BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//Grails iCalendar plugin//NONSGML Grails iCalendar plugin//EN
VERSION:2.0
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20260407T040325Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20191018T100000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20191020T130000
SUMMARY:Ethical Impartialism: Contemporary Perspectives
UID:20260407T135327Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-f5d4878dd-r5qzs
TZID:Europe/Berlin
LOCATION:Fritz-Haber-Weg 7\, Karlsruhe\, Germany
DESCRIPTION:<p>It is often held that while we ought to give some consideration to the<br>interests of everyone\, including distant strangers\, we are rationally<br>justified in prioritizing ourselves and our loved ones. However\, the<br>idea that one ought to have equal basic concern for the interests of<br>all has a surprisingly impressive pedigree. This view\, sometimes<br>called ethical impartialism\, can be found in the teachings of the<br>Buddhists and Stoics in the Ancient world\, in Christian philosophy of<br>the medieval period\, and in modern moral theories such as<br>Utilitarianism and Kantianism. Amidst the ongoing contemporary debate<br>between proponents of impartialist ethical theories and those who<br>defend partiality\; this workshop aims at exploring the following<br>questions:<br> <br>- To what extent are partialist ethical theories committed to<br>impartialist considerations? <br> <br>- Is it possible to isolate the impartialist thread from the rest of<br>paradigmatic impartialist theories like utilitarianism?<br> <br>- What\, if any\, are the affinities between impartialist elements in<br>alternative approaches\, such as Utilitarianism and Kantian ethics?<br> <br>- To what extent is it possible to account for typical partialist<br>verdicts from an impartialist perspective?</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Tyler Paytas;CN=C. Seidel:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
