What Makes a Philosopher Good or Bad? \;
\nIntellectual \;Virtues and Vices in the History of Philosophy
\n> \;Two-day \;conference \;| \;Thursday 25 &ndash\; Friday 26 \;November 2021
\n
> \;Keynote \;speakers
Adeshina Afolayan (University of Ibadan\, Nigeria) \;
\nMichael Beaney (University of Aberdeen\, UK \;/ \;Humboldt University Berlin\, Germany) \;
\nQuassim Cassam (University of Warwick\, UK)
\nLisa Shapiro (Simon Fraser University\, Canada) \;
> \;Description
This \;conference \;raises \;two \;simple but provocative \;questions. What makes a philosopher \;good \;or bad? And how have \;views \;on \;what counts as a good or bad philosopher changed over time? \;
\nThese meta-philosophical questions \;offer an \;opportunity to introduce \;recent \;historical \;and philosophical research on intellectual virtues and vices into the study of the history of philosophy. \;This combination \;provides \;a promising new way of bridging the gap between history\, philosophy\, history of philosophy\, and historiography. \;
\nIn recent years\, \;the notions of \;intellectual \;virtues and vices have \;become \;hotly \;debated topics\, owing in large part to the \;groundbreaking \;work of\, among others\, Herman Paul and Quassim Cassam. \;Taking a cue from their writings\, this workshop seeks to \;explore \;virtues \;(open-mindedness\, intellectual courage\, \;rigor\, \;etc.) and vices (closed-mindedness\, intellectual arrogance\, \;sloppiness\, \;etc.) as key characteristics of &ldquo\;philosophical personae&rdquo\;\, that is\, of historically changing ideal-typical models of what it takes to be a \;(good or bad) \;philosopher \;and of \;different \;ways \;of &ldquo\;being a philosopher&rdquo\;. \;
\nThis approach to the history of philosophy \;makes it \;possible to raise new questions and to answer \;old questions in \;new ways. \;How\, for example\, have \;(changing views on) \;intellectual \;virtues and vices shaped the philosophical canon and \;in what sense was the analytic-Continental divide \;primarily \;a clash between different understandings of what it means to be a philosopher? At the same time\, the approach \;goes \;against the grain of \;more \;established ways of \;studying \;the history of philosophy\, insofar as it turns the attention away from \;what philosophers think (&ldquo\;ideas&rdquo\;) \;toward \;the philosophers \;that do the thinking \;(&ldquo\;people&rdquo\;). For example\, one might \;polemically \;ask whether the history of philosophy \;could be rewritten as \;a story of meta-philosophical \;changes in what it means to do philosophy &ndash\; as opposed to\, say\, \;science or fiction-writing \;&ndash\; and for thinkers and \;ideas \;to count as philosophical.This\, in turn\, puts \;strong \;emphasis on processes of \;inclusion and exclusion\, and the various factors involved therein \;(gender\, race\, culture\, language\, etc.)\, in \;philosophical canon formation.
\nThe \;conference \;will \;take place on Thursday 25 and Friday 26November 2021 from 9:30-18:00 \;(CET). \;It will in principle \;be held online\, but \;it may \;be \;turned \;into a hybrid event when Covid (travel) regulations allow for it.
ORGANIZER;CN=Lukas M. Verburgt: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR