CFP: 2024 Pacific APA

Hello Everyone,

I am organizing main program colloquiums for the 2024 Pacific APA. In order to cultivate diversity, equity, and inclusion, I am sending out this unprecedented CFP for commentators and a chair for these main program events. If you are interested in showcasing your skills and professionalism by commentating or chairing this session at the 2024 Pacific APA, please read the information provided below and complete the  APA Colloquium Commentator/Chair Sign-up Sheet Sheet by October 7, 2023, at the latest: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSe45yAJUJ4vPy8PoHzCipx6ClUe2pbeyTvNm7ZKn-iR_C76hQ/viewform?usp=pp_url.

We expect the following papers to be presented during the session:

Speaker 1: Kaitlyn Creasy (California State University, San Bernardino)

Title 1:On Loneliness and Really Being Seen

Abstract 1: In recent work, philosopher Kieran Setiya (2022) offers an account of the origins of loneliness. According to Setiya, feelings of loneliness result when an individual's basic needs to be loved and to have her unconditional value as a person recognized fail to be met. I argue in this paper that this account is far from the whole picture, failing to explain a wide variety of familiar scenarios in which loneliness arises. In this paper, I develop a novel account of loneliness, arguing that it results not only when we fail to secure recognition of our unconditional worth as persons, but also when we perceive that the relationships through which we secure that recognition - loving relationships - lack sufficient quality: that is, when we perceive that those who love us either fail to meet certain of our specific needs or fail to recognize and affirm us as the particular individuals we are.

Speaker 2: Jordan Myers (Independent Scholar)

Title 2:Anger, Injustice, and Affective Pluralism

Abstract 2: Amia Srinivasan and Christopher Franklin have defended anger on the grounds that it is a fitting or apt response to injustice. Even decisively counterproductive anger can be intrinsically valuable. Srinivasan and Franklin argued that anger alone can fully appreciate injustice and value the wronged party. They claimed grief and disappointment cannot do this work and are thus intrinsically deficient as emotional responses. I argue that grief and disappointment can indeed fully appreciate injustice and value the wronged. I argue, contra Srinivasan, that disappointment can respond to normative violations and is agent-oriented - it can respond to the intentionality of actions as well as to the raw harm produced. Against Franklin's conception of grief, I argue that an aggrieved reaction can directly track the intentions behind an action and can directly value the wronged party. I conclude that an aggrieved and disappointed response to injustice is in no way intrinsically deficient.

Speaker 3: Anne-Marie Gagné-Julien (McGill University) and Zoey Lavallee (McGill University)

Title 3: Affective Injustice and Psychiatry

Abstract 3: Drawing on the burgeoning literature on affective/emotional injustice, this paper develops an account of emotional injustice experienced by Mad people, particularly in relationship to the institution of psychiatry. By Mad people, we refer to people who are diagnosed or perceived as "mentally ill." Under this description, Mad people are a social group, on the basis of being subjected to shared experiences of discrimination and oppression. The affective injustice literature, broadly speaking, addresses harms and disadvantages imposed on individuals and groups in their capacity as emoters. By appealing to the general idea of emotional injustice, we develop an account of two related forms of emotional injustice faced by Mad people: certain dominant norms concerning appropriate or apt emotions operate in the context of psychiatry in such a way that contributes to pathologizing Mad people's emotions and enabling hermeneutical emotional injustice.

Speaker 4: Asya Passinsky (Central European University)

Title 4: Social Construction and Meta-Ground

Abstract 4:The notion of social construction plays an important role in many areas of social philosophy, including the philosophy of gender, the philosophy of race, and social ontology. Yet there is no consensus in the literature on how this notion is to be understood. One promising proposal, which has been championed in recent years by Brian Epstein (2015, 2016), Aaron Griffith (2017, 2018), and Jonathan Schaffer (2017), is that social construction may be understood in terms of the notion of metaphysical grounding. However, a simple ground-theoretic analysis of social construction is subject to familiar counterexamples, and it is far from clear how to modify the analysis to avoid the counterexamples. I argue that a popular strategy for dealing with the counterexamples fails. I then develop and defend a new strategy for dealing with the counterexamples - one which leads to a novel ground-theoretic account of social construction in terms of meta-ground.

There will be one chair, one paper, one commentator, and one Q&A for each paper, with the following time constraints:

• Paper author: 20 minutes

• Commentator: 10 minutes

• Author reply: 5 minutes

• Discussion: 25 minutes

The session will be an in-person session (no remote participation will be allowed), and will be conducted in adherence to theAPA guidelines for paper colloquium. Final papers will be provided to commentators at least six weeks prior to the session, and replies from authors will be provided at least three weeks prior to the session. The2024 Pacific APAwill take place in Portland, Oregon. Please follow the given link for additional information. 

Please note that no participant can appear on the APA’s main program more than once. So, please do not apply if you are already scheduled for a main program event, including commentators. Affiliated-group session participants may apply. 

All participants must also register for the 2024 Pacific APA. Furthermore, both commentators (although not the chair) would be able to apply fortravel assistance from the APA (refer to “Travel Assistance” under “Meetings,” at the bottom of the list). Participants should also check with their institution for potential funding opportunities, including their department and student government organizations.

We encourage all qualified commentators and chairs to sign-up, but note that priority will be given to early career scholars who are still on the job market, graduate students who will be entering the job market in 2024, and established scholars who are interested in mentoring or networking with fellow scholars on the topic of hate (in this order). Regardless of your current position, we invite anyone who will be able to participate and are interested in doing so to apply. 

If you have any questions, please contact Cecilea Mun at cecileamun[at]icloud.com