Skepticism is usually understood as a view or stance in epistemology: the skeptic raises a set of challenges to our beliefs and claims to knowledge. But doubt has always had ethical and political implications. Ancient Pyrrhonists saw suspension of judgement as a path to tranquility. Early modern thinkers used skeptical arguments against religious and political authority. In more contemporary debates over expertise\, trust\, and the "crisis of knowledge"\, questions of what we can know are inseparable from political questions.
\nThis conference explores the ethics and politics of skepticism and doubt. How does skepticism interact with politics--does skepticism undermine or enable certain political arrangements\, ideologies\, or ethical stances? What are the ethical and political implications of different skeptical views or stances? What can we say about specific contexts where doubt may be productive or perilous\, such as in democratic deliberation\, or challenges to scientific consensus?
ORGANIZER;CN=Christopher Ranalli;CN=Robin McKenna: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR