be/hua/events/lotzetohusserl/","","","","","","","philevents5777","17-6-2013 9:0 CEST","19-6-2013 17:0 CEST" 9554,"The Pain Conference","Pain is ubiquitous. But it continues to be poorly understood.Scientific advances have led to increasingly subtle and complex models of pain, but not yet consensus. Both in science and in philosophy, pain continues to generate deep and gripping questions.
The Pain Project has been holding workshops targeting four questions in particular: (1) How doespain relate to perception, whose role seems informational rather than motivational? (2) How does pain relate to emotional suffering, which is both implicated in and intriguingly parallels physical suffering?(3) How is pain illuminated by comparisons and contrasts between human and non-human pain? And (4) How is pain illuminated by considerations of atypical pain experiences?
The Pain Conference constitutes the culmination of these workshops and will be organized around research from presenters including:
Colin Allen (Indiana University; Philosophy and Cognitive Science)
Murat Aydede (University of British Columbia; Philosophy)
David Bain (University of Glasgow; Philosophy)
Michael Brady (University of Glasgow; Philosophy)
Victoria Braithwaite (Pennsylvania State University; Biology)
Jennifer Corns (University of Glasgow; Philosophy and Cognitive Science)
Frederique de Vignemont (Institut Jean Nicod, Paris; Philosophy and Cognitive Science)
Valerie Hardcastle (University of Cincinnati; Philosophy and Psychology)
Richard Krueger (Columbia University; Psychiatry)
Siri Leknes (University of Oslo; Neuroscience)
Jennifer Radden (University of Massachusetts; Philosophy)
Adam Shriver (University of Western Ontario; Philosophy and Cognitive Science)
The conference is part of the larger Pain Project. The Pain Project is an international, interdisciplinary research project focused on relations amongst pain, perception, and emotion, as well as pain in non-human animals. It is part of an overarching research program, Pain and the Nature of Mind, run by the University of Notre Dame and funded by the John Templeton Foundation.
More information about the project and our research team can be found at: http://www.davidbain.org/pain
Registration fee: £50(includes tea/coffee and wine reception)
To register or for further inquiries please email Jennifer Corns at:
","Conference or similar","","Jennifer Corns","Philosophy, School of Humanities, University of Glasgow","Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom","G12 8QQ","","-4.25763","55.8652","E-Mail","","http://www.davidbain.org/pain","18-6-2013 9:0 BST","true","","","","","philevents4986","18-6-2013 9:0 BST","20-6-2013 17:0 BST" 8535,"International Advanced Seminar in Philosophy of Medicine ","The International Advanced Seminar in Philosophy of Medicine is a new biennal international conference in philosophy of medicine, especially designed for grad students and early-career researchers.
The IASPM is jointly organized by the Institut d'Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences et des Techniques (University Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne / CNRS/ ENS), the Institute for the History, Philosophy and Ethis of Medicine (Johannes Gutentberg University Mainz), the European School of Molecular Medicine (in collaboration with the research group Biomedical Humanities at the European Institute of Oncology, Milan), the Center for Humanities and Health at King's College in London and the Department of History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Pittsburgh.
The first meeting will be held in Paris on June 20-21-22, 2013. The main topic will be ""Unity and autonomy in the philosophy of medical science"". The deadline for submission via the website of the conference (http://iaspm.sciencesconf.org) is March 15th, 2013.
","Conference or similar","","Marie Darrason","Institut d'histoire et de philosophie des sciences et des techniques (IHPST) - Paris ","Paris, Ile de France, France","75005","Room 1","2.0","48.0","External Site","http://iaspm.sciencesconf.org/registration/index","http://iaspm.sciencesconf.org ","20-6-2013 11:0 CEST","true","","","","","philevents4273","20-6-2013 8:30 CEST","22-6-2013 17:0 CEST" 10707,"Bergen Philosophy of Science Workshop 2013","Bergen Philosophy of Science Workshop 2013
BPSW 2013, 20-21 June
Department of Philosophy, University of Bergen
12/13 Sydnesplassen, Room 210
The talks are 40 min long followed by Q&A.
There is no registration/attendance fee. Abstracts below.
Thursday 20 June
12:45 Coffee
Welcome, Philosophy Dept. Chair Prof. Reidar Lie
Chair Sorin Bangu
13:00 - 14:00
Margaret Morrison (Univ. of Toronto)
Inconsistent Models: Problems and Perspectives
14:15-15:15
Wendy Parker (Durham Univ. UK)
Simulation, Measurement & the Construction of Global Climate Datasets
15:15 - 15:30 Coffee break
15:30 - 16:30
Michal Walicki (Univ. of Bergen, Institute of Informatics)
The holism of truth and paradox
(joint work with Sjur Dyrkolbotn)
Friday 21 June
9:45 Coffee
Chair Michal Walicki
10:00 - 11:00
Alexander Paseau (Oxford Univ.)
Knowledge of Mathematics Without Proof
11:15 - 12:15
Rani L. Anjum (Norwegian Univ. of Life Sciences UMB)
Causation, Powers and Probability
(joint work with Stephen Mumford)
12:15 - 13:00 Lunch break on site
13:00 - 14:00
Colin Howson (Univ. of Toronto)
The Importance of Being Bayesian
14:00 Farewell
----
Abstracts
Margaret Morrison (Univ. of Toronto)
Inconsistent Models: Problems and Perspectives
One of the main stumbling blocks to theory unification is the problem
of having many incompatible models for the same phenomena. Not only is
this a problem for unification but it raises the issue of how to
epistemically assess the information these models contain.
Perspectivism is often seen as a way around this problem but a closer
look reveals that it only offers a solution in cases where the
incompatibility isn't really a problem after all. I discuss some of
the issues surrounding the use of inconsistent models and show that
the problem can persist even in the presence of a unified theory.
Wendy Parker (Durham Univ. UK)
Simulation, Measurement & the Construction of Global Climate Datasets
It is well known that computer simulation models are used to make
projections of future climate change. It is less well known that some
of the most-used ""observational"" datasets in climate science are
composed entirely of simulation output. I explain how such datasets
are produced (via a practice known as data assimilation) and consider
whether they are really so different from conventional observational
datasets. I argue that the differences are not as great as one might
suspect: in principle, these datasets can be high-quality measurements
of atmospheric properties, despite their genesis in simulation. In
arguing for this conclusion, I will present three core features of
measurement and explore intuitions about the nature of measurement
more generally. I will also argue that data assimilation is a special
case -- most simulation studies do not deliver measurements of
real-world systems.
Michal Walicki (Univ. of Bergen, Institute of Informatics)
The holism of truth and paradox (joint work with Sjur Dyrkolbotn)
Our main claim is that discourses, understood as relative and bounded
totalities of statements, provide the grounding for truth and paradox.
Single statements may be the carriers of truth-values but their
truth-claims become justifed or invalid only relatively to the actual
discourse. Truth-claims become invalid in the situation when no
coherent assignment of truth-values to all involved statements - of
the actual discourse - is possible and this amounts to a semantic
paradox. Only the totality of the actual discourse can justify the
conclusion of paradoxicality. (Typical examples, like the liar,
involve merely discourses consisting of single statements.) The
absence of paradox amounts exactly to the applicability of the
truth-concept: the possibility to distribute some truth-values among
all statements of the discourse. According to this view, paradox is
not any specific semantic value of statements but a failure of the
totality of a discourse, the limit suspending its aletheic
possibilities. Accepting thus paradoxes, the view is not threatened by
any revenge. The presented holism has only limited scope and functions
well along with truth of some statements understood as the
correspondence to the non-discursive facts. The presentation is based
on a series of informal examples and a formalisation, only hinted at,
is left for the interested readers.
Alexander Paseau (Oxford Univ.)
Knowledge of Mathematics Without Proof
Mathematicians do not claim to know a proposition unless they think
they possess a proof (or proof sketch) of it. For all their confidence
in the truth of a proposition with considerable non-deductive evidence
behind it (e.g. the Riemann Hypothesis), they maintain that strictly
speaking the proposition will remain unknown until such time as
someone has proved it. This paper challenges this conception of
knowledge, which is quasi-universal within mathematics. We present
four arguments to the effect that non-deductive evidence can in fact
yield knowledge of a mathematical proposition, showing in passing that
some of what mathematicians take to be deductive knowledge is in fact
non-deductive.
Rani L. Anjum (Norwegian Univ. of Life Sciences UMB)
Causation, Powers and Probability (joint work with Stephen Mumford)
Correlation data are often used for finding causation. But how does
causation relate to such data? Hume thought there was nothing more to
causation than regularities. Others think that causation is something
that underlies these correlations, for instance that a cause produce
its effect by necessitating it. An alternative to both views is
probabilistic causation. Instead of looking for perfect regularities,
one might say that a cause raises the probability of its effect.
Causal dispositionalism is an alternative that allows for both
probabilistic and non-probabilistic causation, while also throwing
some new light on the relation between causation and probability.
Colin Howson (Univ. of Toronto)
The Importance of Being Bayesian
Desirable, not to say indispensable, characteristics of a reliable
test, of a hypothesis are that it should minimise the chances of
incorrectly rejecting a true hypothesis and incorrectly accepting a
false one. These criteria are also known as the Neyman-Pearson
criteria of minimising (as far as possible) the chances of making type
I and type II errors, and in medicine of minimising false-negative and
false-positive rates of a diagnostic test. They are also the criteria
appealed to in the so-called No-Miracles argument for scientific
realism. They are popular among objectivists because they seem to
constitute a sound inductive strategy which makes no appeal to prior
probabilities. Unfortunately, they sanction demonstrably unsound
inferences. To ensure soundness priors are indispensable.
Time: 15:00 until 17:15.
Programme
15:00 - 16:00 Elliott Wagner ""The Evolutionary Dynamics of Collective Action""
16:15 - 17:15 Andreas Flache ""Modelling polarization in opinion formation""
___
ABSTRACTS
Elliott Wagner ""The Evolutionary Dynamics of Collective Action""
Stag hunt games are often used to model the strategic aspects of collective actions such as coalition formation and group hunting. But the evolution of cooperation in these games remains somewhat mysterious. This mystery is due to the fact that under all standard evolutionary and learning dynamics the cooperative equilibrium of a stag hunt game has a smaller basin of attraction than that of defection. Furthermore, many different stochastic dynamics, such as the stochastic replicator dynamic, predict that populations will spend almost all the time defecting in 2-player stag hunt games. But in this talk I prove that this is not true of N-player stag hunts. Populations that evolve (or learn) according to the stochastic replicator dynamic will spend almost all of their time cooperating in N-player stag hunt games where N>2. This perhaps counterintuitive result indicates that cooperation may be more likely to evolve in strategic settings with more than two participants than it is to evolve in pairwise interactions.
Andreas Flache ""Modelling polarization in opinion formation""
Many existing models of opinion formation are built on the assumption that social influence fosters consensus. In these models, interacting individuals move their opinions towards those of their interaction partners, so that disagreement is reduced. Models of such 'positive' social influence can explain polarization and persistent dissensus only for exceptional social conditions, such as total isolation of subgroups from outside influences. I will present some mechanisms that we have proposed in recent work that can explain polarization under a wider range of conditions, and discuss corresponding social conditions. Agent-based computational models of polarization based on negative influence, on persuasive argument exchange and on strive for individualization will be presented. I will also show evidence from experiments designed to test some of these models.
Submissions: We invite submissions on any topic related to historical or philosophical aspects of scientific measurement. Some possible topics might include (but are certainly not limited to):
General issues in scientific measurement (e.g., instrumentation, calibration, standardization, precision, definitions of ‘measurement’ and ‘quantity’, the role of the unit, measurement technologies, the role of metaphor, philosophy of metrology, measures of confirmation, causal impact, probabilities, etc.)
Measurement in the physical sciences (e.g., measurement in quantum mechanics, measurement in engineering, measuring the very large, the very small, time, etc.)
Measurement in the biological and health sciences (e.g., measuring fitness, selection, drift, gene flow, relatedness, ancestry, life expectancy, obesity, health, disease rates, disability, etc.)
Measurement in the social sciences (e.g., defining and measuring psychological attributes and disorders, educational testing, the role of psychometric models, reflective vs. formative measurement, multidimensional measurement, cost-benefit assessment, measuring preferences, utilities, inflation, unemployment, poverty, etc.)
History of measurement (e.g., changes in the meaning and practice of measurement through time, interactions between measurement and theory-development, sociology of quantification)
Social values and measurement (e.g., corruption of measurement, politics of measures of social problems, values affecting choice of measurement, misuse of measures of cognitive attributes)
Faculty interested in presenting are invited to submit an abstract of roughly 500 words, while graduate students are invited to submit full papers of roughly 3000-4000 words. Projects should be appropriate for a presentation time of 20-30 minutes. Submissions are due by June 30, 2013 and should be sent as an email attachment (in .doc, .docx or .pdf format) to the organizer account (and cc:d to Professor Cleland): RCHPS@Colorado.EDU; carol.cleland@colorado.edu. Acceptances will be announced by August 15, 2013.
Graduate stipend: Graduate students are encouraged to submit for the program; those whose papers are accepted will receive a modest stipend of $100 to help offset travel expenses.
","CFP for conference or similar","","Matthew Kopec","Committee on the History and Philosophy of Science , University of Colorado, Boulder","Boulder, Colorado, United States","","","-105.271","40.015","Not Specified","","http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/chps/conference.htm","","","","","29th Boulder Conference on the History and Philosophy of Science, Topic: Measurement Across the Sciences","9770","philevents5141","30-6-2013 23:45 BST","" 9458,"","The Intergenerational Foundation (IF), a UK-based think tank, would like to announce a change to the 2012/13 Demography Prize for Young Researchers, which is being awarded in collaboration with Germany's Foundation for the Rights of Future Generations (FRFG).
The closing date is 1 July.
This is a biennial essay prize which has been endowed with €10,000 for the scholars who can compose the best essay on an intergenerational theme. The theme for the 2012/13 prize is as follows:
""Youth Quotas - The Answer to Changes in Age Demographics""
This prize is aimed primarily at young researchers (undergraduates, graduates, doctoral candidates, post-doctoral fellows and junior professors), so we would be grateful if you could distribute the flyer attached to this email among any members of your department(s) who you think could be interested.
Full details of how to enter the competition are available from the following URL:
http://www.if.org.uk/demography-prize-for-young-researchers-201213
Contact: David Kingman (david@if.org.uk)
Minds, Models and Milieux: Commemorating the Centenary of Herbert Simon’s Birth
Edited by Roger Frantz (San Diego State University) and Leslie Marsh (University of British Columbia)
Call for Papers
Herbert Simon (June 15, 1916 – February 9, 2001) was a polymath of the highest order, making significant contributions to sociology, political science, behavioral economics, epistemology, cognitive science, public administration, economics, organization theory and complexity studies. With ever narrowing specialization we may never (at least in our lifetime) see another intellect as genuinely polymathic as Simon. We take the view that Simon’s lifelong project is analogous to Adam Smith in the sense that just as Smith wrote about both Man’s inner life (Theory of Moral Sentiments) and his outer life (Wealth of Nations) so too did Simon in many of his publications. Our book will include chapters on Simon’s theory of mind, theory of rationality and his work on organizations and markets (the latter connoted by milieux of our tripartite title). We welcome proposals on all aspects of Simon’s work (but especially philosophy of mind/CogSci), be it his contribution to a single topic, a single field, or his interdisciplinary influence. Papers should include some – as long or as short as best befits your paper – historical perspective on Simon’s writings. What was the conventional wisdom on your paper’s topic when Simon undertook his research; what was Simon’s contribution to the topic and how did the change the conventional wisdom, if at all, and; how has his work influenced research in the field. Chapters dealing with some neglected aspect of Simon’s legacy would be welcome as well. The deadline for sending a proposal is July 1, 2013. We anticipate having the book published in 2016, the centenary of Simon’s birth. Contact: leslie.marsh@ubc.ca
","CFP for publication or other deadline","","Leslie Marsh","","","","","","","Not Specified","","","","","","","","","philevents5837","1-7-2013 9:0 BST","" 8867,"Business & Economics Society International (B&ESI) Conference","For more information, please contact the B&ESI as follows:
B&ESI
64 Holden Street
Worcester, MA 01605-3109
USA
Tel: 508-852-3937
Fax: 508-595-0089
Email: hkan@besiweb.com
Web: www.besiweb.com
Twitter: B&ESI@BESI_Conference
Exciting developments in the life sciences and their application in biotechnology are helping to provide pioneering cures and therapies for inherited and degenerative diseases. Consider genomics and genetic based therapies, neuroscience and neuropharmacology, ICT implants and prosthetics, nanomedicine and the required socio-cultural accommodations to ageing and you will see how the way in which we perceive ourselves and those around us is slowly being recast. As our knowledge and its application continues to grow and expand, the range, scope and magnitude of what we are able to achieve seems to be limitless.
Building on the success of last year’s event and the many positive and encouraging comments from participants, this year’s interdisciplinary symposium is convened in order to further build capacity as well as consolidate existing scholarship on perspectives on the human body and identity in the face of new advances in emerging technologies.
FURTHER DETAILS
Technology forecasters point to advances in nanoscience and nanotechnology as an ‘enabling technology’ which opens up further opportunities when combined with other technologies. This “convergence” of new emerging technologies therefore becomes a matter of great debate. This is seen, for example, when advances in nanoscience converge with developments in biotechnology, which also utilise developments in information technology to capture and simulate human abilities using artificial intelligence systems and, more controversially, cognitive science. As the animal-human distinction becomes increasingly blurred, it is plain to see the increasing growth of human power over nature in all of its forms including traditional and contemporary understanding about human nature itself. More than just speculative science fiction, talk of brain implants and neural imaging, cyborg enhancement and virtual reality simulation is suddenly becoming a pressing reality.
At this time we are faced with a key question: what does it mean to be human in the 21st Century? A series of identity crises emerge. Against the backdrop of developments in ICT, and especially in virtual contexts we are keen to ensure that our identities are protected and can be authenticated appropriately, without fear of them being reconstructed by others. Likewise, concern is expressed over the question of privacy and surveillance when we encounter new forms of identifying technologies such as biometrics which could challenge our freedom and dignity. As genetic and neuroscience technologies evolve, they provoke and unsettle some of our traditional perceptions of who and what we are.
It is envisaged that this symposium will contribute to the conversation on this theme and by drawing from insights and ideas from across the disciplines, the aim will be to chart challenges to, and changes in perceptions of identity and the human body in the 21st century.
Some key questions this symposium will aim to address include the following:
Suggested topics:
Organising committee:
Dr Yasemin J. Erden, Lecturer in Philosophy, CBET, St Mary's University College, Twickenham erdeny@smuc.ac.uk
Deborah Gale, MA, King’s College London deb.dgale@gmail.com
Matt James MA, Director, BioCentre matt.james@bioethics.ac.uk
Aaron Parkhurst, PhD research candidate, Medical Anthropology, University College London ucsab01@ucl.ac.uk
Dr. Stephen Rainey, Visiting Lecturer in philosophy, St Mary’s University College, Twickenham stiofan.orian@gmail.com
SUBMISSION DETAILS
We invite submission of abstracts in the first instance, with a word limit of around 500-750 words (maximum), and not including references. The abstract should clearly outline main arguments and conclusions of the paper. On the basis of these abstracts, the academic organising committee will compose a short list of speakers to be invited to submit full-length papers for presentation at the symposium, which will be held in London in November 2013.
All abstracts must be submitted through EasyChair (in a Word attachment; without inclusion of personal details to allow for blind reviewing).
EasyChair details and link will be posted shortly.
A selection of successful papers from last year’s symposium were published in a special issue of The New Bioethics: A multidisciplinary journal on biotechnology and the body.
This year a selection of papers which are included in the symposium will also be invited to submit copies for consideration to a special publication on the same theme.
WEB LINKS
http://www.bioethics.ac.uk/news/Call-for-Papers-The-21st-Century-Body-Reloaded-.php
IMPORTANT DATES
Tuesday 9th July 2013
Deadline for submission of abstracts to Easychair (500-750 word limit).
Monday 28th October 2013
Final version of papers to be submitted to Easychair
w.c. 4th November 2013
Symposium, University College London
CONTACT
For more information, please contact the organising committee directly.
","CFP for conference or similar","","Chrissy Meijns","Department of Anthropology, University College London","London, England, United Kingdom","","","-0.12806","51.5219","Not Specified","","http://www.bioethics.ac.uk/news/Call-for-Papers-The-21st-Century-Body-Reloaded-.php","","","","","The 21st Century Body Reloaded","9813","philevents5169","9-7-2013 9:0 BST","" 9228,"","Call for Papers for volume 7, n° 1(13)/ 2014
ESSACHESS – Journal for Communication Studies[1]
www.essachess.com
Environment and communication
Coordinators:
Pieter LEROY (Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands) and Marie-Gabrielle SURAUD (CERTOP, Paul Sabatier University of Toulouse 3, France)
Over the last 40 years, scientific research on environmental issues has become a well-established field worldwide. These environmental issues, on the one hand, have provoked a series of novel questions in a variety of scientific disciplines. Simultaneously, they have led to a series of controversies over political, technological, economic and related issues with and between public authorities, industries and civil society. Communication is a quintessential part of these questioning and debating, and a precondition for scientific, societal and political responses to environmental challenges at large.
This special issue envisages a better understanding of ‘communication’ on environmental issues. We would like to pay attention to the specific features of communication over environmental issues, to its role in the controversies about them, to their mediatisation, to their role in public and political debates, and in negotiation and policy making. What role does ‘communication’ play in all this? What forms and functions does it take? What are the implications thereof when it comes to societal and political action? And under what conditions can communication contribute to the gradual institutionalisation of these environmental responses?
Making the environmental issue into a challenge for collective action affects every single societal sphere: the world of science and technology as well as the associative world of citizens, communities and non-governmental associations; the sphere of public authorities as well as market representatives; employers as well as employees, and farmers as well as banks; agencies at local as well as at global level. Within each of these spheres and between them, ‘environment’ not only has become a discourse, it also created new discursive spaces for concern and mobilisation, it contributed to novel platforms for debate and decision making, resulting into new practices and new standards. While one has to study their mechanisms and effects in more detail, environmental concern in general made citizens to adopt new daily practices - and to conquer other practices -, market agencies developed their ‘social responsibility’ and sustainability standards - either con amore or as green washing -, while public authorities engaged in the development and implementation of environmental policies. In comparable ways, ‘the environment’ informs certain technological options, while challenging others. And above all, communication over the environment created novel ways for these spheres to interact, through a variety of multi-actor and multi-sector arrangements, covering a series of environmental topics, and ranging from the local to the global.
In brief, we regard ‘communication’ to be the link between discourse and action, between discourse and institution, and - under conditions still to be more precisely unravelled and understood - as a motor for societal change.
Within this approach, we call for contributions that could cover four complementary perspectives.
First: the emergence of environmental issues or particular sub-issues thereof, such as GMOs, the nuclear, climate change, biodiversity and others. What are the factors that drive and further their mediatisation and their politicisation, and what are the factors that block or hinder these processes? What is the role of scientific information in this emergence of environmental issues, and what role does citizen science or societal expertise play? How get these different sources of information articulated into different discourses and problem definitions? And how then do the latter enter in confrontation and debate, and eventually result in negotiation and collective decision making?
Second: the institutionalization of environmental discourses. When concern and mobilisation over environmental issues results in successful agenda-setting, these discourses institutionalise into concrete practices, into new ways of interaction, into novel strategies of intervention, either within or among public authorities, market agencies and civil society representatives. What processes do generate successful institutionalisation? What hinders it? To what extent and through what mechanisms this institutionalisation then actually affects the day to day practices of public authorities, of market enterprises, of citizens and the interactions between these stakeholders? Is ‘environmentalism’ indeed a catalyst of institutional change? And how does, within and beyond the well-known mechanisms of ‘implementation’, institutionalisation at one level of governance trigger institutionalisation at other levels?
Third: co-operative arrangements for negotiation and decision-making on environmental issues. As stated above, ‘environmentalism’ has led to the set up of a whole series of new ways of interaction, negotiation and decision-making. While initially environmental impact statements, risk assessments and cost-benefit analyses reflected a technocratic discourse, they all adopted, albeit in various ways, a ‘participatory’ variant. Moreover, environmental issues induced the coming into being of new arena’s and platforms for negotiation and decision-making, their stakes ranging from the location of hazardous activities at local level up to the gradual institutionalisation of some global environmental governance. The recent ‘Grenelle de l’environnement’ in France reflects a trend that encompasses a whole bunch of participatory and interactive initiatives, including the IPCC and, more recently, IPBES. While some of these platforms link the public, the economic and the societal sphere, others relate science to policy, and still others can be regarded as private governance initiatives. Here again, questions arise as to what extent these newly institutionalised arrangements echo certain discourses while, in turn, they facilitate some definitions of the problem and might hinder other forms of communication.
Fourth: the role of sensitizing events and crises. Under normal circumstances, communication, also environmental communication tends to be business as usual. Yet the very character of environmental communication changes dramatically when sensitizing events occur, let alone in times of crisis. While the first pictures of ‘planet Earth’- the blue marble - created such a sensitizing moment in the late 1960s, creating sensitizing moments seems part of any environmental communication strategy, with logo’s and icons - from the panda to the ice bear – in a prominent role. Yet environmental catastrophes and crises in particular, such as Seveso, Erika, Chernobyl, AZF and Fukushima, do generate specific patterns of communication. Parts of these communications regard the people and the region directly affected, while other parts regard the amplification and multiplication of the scientific, moral and political messages that (should) go with this particular crisis. Sensitizing events and crises, therefore, make environmental communication more visible, yet it remains to be seen what their long term impact is, whether they give rise to the institutionalisation of new practices and new rules. And, of course, while public media and social media do play a role in whatever environmental communication, their role is even more accentuated under conditions of crises. The latter raises questions as to how they take up their ‘societal responsibility’, be it here and now or in a wider frame of time and space.
Important Deadlines
– July 15, 2013: submission of the proposition of article in the form of a summary of 400-500 words. The proposal must include a list of recent references;
– September 30, 2013: acceptance of the proposal;
– February 15, 2014: full paper submission;
– May 30, 2014: full paper acceptance.
Papers should be between 6,000-10,000 words in length. Papers can be submitted in English or French. The abstracts should be in English and French, max. 200-250 words followed by 5 keywords. Please provide the full names, affiliations, and e-mail addresses of all authors, indicating the contact author. Papers, and any queries, should be sent to:
essachess@gmail.com
Authors of the accepted papers will be notified by e-mail. The journal will be published in July 2014.
[1]The journal „ESSACHESS” has been indexed in the databases ProQuest CSA, EBSCO Publishing, Ulrich’s, Gale, J-Gate, DOAJ, CEEOL, Index Copernicus, SSRN, DRJI.
","CFP for publication or other deadline","","Mihai Crangasu","","","","","","","Not Specified","","http://www.essachess.com/index.php/jcs/announcement","","","","","","","http://www.essachess.com/index.php/jcs/index","15-7-2013 23:45 BST","" 8862,"25th Annual Human Behavior and Evolution Society Conference","The Keynote Address will be given by Leda Cosmides and John Tooby, with an introduction by Steven Pinker.
Early registration ends May 19. Please see the website for more information.
We have reserved a block of rooms at the Loews Hotel, the venue of this year's conference. Please use the link to the hotel website listed on the HBES website to take advantage of the negotiated group rate: http://www.hbes.com/conference/accommodations/. The hotel will extend this rate up to 3 days before and after the conference for those looking to come early and/or stay longer.
The next issue of the Journal of Critical Globalisation Studies is on the theme of ‘Modelling Capitalism’. We aim to be the first interdisciplinary journal to examine this important global trend: the increasing use of models and computer simulations to understand global economic dynamics.
Frequently held in suspicion by critical thinkers, modelling and simulation technologies are nonetheless more and more integral to how the world works, utilised by international bodies, governments, financial firms, and large corporations. This special issue wishes to approach in a synoptic fashion some of big themes raised by this development. Questions we are concerned with include fundamental philosophical issues: Can economic models ever be realistic? Can they model complexity? Pragmatic questions: Is their use responsible for the depression initiated with the 2008 crash? To what extent are they changing the nature of capitalism? Political debate: Do models merely dress up dominant ideologies in technical drapery? Can models be used for critical purposes, or for proposing economic alternatives? With this issue we thus aim to bring into dialogue scholars working in diverse fields including the philosophy of science, economic modelling, the social studies of finance, and political theory.
To explore these issues, the journal is open to articles, essays and interview contributions in the following streams:
We are also willing to consider suggestions for other lines of investigation or special features.
In the first instance, please send an abstract to editor-in-chief for issue 7, Nathan Coombs, detailing your proposed contribution: nathan@criticalglobalisation.com
Please send complete manuscripts to: abstracts@criticalglobalisation.com.
Final submission deadline: 1 August 2013
","CFP for publication or other deadline","","Chrissy Meijns","","","","","","","Not Specified","","","","","","","","","philevents4937","1-8-2013 9:0 BST","" 9610,"Utopia in the Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences","From early ideas of a perfect human condition to a more modern conception of technological or social nirvana, visions of utopia have permeated our histories. Their genesis is often in response to social and political struggle, or is a reaction to imperfect reality. They are commentaries on the aspirations of our predecessors and present dreamers for the potential that lives within us all. This interdisciplinary conference seeks to examine how human experience and culture has impacted our idea of utopia in the present, in times and places past, and in the future. What do these visions of utopia tell us about ourselves? How have they been conceived during centuries past, and how have they changed? How has our conception of utopia propelled us and shaped our intellectual activity and creative output? How does it impact what we do today, and what we envision for the future?
The idea of utopia raises interesting interpretive questions about all of the arts and humanities. These questions are investigations into the nature of humankind. They reflect our curiosity about ourselves, and about our place in the whole human enterprise. We welcome contributors from all disciplines and on a wide range of topics. Possible themes might include:
A selection of contributions to the conference will be published in a a peer-reviewed, edited volume by University of North Georgia Press. Faculty, graduate students, and independent scholars are welcome.
Please submit an abstract of 200 – 300 words and a brief biography to:
rjohnston@northgeorgia.eduby August 1, 2013.
Contact:
Tel. & Fax: (+30) 2108029313
Mobile Tel: (+30) 6977947916, Email: lbargel@ppp.uoa.gr
Following please find the necessary information for making arrangements for your participation. If you need any additional information, do not hesitate to contact any of the persons listed below.
Prof. Georgios ANAGNOSTOPOULOS, University of California-San Diego, USA
Prof. Leonidas BARGELIOTES, University of Athens, President of the OLYMPIC CENTER
Prof. Christos EVANGELIOU, Towson University, USA
Prof. Gregoris KARAFILLIS, University of Ioannina
Dr. Charalampos MAGOULAS, National School of Public Health
REGISTRATION:
July 15, 2013: Early Registration Fee (100 Euros or the equivalent)
August 11, 2013: Late registration Fee accepted (120 Euros or the equivalent)
Please note that the registration fee of 100.00 (Euros or the equivalent) per participant, which is non-refundable, covers the following:
TRANSPORTATION AND ACCOMMODATION
Transportation from Athens to Olympia will be arranged by the participant. Please get informed about bus schedules and prices by contacting the bus company: Tel: +30 26210 20600-2, E-mail:info@ktelileias.gr
For the arrangement of your accommodation during the XXIIIth International Symposium of the OCPC (August 11-14, 2013, in Ancient Olympia, in Elida and Kalamata, Greece), please choose among the following hotels:
Please make your own reservations for the above Hotels by contacting Mrs Koula Kotretsos-Kritselis (www.olympiahotels.gr) Phone: +30 2624 022547, Fax: +30 2624 022112 and ask for the special rates that have been offered to those participating in the symposium.
For additional information, please contact directly Prof. Leonidas C. Bargeliotes, 9, Aristotelous St., 151 24 Amaroussion, Greece; Tel. and Fax in Athens: (30-210) 80.29.313; Tel. in Neochorion: (30-26250) 61388; Mobile Tel: (30-697794 79 16; E-mail:lbargel@ppp.uoa.gr Or contact one of the OLYMPIC CENTER's representatives in the USA: Prof. Georgios Anagnostopoulos, University of California, San Diego, Tel. (858) 534-3072, (858) 481-8501, E-mail: ganagnos@ucsd.edu , and Prof. Christos Evangeliou, Towson University, Tel. (410) 704-2755, Fax: (410) 704-4398, E-mail: cevangeliou@towson.edu.
","Conference or similar","XXIIIth International Symposium of the Olympic Center for Philosophy and Culture","Chrissy Meijns","Olympic Center for Philosophy and Culture","Amaroúsion, Attiki, Greece","151 24","","23.8073","38.0592","Not Specified","","http://ocpcul.blogspot.com/","11-8-2013 11:0 EEST","true","","","","","philevents5222","11-8-2013 11:0 EEST","14-8-2013 17:0 EEST" 7886,"8th Principia International Symposium","How to submit a paper
Papers to be submitted to the symposium may be written in Portuguese, English, French, or Spanish. An enhanced abstract of the paper (circa 500 words, in any of the aforementioned languages) must be sent from February 1st, 2013 on up to April 1st, 2013, to the organizing committee. (In a few days, more details to come.)
Abstracts must be sufficiently detailed to allow the program committee to evaluate the papers’ quality. Please, include an identification page along with your abstract, containing your name, email address, professional status (professor, associate professor, researcher, or student), and a complete institutional address. In addition, tell us, please, if you are benefited by a research grant from CNPq – Brazilian Council for Scientific Research, and your level.
Papers by undergraduate students, even if coauthored by their supervisors or other professionals, won’t be accepted.
Authors will be informed as to the acceptance or dismissal of their papers by April 30, 2013. Abstracts will be available for all when the symposium will take place.
Authors of the papers delivered at the symposium will be subsequently allowed to submit their papers (in a fully developed version) for a special issue of Principia.
________________________
Financial support for speakers
The organizing committee will do its best to support financially the speakers of the 8th Principia International Symposium. However, is highly recommended that speakers try to get financial support from their universities, especially if international flight tickets are needed.
________________________
Professionals
BR$ 240.00 (approximately US$ 120.00) until May 31, 2013
BR$ 280.00 (approximately US$ 140.00) until June 30, 2013
BR$ 320.00 (approximately US$ 160.00) up to the days of the symposium
Students
BR$ 120.00 (approximately US$ 60.00) until May 31, 2013
BR$ 140.00 (approximately US$ 70.00) until June 30, 2013
BR$ 160.00 (approximately US$ 80.00) up to the days of the symposium
","CFP for conference or similar"," Principia International Symposium","Renato M. Rocha","Epistemology and Logic Research Group, Federal University of Santa Catarina","Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil","88030-300","","-4.85121E33","-2.75551E29","Not Specified","","http://www.principia.ufsc.br/8pis.html","","","","","8th Principia International Symposium","7885","8pis","12-8-2013 9:0 BST","" 7885,"8th Principia International Symposium","The 8th Principia International Symposium will be held in Florianópolis, Brazil, on August 12-15, 2013. Its main subject is the philosophy of Hilary Putnam.
The previous seven symposia in this series have been dedicated respectively to Principles in philosophy and in the sciences (1999), to the Philosophy of Bertrand Russell (2001), to the Philosophy of Willard van Orman Quine (2003), to the Philosophy of Donald Davidson (2005), to the Philosophy of Bas van Fraassen (2007), to Charles Darwin and his impact into philosophy and the sciences (2009), and to the Philosophy of Nelson Goodman (2011).
All these symposia were organized by NEL – Logic and Epistemology Research Group and the editors of Principia – an International Journal of Epistemology, belonging to Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil.
This 8th Principia Symposium is also being organized by NEL – Logic and Epistemology Research Group, along with of Principia’s editors, and the support of the Graduate program in Philosophy and the Philosophy department of Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), Brazil.
","Conference or similar"," Principia International Symposium","Renato M. Rocha","Epistemology and Logic Research Group, Federal University of Santa Catarina","Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil","88030-300","","-4.85121E33","-2.75551E29","Not Specified","","http://www.principia.ufsc.br/8pis.html","","","","","","","8pis","12-8-2013 9:0 BRT","15-8-2013 17:0 BRT" 8320,"27th EUROPEAN CONFERENCE ON PHILOSOPHY OF MEDICINE AND HEALTH CARE: Innovation in Health Care and the Life Sciences","This conference will be organised by
the European Society for Philosophy of Medicine and Healthcare
(ESPMH) and the Institute for Biomedical Ethics,
University of Basel, Switzerland.
Anyone wishing to present a paper at the conference should submit an abstract (500 words maximum) before 1 March, 2013.
For more information: Professor Bert Gordijn, Secretary of the ESPMH,
Institute of Ethics, Dublin City University, Glasnevin, Dublin 9 (Ireland).
E-mail: bert.gordijn@dcu.ie
","Conference or similar","27th EUROPEAN CONFERENCE ON PHILOSOPHY OF MEDICINE AND HEALTH CARE","Tim Jacquemard","European Society for Philosophy of Medicine and Healthcare (ESPMH)","Basel, Basel-City, Switzerland","","","7.58349","47.5586","External Site","http://www.espmh.org/","http://www.espmh.org/","25-2-2013 0:45 CET","true","","","","","philevents4118","14-8-2013 10:0 CEST","17-8-2013 17:0 CEST" 9994,"Florida State University Graduate Philosophy Conference on Free Will, Moral Responsibility, and Agency","The Philosophy Graduate Student Association (PGSA) of Florida State University is now accepting submissions for their graduate conference on free will, moral responsibility, and agency.
The conference will take place at Florida State University on October 11 and 12, 2013. Keynote speakers will be:
John Martin Fischer, Distinguished Professor of Philosophy, University of California, Riverside
Randolph Clarke, Professor of Philosophy, Florida State University
Those interested in submitting high quality papers related to free will, moral responsibility, or the wider notion of agency should email their submissions to fsupgsa@gmail.com. Papers addressing the relationship between scientific developments and free will are also welcome. Papers should fulfill the following criteria:
Prepared for blind review
No more than 4,000 words
Suitable for 25-minute presentation
Preceded by an abstract of 150-250 words
Along with the paper, please also submit a cover page with the following information:
Presenter’s name
Institutional affiliation
Contact information (email address or phone number)
Title of paper
Abstract of the paper
Word count
The deadline for submissions is August 15. We will notify those whose papers have been accepted by September 13.
For questions or further information, please contact Kyle Fritz (kgf10@fsu.edu), Dan Miller (djm09@fsu.edu), or Robyn Waller (rar09h@fsu.edu).
","CFP for conference or similar","","Robyn Repko Waller","Department of Philosophy, Florida State University","Tallahassee, Florida, United States","","","-84.2807","30.4383","Not Specified","","","","","","","Florida State University Graduate Philosophy Conference on Free Will, Moral Responsibility, and Agency","9993","philevents5298","15-8-2013 0:0 BST","" 10003,"Wide cognition and social intelligence","The theme of the workshop is the significance of wide cognition – which is embodied, enacted, extended, embodied, and distributed cognition – for social intelligence.
Wide cognition has, over the last couple of decades, become more and more widespread in all areas of cognitive science – from neuroscience to cognitive psychology to cognitive linguistics to philosophy to computer science and robotics. Unlike traditional frameworks for cognitive science, these approaches do not explain cognitive phenomena solely in terms of the manipulation of (language-like) internal representations but stress that (1) minds can extend into the environment; (2) agents are cognitive insofar as they are embodied; (3) their cognitive scaffolding is enacted, or constructed, in an active fashion; (4) cognitive phenomena are always interactions with the environment; (5) and cognitive acts are often paradigmatically distributed among multiple agents. The workshop’s aim is to explore the relevance of this body of research for understanding social intelligence. In particular, its reliance on environmental design, bodily interaction, shared cognitive and symbolic tools, and complex schemas of collaboration.
The workshop will also feature discussion of a white paper of the topic that is being prepared in collaboration with the SINTELNET coordination network (sintelnet.eu).
Registration and accommodation
Early registration ends June 30th. The early registration fee is 150 Euro (reduced rate – 75 Euro), while the late registration fee is 200 Euro. Fees cover the workshop sessions, conference materials, lunches, coffee breaks and the minibus to and from Warsaw airport.
Accommodation is available at the conference hotel. The cost is 100 Euro in total for four nights (August 19th to 23rd) in shared twin en suite rooms and includes breakfasts (limited single rooms available at higher price). Availability of accommodation cannot be guaranteed for late registrants.
Registration and accommodation fees might change in the event of significant movement in the exchange rate of the Polish currency.
","Conference or similar","Kazimierz Naturalist Workshop 2013","Chrissy Meijns","Centre for Philosophical Research","Kazimierz Dolny, Lublin Voivodeship, Poland","","","21.955","51.3191","Not Specified","","http://www.obf.edu.pl/content/blogcategory/17/42/lang,en/","30-6-2013 10:0 CEST","true","","","","","philevents5305","19-8-2013 10:0 CEST","23-8-2013 17:0 CEST" 10331,"","Research Topic in Frontiers in Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology
What levels of explanation in the behavioural sciences?
Topic Editors:
Giuseppe Boccignone, Università di Milano, Italy
Roberto Cordeschi, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy, Italy
Deadline for abstract submission: 31 Aug 2013
Deadline for full article submission: 31 Jan 2014
Complex systems are to be seen as typically having multiple levels of organization. For instance, in the behavioural and cognitive sciences, there has been a long lasting trend, promoted by the seminal work of David Marr, putting focus on three distinct levels of analysis: the computational level, accounting for the What and Why issues, the algorithmic and the implementational levels specifying the How problem.
However, the tremendous developments in neuroscience knowledge about processes at different scales of organization together with the complexity of today cognitive theories suggest that there will hardly be only three levels of explanation. Instead, there will be many different degrees of commitments corresponding to the different granularities—from high-level (behavioural) models to low-level (neural and molecular) models of the cognitive research program. For instance, Bayesian approaches, that are usually advocated for formalizing Marr's computational level and rational behaviour, have even been adopted to model synaptic plasticity and axon guidance by molecular gradients. As a result, we can consider the behavioural scientist as dealing with models at a multiplicity of levels.
The purpose of this Research Topic in Frontiers in Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology is to promote an approach to the role of the levels and explanation and models which is of interest for cognitive scientists, neuroscientists, psychologists, behavioural scientists, and philosophers of science.
We solicit original empirical work, review and opinion papers, and methodological and epistemological papers that can provide both state-of-the-art views and advancement proposals for our understanding of the proposed topic. The following are potential issues: How can the autonomy of explanatory levels be properly understood in behavioural explanation? Is reductionism a satisfactory strategy? If so, how can it be justified? How can high-level and low-level models be constrained in order to be actually explanatory of both behavioural and neurological or molecular evidence? What is the kind of relationship between those models? What is the actual contribution to explanation provided by Bayesian modelling?
Organized by the Berlin School of Mind and Brain, Humboldt’s KOSMOS Summer University 2013 “Human Sociality and the Brain – Decision Making in Social Contexts“ will focus on human sociality research at the interface between neuroscience and the humanities.
The Summer University will bring together neuroscientists, psychologists and philosophers presenting the latest experimental results and theoretical findings regarding decision making in social contexts. Putting interdisciplinarity to work, the lectures will present a comprehensive overview of the most recent empirical developments, bring them into context, and shed light on the consequences of such findings.
The KOSMOS Summer University has been organized with a special focus on the participants’ needs. It will foster intensive contact and exchange between participants and faculty. Participants will be given ample opportunity to present their own work in small groups where they will receive first-hand comments and advice from top level scientists. Moreover, hands-on courses on grant-application writing will teach participants to put their ideas into practice and develop a successful grant application in their respective fields.
The KOSMOS program is a key internationalization project and part of the institutional strategy of Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. It combines two of the University’s strengths: internationality and interdisciplinarity. In addition to the Summer University, KOSMOS supports fellows and workshops.
For details see:
www.exzellenz.hu-berlin.de/index-en?set_language=en&cl=en
Lecturers:
Moshe Bar (Boston/Tel Aviv)
Marcel Brass (Gent)
Isabel Dziobek (Berlin)
Vittorio Gallese (Parma)
Tom Johnstone (Reading)
John-Dylan Haynes (Berlin)
Michael Pauen (Berlin)
Frédérique de Vignemont (Paris)
Henrik Walter (Berlin)
Application:
Participants are expected to apply with their own research proposal that will be presented and discussed during the KOSMOS summer university.
Deadline: 15 June 2013
Notification of acceptance: by 15 July 2013
Further information:
The European Network for the Philosophy of the Social Sciences and the Philosophy of Social Science Roundtable invite contributions to their first joint conference. Contributions from all areas within the philosophy of the social sciences, from both philosophers and social scientists, are encouraged.
Publication:
ENPOSS:
The purpose of the European Network of Philosophy of the Social Sciences is to promote, encourage and facilitate academic discussion and research in the philosophy of the social sciences broadly conceived.
Steering Committee: Alban Bouvier (Paris), Byron Kaldis (Athens), Thomas Uebel (Manchester), Julie Zahle (Copenhagen), and JesFAs Zamora-Bonilla (Madrid).
PSSRT:
The Philosophy of Social Science Roundtable serves as a forum for communication among philosophers and social scientists who share an interest in discussion of epistemology, explanatory paradigms, and methodologies of the social sciences.
Programme Committee: James Bohman (St. Louis), Mark Risjord (Atlanta), Paul Roth (Santa Cruz), Stephen Turner (Tampa), Alison Wylie (Seattle)
Conference homepage:
For more information about the conference see:
","Conference or similar","","Chrissy Meijns","University of Venice","Venice, Veneto, Italy","","","12.3267","45.4386","Not Specified","","http://www.enposs.eu","","","","","","","philevents3729","3-9-2013 9:0 CEST","4-9-2013 17:0 CEST" 9993,"Florida State University Graduate Philosophy Conference on Free Will, Moral Responsibility, and Agency","","Conference or similar","","Robyn Repko Waller","Department of Philosophy, Florida State University","Tallahassee, Florida, United States","","","-84.2807","30.4383","Not Specified","","","","","","","","","philevents5298","11-10-2013 15:0 EDT","12-10-2013 17:0 EDT" 9450,"Radical Space","We are interested in presentations which address the problematics of space both as concept and as lived social reality, with a particular emphasis on the tension between spaces of control in the context of contemporary neoliberalism, spaces of resistance and the apocalyptic spaces which emerge from war, forced migration and the failures of consumer capitalism.
What are the politics of space in contemporary contexts? How can we re-think space beyond the public/private divide? How do spatial arts re-configure space and the way in which it is experienced? What new configurations of space may emerge from burgeoning forms of community? How do the theatres of contemporary war force a re-assessment of spatial concepts? Is it still possible for the notion of virtual space to function in opposition to the striated space of contemporary cities?
Full details will be available on our website culturalstudiesresearch.org. Contact: Debra Benita Shaw (d.shaw@uel.ac.uk) or Tony Sampson (sampson2@uel.ac.uk).
The Third Conference of the European Network on Social Ontology (ENSO-III) will be hosted by the Social Ontology Group at the Finnish Centre of Excellence in the Philosophy of Social Science and is open to researchers in all disciplines with an interest in the foundational structure of the social world.
The invited speakers of the symposium are:
The European Network on Social Ontology is a vibrant community of academic scholars with a commitment to studying the philosophical aspects of human sociality from an empirically informed and multi-disciplinary point of view. The participants of the ENSO conference shall have an occasion to join the newly established International Network on Social Ontology (ISOS) and to learn more about the Journal of Social Ontology (JSO) that is published by De Gruyter. Further information can be found from:
http://social.univie.ac.at/network/
The costs of attending the conference will be kept within feasible limits for all participants.
For more information, please contact enso-3@helsinki.fi
IMPORTANT DATES
Description:Measurement plays a central role in scientific inquiry. But as science has changed over time, and new scientific disciplines have sprung up, the nature of scientific measurement has become complicated. To what extent do different scientific disciplines have a common understanding of measurement as a tool of inquiry? On the other hand, to what extent has the meaning and purpose of measurement become idiosyncratic to each discipline? And is it necessary for us to have common standards of measurement across disciplines? It is crucial for historians, philosophers, and scientists alike to reflect upon the role that measurement has played, and continues to play, across the sciences.
The Committee on the History and Philosophy of Science at University of Colorado at Boulder is co-sponsored by the University of Colorado College of Arts and Sciences, the Center for the Humanities and the Arts, the Museum of Natural History, and by the following University of Colorado Departments: Ecology and Evolutionary Biology; Geological Sciences; History; Mathematics; Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology; Philosophy; and Physics.
","Conference or similar","","Matthew Kopec","Committee on the History and Philosophy of Science , University of Colorado, Boulder","Boulder, Colorado, United States","","","-105.271","40.015","Not Specified","","http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/chps/conference.htm","","","","","","","philevents5141","1-11-2013 9:0 MDT","4-11-2013 17:0 MST" 9813,"The 21st Century Body Reloaded","Exciting developments in the life sciences and their application in biotechnology are helping to provide pioneering cures and therapies for inherited and degenerative diseases. Consider genomics and genetic based therapies, neuroscience and neuropharmacology, ICT implants and prosthetics, nanomedicine and the required socio-cultural accommodations to ageing and you will see how the way in which we perceive ourselves and those around us is slowly being recast. As our knowledge and its application continues to grow and expand, the range, scope and magnitude of what we are able to achieve seems to be limitless.
Building on the success of last year’s event and the many positive and encouraging comments from participants, this year’s interdisciplinary symposium is convened in order to further build capacity as well as consolidate existing scholarship on perspectives on the human body and identity in the face of new advances in emerging technologies.
FURTHER DETAILS
Technology forecasters point to advances in nanoscience and nanotechnology as an ‘enabling technology’ which opens up further opportunities when combined with other technologies. This “convergence” of new emerging technologies therefore becomes a matter of great debate. This is seen, for example, when advances in nanoscience converge with developments in biotechnology, which also utilise developments in information technology to capture and simulate human abilities using artificial intelligence systems and, more controversially, cognitive science. As the animal-human distinction becomes increasingly blurred, it is plain to see the increasing growth of human power over nature in all of its forms including traditional and contemporary understanding about human nature itself. More than just speculative science fiction, talk of brain implants and neural imaging, cyborg enhancement and virtual reality simulation is suddenly becoming a pressing reality.
At this time we are faced with a key question: what does it mean to be human in the 21st Century? A series of identity crises emerge. Against the backdrop of developments in ICT, and especially in virtual contexts we are keen to ensure that our identities are protected and can be authenticated appropriately, without fear of them being reconstructed by others. Likewise, concern is expressed over the question of privacy and surveillance when we encounter new forms of identifying technologies such as biometrics which could challenge our freedom and dignity. As genetic and neuroscience technologies evolve, they provoke and unsettle some of our traditional perceptions of who and what we are.
It is envisaged that this symposium will contribute to the conversation on this theme and by drawing from insights and ideas from across the disciplines, the aim will be to chart challenges to, and changes in perceptions of identity and the human body in the 21st century.
Some key questions this symposium will aim to address include the following:
Organising committee:
Dr Yasemin J. Erden, Lecturer in Philosophy, CBET, St Mary's University College, Twickenham erdeny@smuc.ac.uk
Deborah Gale, MA, King’s College London deb.dgale@gmail.com
Matt James MA, Director, BioCentre matt.james@bioethics.ac.uk
Aaron Parkhurst, PhD research candidate, Medical Anthropology, University College London ucsab01@ucl.ac.uk
Dr. Stephen Rainey, Visiting Lecturer in philosophy, St Mary’s University College, Twickenham stiofan.orian@gmail.com
WEB LINKS
http://www.bioethics.ac.uk/news/Call-for-Papers-The-21st-Century-Body-Reloaded-.php
CONTACT
For more information, please contact the organising committee directly.
","Conference or similar","","Chrissy Meijns","Department of Anthropology, University College London","London, England, United Kingdom","","","-0.12806","51.5219","Not Specified","","http://www.bioethics.ac.uk/news/Call-for-Papers-The-21st-Century-Body-Reloaded-.php","","","","","","","philevents5169","7-11-2013 9:0 GMT","8-11-2013 17:0 GMT" 8237,"Trends in interdisciplinary studies","""Thinking with hands, eyes and things""
We invite you to participate in the conference devoted to extra-neural aspects of cognition as well as controversies related to them.
The claim that both the body and the environment are involved in our experience of the world is a banal claim. However, the point is what a great role in our mental processes is played by the whole body as well as its interactions with the environment. Cognition may involve integration with our tools, and we may even delegate some of our thinking to the environment. According to situated cognition and extended mind approaches, humans use elements of their environment as external components of cognitive processes or as means enabling them to reduce the complexity of the cognitive problems they face. The theory of affordances connects observers and environments in the act of cognition and cuts across the dichotomy of subjective-objective. Some researchers treat immune system as one of cognitive systems. Proponents of embodied cognitive science claim that aspects of the body beyond the brain play a significant role in cognition. Conversely, there are many critical voices in answer to the statements above. They say that cognitive-scientific results do not enough support thesis of embodied, distributed, extended and situated cognition. According to those critics, nonneuronal body and elements of environment play a peripheral role in cognitive processing.
Reduction and emergence play a central role in the relations of scientific theories and disciplines. For instance, a reducible theory is in some sense replaceable but also supported by its reducing theory. In contrast, a theory that describes emergent phenomena arguably stands alone in both respects. Unfortunately, the discussion about reduction and emergence suffers from two uncertainties at once. On the one hand the concepts of reduction and especially emergence are not precisely defined, on the other hand there are few if any uncontentious cases of reduction or emergence in the sciences. This stalemate can be overcome by a thorough analysis of relations between and within scientific theories. These relations can then serve as a basis for explications of reduction and emergence that are applicable in the sciences.
This conference will bring together philosophers of science and scientists of different disciplines with the aim of addressing the inter- and intratheoretic relations of specific theories and providing precise notions of such relations for the application in the sciences.
Program Committee:
Michael Baumgartner (Osnabrück)
Gordon Belot (Michigan)
Mark Colyvan (Sydney)
Isabelle Drouet (Paris-Sorbonne)
Laura Franklin-Hall (NYU)
Paul Hoyningen-Huene (Hannover)
Paul Humphreys (Virginia)
Eleanor Knox (King’s College London)
Meinard Kuhlmann (Bremen)
Martin Kusch (Vienna)
Alan C. Love (Minnesota)
Peter Machamer (Pittsburgh)
Albert Newen (Bochum)
John D. Norton (Pittsburgh)
Alexander Reutlinger (Köln)
Alexander Rosenberg (Duke)
Achim Stephan (Osnabrück)
Paul Teller (UC Davis)
Jos Uffink (Minnesota)
Raphael van Riel (Bochum)
Joel D. Velasco (Caltec)
Jack Vromen (Rotterdam)
C. Kenneth Waters (Minnesota)
Marcel Weber (Geneva)
« Political Decision And Truth »
Interdisciplinary Symposium
Ø Date and place of event: November 15-16, 2013 – Panthéon-Sorbonne University, Paris, France
Ø Scientific committee:
- Sophie Guérard de Latour (Université Paris I)
- Laurent Jaffro (Université Paris I)
- Jean-François Kervégan (Université Paris I / IUF)
- Catherine Larrère (Université Paris I)
Ø Contact:
- Adeline Barbin: adelinebarbin@yahoo.fr
- Élodie Djordjevic: elodie.djordjevic@gmail.com
- Symposium webmail: rationalites.pratiques@gmail.com
Argument*
We are used to saying a political decision is good or fair, or even right rather than to say it is true. Yet, that the statement “true decision” may seem unapt, clumsy, even meaningless, does not imply that there is generally no conception of truth involved in practical choice, and particularly in political decision-making. Thus our describing political decision as good or bad, or as fair or unfair, would express an ambiguous and controversial involvement of the concept of truth rather than its exclusion. At the same time, political debate purports to demonstrate that some are right and others wrong. Moreover, knowledge is permanently called for and required, including within the context of modern democracy, as shown by the use of skillfulness made in all experts debates. Those experts are supposed to know better than the average citizen what ought to be chosen, and what decisions ought to be made.
This conference aims to be an opportunity to explore the use of the notion of truth, which is often implied in the way we analyze and value political decisions. Among the different issues that are raised, two main directions – likely to be connected – take shape:
- The first one, more conceptual, addresses directly the questions of the determination and nature of the notion of truth involved in the political field.
The goal is to clarify the meaning of the notion of truth in the field of political decision-making. What kind of truth are we talking about? Which sense is most apt to make for a legitimate use of the notion? Certainly not the paradigm notion of truth we meet in theoretical fields and which implies the double attribute of necessity and universality. If the realm of human affairs is one where the modal status of things and events is contingence, where normativity is implied, and where we have to decide between various ends and values, it seems debatable and – to say the least – difficult to think of practical truth according to the model of theoretical truth.
On the other hand, it is probably not relevant to say that all decisions are merely subjective – not to say arbitrary: admittedly, political choices cannot claim to be unquestionable the way theoretical statements can be, but some of those choices are obviously considered better than others, and are considered to be so from a point of view that claims not to be merely subjective. Insofar as decisions can be debated, a debate presupposes the production and the confrontation of reasons – reasons which involve and mix in a problematic way concepts of fairness, goodness, and truth. So, exactly what are we discussing when we make a decision? Since one must determine the best ends to aim for and the best ways to achieve them, both practical and theoretical rationality – or, in Kantian terms, practical judgments and knowledge judgments – seem to be involved, without any sharp divide between each.
In order to get round difficulties – both epistemological and strictly political – which are linked to determination of a “goodness”, a “fairness” and a “truth”, well-known theories plead purely procedural conceptions of decision-making. But, what is the meaning of “justice” in those theories? Does this meaning really succeed in excluding every reference to such notions?
- The second direction is more contextual and is concerned with how the notion of truth is used in current public space, within modern, pluralistic, and representative democracy.
The notion is pervasive under different shapes. We appeal to experts in science, economics, even ethics. Think tanks have become common institutions whose explicit goal is to influence policy-making in virtue of their expertise. In France, the CCNE (National Consultative Ethical Committee) is an expression of the need for debate – especially about bioethics –, but equally of the preference for experts’ advice over citizens’ opinions. While political pluralism and democracy are not overtly questioned, a distinction between those who know and those who don’t is consistently reasserted. So, what do those who know actually know? Even if they know more, why would they know better what ought to be done? Is there but one right answer to a given problem? If so, the range of possibilities would be drastically reduced and would echo Margaret Thatcher’s famous “TINA” slogan: “There is no alternative”. But then, exactly what is practical in political decisions: are they not reduced to a problem of pure knowledge, and politics to simple management business? On the other hand, it’s not clear that such a reduction really is more value- and preconception-free: choosing means is only meaningful in relation to an end, even when aiming at this end does not result from an explicit decision.
Finally, questioning the relationship between political decision and truth is confronting the way we think of democracy and of the possibility for each political entity to make its own destiny. It’s as well questioning the way we circumscribe and define the realm of the possible and the contingent, within which and no other something like a real political decision can be conceived: human agency takes place in a sphere where, while not everything can be known, one nevertheless has to choose and decide. Now, isn’t the very definition of this sphere something that implies, at least in part, a decision? In other words, isn’t it itself a genuinely political issue?
« Political Decision and Truth » Symposium (rationalites.pratiques@gmail.com)
Organization : Adeline Barbin et Élodie Djordjevic
EA 3562 PhiCo — Philosophies Contemporaines
*We would like to thank warmly Nicolas Delon for his help in revising the English version of the argument.
","Conference or similar","","Adeline Barbin","Department of Philosophy PhiCo, Université Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne","Paris, France","","","2.0","48.0","Not Specified","","","","","","","","","philevents4086","15-11-2013 9:0 CET","16-11-2013 17:0 CET" 10220,"Researching the relational/sociable self: Methods, Privacy, Ethics","We invite doctoral students from a range of disciplines including media and communication studies, information science, sociology, philosophy, and political science to participate in this interdisciplinary PhD course.
27. Nov. 2013 09:15 - 28. Nov. 2013 17:00
Co-organizers:
Charles Ess (http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/personer/vit/charlees/index.html)
(Department of Media and Communication, University of Oslo)
Stine Lomborg (http://mcc.ku.dk/staff/presentation/?id=293359&f=3)
(Department of Media, Cognition, and Communication, University of Copenhagen)
Additional lecturers / mentors:
Hallvard Fossheim, Director, (Norwegian) National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH)
Annette Markham, Visiting Professor, School of Commmunication, Loyola University / Guest Professor, Informatics, Umeå University
Espen Ytreberg, Department of Media and Communication, University of Oslo
Background
Especially over the last decade or so, both social science and humanistic research have recognized the emergence of ³the relational self,² as fostered by Internet-facilitated modes and venues of communication most especially social media.
Understanding how far our conceptions of selfhood may be changing in Western societies broadly, from more individual to more relational, and, perhaps, from more rational to more emotive is critical, especially as these changes seem further tied to:
The workshop addresses theories of relational selfhood; research methodologies as retuned to such selfhood; and new research ethics questions evoked by changing senses of selfhood and thus privacy expectations.
For more details, including available ECTs and registration procedures, please see the workshop website:
A special issue of HOMO OECONOMICUS
edited by Ao Yumin and Ulrich Steinvorth
Since Thomas Paine demanded, in a pamphlet Agrarian Justice published around 1796, ""to create a Natural Fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of Fifteen Pounds sterling as a compensation in part for the loss of his natural inheritance by the introduction of the system of landed property. AND ALSO, The sum of Ten Pounds per annum, during life, to every person now living of the age of fifty years, and to all others as they arrive at that age"" the idea of a basic income unconditionally paid to every citizen has been proposed by leftists and by liberals, by the American rival to Roosevelt, Huey Long, assassinated in 1935, and by the free market champion Milton Friedman; by the left German party Die Linke and by the German conservative Christian democrat and former minister president of Thuringia, Dieter Althaus. The issue of basic income, dividing political parties and making unexpected bed fellows, requires looking at modern society from new viewpoints.
We welcome papers answering questions such as the following:
Papers can be written both in an academic and in a more popular style accessible to a broader public and apt to impact the public opinion. Proposals are to be sent to aoyumin@gmail.com and ulrich.steinvorth@uni-hamburg.de The deadline for the papers, which must be preceded by an abstract, are expected for December 1st, 2013.
On HOMO OECONOMICUS, see http://www.homooeconomicus.org/
The manuscripts have to satisfy HOMO OECONOMICUS style: See the field “submissions” in:
The Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics is committed to supporting and encouraging the work of Young Scholars in philosophy and economics. This academic prize is intended to promote and reward the best of such scholarship.
The prize is named in honour of Professor Mark Blaug (1927-2011), a founder of the field of philosophy and economics who made a tremendous scholarly contribution to many areas of the history and philosophy of economics. Mark Blaug’s generosity and commitment to Young Scholars was recognized by all who knew him.
The prize includes a cash sum of 500 Euros.
2014 Prize is open for submissions:
To qualify for the Mark Blaug Prize the author has to be a Young Scholar, defined as someone who:
You may be asked for evidence of your eligibility.
Young Scholars should submit a single-authored article for publication in EJPE in the usual way before the end of December 2013, and mention that you would like to be considered for the prize. Co-authored papers where all authors are Young Scholars are also eligible. Prize submissions should not include articles previously published or under consideration elsewhere. For more information about submissions, see the EJPE Call for Papers.
Articles that pass peer-review and are accepted for publication will be considered by a committee of experts and the winner will be announced in mid-2014.
","CFP for publication or other deadline","","Chrissy Meijns","","","","","","","Not Specified","","http://ejpe.org/call-for-papers/","","","","","","","philevents5308","13-12-2013 9:0 GMT","" 9609,"Utopia in the Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences","From early ideas of a perfect human condition to a more modern conception of technological or social nirvana, visions of utopia have permeated our histories. Their genesis is often in response to social and political struggle, or is a reaction to imperfect reality. They are commentaries on the aspirations of our predecessors and present dreamers for the potential that lives within us all. This interdisciplinary conference seeks to examine how human experience and culture has impacted our idea of utopia in the present, in times and places past, and in the future. What do these visions of utopia tell us about ourselves? How have they been conceived during centuries past, and how have they changed? How has our conception of utopia propelled us and shaped our intellectual activity and creative output? How does it impact what we do today, and what we envision for the future?
The idea of utopia raises interesting interpretive questions about all of the arts and humanities. These questions are investigations into the nature of humankind. They reflect our curiosity about ourselves, and about our place in the whole human enterprise.
Contact: rjohnston@northgeorgia.edu
","Conference or similar","University of North Georgia Arts & Letters 2014 Conference","Chrissy Meijns","University of North Georgia","Dahlonega, Georgia, United States","","","-83.9849","34.5326","Not Specified","","","","","","","","","philevents5029","28-2-2014 9:0 EST","2-3-2014 17:0 EST"