BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//Grails iCalendar plugin//NONSGML Grails iCalendar plugin//EN
VERSION:2.0
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20260408T105032Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Budapest:20260331T234500
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Budapest:20260331T234500
SUMMARY:Early Modern Naturalisms: Spinozist and Humean
UID:20260408T174235Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-f5d4878dd-r5qzs
TZID:Europe/Budapest
LOCATION:Budapest\, Hungary
DESCRIPTION:<p><strong><u>Early Modern Naturalisms: Spinozist and Humean</u></strong></p>\n<p>Workshop\, Budapest\, 4-5 September 2026</p>\n<p>Organised by Tam&aacute\;s Demeter (Corvinus University of Budapest) and David Harmon (University of St Andrews)</p>\n<p>Confirmed Paricipants:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>Don Garrett (New York University)</li>\n<li>Jennifer Smalligan Maru&scaron\;ić (University of Edinburgh)</li>\n<li>Alison Peterman (University of Rochester)</li>\n<li>Martin Lenz (University of Hagen)</li>\n<li>Jonny Cottrell (York University)</li>\n<li>Falk Wunderlich (Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg)</li>\n</ul>\n<p>While both Hume and Spinoza have been claimed as paradigmatic naturalists\, it is far from clear that they are naturalists in the same sense. Further\, it is not obvious that the label applies to either without qualification. Spinoza&rsquo\;s and Hume&rsquo\;s projects moved in markedly different directions\, so we propose a workshop with the aim of examining what is at stake in calling either thinker a naturalist.</p>\n<p>By placing Spinoza and Hume in conversation on this topic\, the conference seeks to illuminate two distinct (purported) strands of early modern naturalism: one expansive and metaphysical\, the other cautious and anthropological. Are these differences merely a matter of emphasis and scale\, or do they represent fundamentally incompatible conceptions of nature and its significance? Does calling them naturalists collapse their distinct philosophies into a single tradition? And what\, if anything\, is gained by framing the early modern naturalist field in terms of &ldquo\;Spinozist&rdquo\; and &ldquo\;Humean&rdquo\; trajectories rather than the more traditional &ldquo\;rationalist&rdquo\; vs. &ldquo\;empiricist&rdquo\; divide?</p>\n<p>We want to revisit early modern naturalism\, not merely as a retrospective label\, but as a philosophical option characterised by contested outlines. Contributors are invited to explore these and related questions for the purpose of critically reevaluating the categories through which early modern thought is often organised\, and reimagining naturalism as a central thread both connecting and dividing the period&rsquo\;s major figures.</p>\n<p>We welcome submissions on:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>Spinoza</li>\n<li>Hume</li>\n<li>Comparative work on both Spinoza and Hume</li>\n<li>Other early modern thinkers who might be thought to fit well into this framing</li>\n<li>Methodological concerns associated with reading early modern philosophy through such naturalist lenses</li>\n</ul>\n<p><strong>The event will take place in Budapest on 4-5 September 2026.</strong></p>\n<p><strong>Please send abstracts of ~500 words to both <u>dh212@st-andrews.ac.uk</u> and <u>tsd2333@gmail.com</u> by 31 March 2026.</strong></p>
ORGANIZER;CN=David Harmon;CN=Tamas Demeter:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR