In Conversation: Exploring the Philosophy of Money and Finance &ndash\; Series III
\nA series of interviews with contributors to The Philosophy of Money and Finance (Hardcover\, OUP 2024\; Paperback\, fall 2025)
\nSchedule
\n"Truth in Financial Accounting"
Author: Christopher J. Cowton (Emeritus\, University of Huddersfield)
Interviewer: Lisa Warenski (CUNY Graduate Center)
Date and Time: 15 January 2026\, 18:00 CET
"Green Central Banking" \;
Authors: Peter Dietsch (University of Victoria)\; Clé\;ment Fontan (University of Louvain)
Interviewer: Jens van't Klooster
Date and Time: 25 March 2026\, 18:00 CET
"On the Wrongfulness of Bank Contributions to Financial Crises"
Author: \;Richard Endö\;rfer (University of Gothenburg)
Interviewer: Kobi Finestone (Univeresity of San Diego)
Date and Time: 01 June 2026\, 18:00 CET
"Bitcoins Left and Right: A Normative Assessment of a Digital Currency"
Authors: Lars Lindblom and Joakim Sandberg
Interviewer: TBA
Date and Time: September (TBA) 2026\, 18:00 CET
This is a zoom series on the value of consciousness\, taking place every first Tuesday of the month at noon Eastern time in the US/6pm in Europe. The program is below. The zoom link is this:
\nhttps://riceuniversity.zoom.us/j/93096236283?pwd=s6SO6NqrM5mnGpqjFtKNfTNoxaHGUg.1
\nProgram:
\nSept. 2: Takuya Niikawa\, &ldquo\;Consciousness Aesthetics&rdquo\;
Oct. 7: Anna Giustina\, &ldquo\;Prospects for an Aesthetics of Consciousness&rdquo\;
Nov. 11: Emad Atiq\, ""Agency\, Normativity\, and Acquaintance"
Dec. 2: Lé\;a Salje\, &ldquo\;Feeling Like Oneself&rdquo\;
Jan. 6: David Builes\, &ldquo\;Four Views of the First Person&rdquo\;
Feb. 3: Adrià\; Moret\, &ldquo\;No Welfare without Sentience&rdquo\;
Mar. 3: Gwen Bradford\, &ldquo\;Dreams and Incommunicable Aesthetic Value&rdquo\;
Apr. 7: Enrico Terrone\, "The Type-Token Dilemma for the Aesthetics of Consciousness"
May 5: Leonard Dung\, &ldquo\;Varieties of Sentientism About Moral Standing&rdquo\;
Slurring Terms Across Languages (STAL) is an international and interdisciplinary network whose primary aim is to promote work on slurs\, pejoratives\, expressives and evaluative terms in general\, from languages that have been seldom discussed in the recent philosophical and semantic literature\, and in particular\, from sign languages and non-Indo-European languages. Its main aim is to bring to light new empirical data and uncover novel interesting phenomena that may have the potential to challenge current theories. Empirical studies of the expressions mentioned from such languages\, comparisons with English slurs\, as well as wider cross-linguistic approaches and developments of extant theories in application to the new data or previously neglected phenomena are encouraged too.
\nThe network's coordinators are \;Isidora Stojanovic \;(Pompeu Fabra University/CNRS-Institut Jean Nicod) &\; \;Dan Zeman \;(University of Porto). More information about the network and its activities can be found at \;https://sites.google.com/view/stalnetwork. To contact the network coordinators\, please write to stalnetwork@gmail.com.
\nThe STAL Seminar features monthly\, online talks by researchers tackling issues \;related to the study of slurs\, pejoratives\, expressives and evaluative terms in general\, from less studied languages. The meetings in the 2025-2026 academic year take place on MONDAYS\, 14:30-16:00 Central European Time (CET). The list of speakers is the following (exact dates to be provided soon):
\n- OCTOBER 2025: Luvell Anderson (University of Illinois\, Urbana-Champaign)
\n- NOVEMBER 2025: Claire Horisk (University of Missouri)
\n- DECEMBER 2025: Xavier Villalba (Autonomous University of Barcelona)
\n- JANUARY 2026: Daisy Dixon (Cardiff University)
\n- FEBRUARY 2026: Elisabeth Camp (Rutgers University)
\n- MARCH 2026: Leopold Hess (Jagiellonian University)
\n- APRIL 2026: Robin Jeshion (University of Southern California)
\n- MAY 2026: Yim Binh Felix Sze (The Chinese University of Hong Kong)
\n- JUNE 2026: Mingya Liu (Humboldt University of Berlin)
ORGANIZER;CN=Isidora Stojanovic;CN=Dan Zeman: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Lisbon:20251001T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Lisbon:20260630T170000 SUMMARY:Polysemy in the Evaluative Sphere UID:20260503T142932Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/Lisbon LOCATION:Faculty of Letters\, University of Porto\, Via Panorâmica s/n\, Porto\, Portugal DESCRIPTION:POLYSEMY IN THE EVALUATIVE SPHERE
\nIn-person: Faculty of Letters\, University of Porto\, Via Panorâ\;mica s/n
\nOnline: Zoom
\nThis is a biweekly seminar pertaining to the project Slurs and the Lexicon: A Rich-Lexicon Approach to Slurs and Other Evaluative Expressions - LEXISLUR (2023.05952.CEECIND\; PI: Dan Zeman). The main aim of the project is to offer a polysemy account fit for evaluative expressions and to assess to what extent a unified approach to the entire evaluative sphere is feasible. Much work on polysemy can be found in lexical semantics - the branch of semantics that studies the meaning of words\, their internal structure and interrelations\, etc. However\, while the debate about polysemy of various expressions has produced an impressive amount of work\, not much material on the polysemy of evaluative expressions exists in that area. The purpose of this seminar is twofold: first\, to get acquainted with the essential literature on polysemy (via in-person sessions dedicated to reading and discussing the relevant papers)\; second\, to feature current work on polysemy as applied to evaluative expressions (via online talks by invited speakers). In this way\, participants will both acquire knowledge about polysemy in general and see how the discussions in lexical semantics can be applied to the evaluative sphere.
\nIn-person meetings
\nNext meeting: NOVEMBER 5\, 15:00-16:30 WET: \;Marina Ortega André\;s &\; Agustin Vicente\, "Polysemy and co-predication"\, \;Glossa \;4(1)\, 2019.
\nPast meetings: \;OCTOBER 15\, 16.30-18.00 WET: \;Michelle Liu\, "Polysemy and Philosophy"\, \;Philosophy Compass \;20: e70040\, 2025.
\nFuture readings:
\nNicholas Asher\, Lexical Meaning in Context: A Web of Words\, Cambridge University Press\, 2011 (excerpts).
\nRobyn Carston\, "Polysemy: pragmatics and sense conventions"\, Mind &\; Language 36(1): 108-133\, 2021.
\nJohn Collins\, "Copredication as illusion"\, Journal of Semantics 40(2-3): 359-389\, 2023.
\nSteven Frisson\, "Semantic underspecification in language processing"\, Language and Linguistics Compass 3(1): 111-127\, 2009.
\nLotte Hogeweg &\; Agustin Vicente\, "On the nature of the lexicon"\, Journal of Linguistics 56(4): 865-891\, 2020.
\nRay Jackendoff\, Semantic Structures\, MIT Press\, 1990 (excerpts).
\nIngrid Lossius Falkum &\; Agustin Vicente\, "Polysemy"\, Oxford Bibliographies Online\, 2020.
\nJames Pustejovsky\, The Generative Lexicon\, MIT Press\, 1995 (excerpts).
\nPetra Schumacher\, "When combinatorial processing results in reconceptualization: Towards a new approach of compositionality"\, Frontiers of Psychology 4: 677\, 2013.
\nAgustin Vicente\, "Polysemy and word meaning"\, Philosophical Studies\, 175(4): 947-968\, 2018.
\nAgustin Vicente\, "Approaches to co-predication"\, Journal of Pragmatics 182: 348-357\, 2021.
\nOnline talks
\nNext talk: NOVEMBER 21\, 11:00-12.30 WET: Marina Ortega-André\;s (University of the Basque Country)\, "When this chef says pot: The importance of the speaker's identity in understanding ambiguous words"
\nPast talks: \;OCTOBER 31\, 11:00-12:30 WET: \;Michelle Liu (Monash University)\, "Ad Hoc Concepts\, Polysemy\, and Verbal Disputes"
\nFuture talks (schedule and titles TBA): \;John Collins &\; Agustin Vicente\, Tamara Dobler\, Jessica Keiser\, Michelle Liu\, Ingrid Lossius Falkum\, Emanuel Viebahn
ORGANIZER;CN=Dan Zeman;CN=Alba Moreno Zurita: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20251001T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260630T170000 SUMMARY:UK XPHI Online UID:20260503T142933Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:We are delighted to announce the next series of our monthly online workshop devoted to discussion of work in progress in experimental philosophy. The workshop is usually held via Teams\, the second Wednesday of each month\, 16:00-18:00 UK time. \; Details of 2025/26 season TBC
\n \; ORGANIZER;CN=James Andow;CN=Eugen Fischer: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20251009T170000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260604T170000 SUMMARY:Sign\, Language\, Reality Seminar 2025/26 UID:20260503T142934Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:Sign. Language\, Reality (SLR) Seminar Series 2025/26
\nWe are pleased to announce the program for the upcoming academic year of the Sign. Language\, Reality (SLR) Seminar\, hosted by the Faculty of Philosophy\, University of Warsaw and the Polish Semiotic Society. The series brings together scholars working on philosophy of language\, logic\, philosophy of linguistics\, theoretical semiotics\, and related areas.
\nProgram 2025/26:
\n9 October 2025 &mdash\; Franç\;ois Recanati (Collè\;ge de France)
Mental files\, concepts\, and modes of presentation
23 October 2025 &mdash\; Antonina Jamrozik (University of Warsaw)
Why do we need the notion of a lie? Considerations from the case of presuppositional lies
6 November 2025 &mdash\; Edward Zalta (Stanford University)
How to Ground Semantics in Higher-Order Metaphysics
4 December 2025 &mdash\; Thomas Hodgson (University of Gdansk / Shanxi University)
The act-type theory of propositions as a theory of empty names
22 January 2026 &mdash\; Hannes Leitgeb (Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich)
The Additive Logic of Epistemic Reasons. An Axiomatic Account
19 February 2026 &mdash\; Piotr Stalmaszczyk (University of Lodz)
Conceptual Engineering\, Semiotics and Metalinguistics
19 March 2026 &mdash\; Merel Semeijn (University of Groningen)
Common ground in non-face-to-face settings
16 April 2026 &mdash\; Louis Rouillé\; (University of Liè\;ge)
The dynamics of fictional names: an antirealist perspective
21 May 2026 &mdash\; Diego Feinmann (IPI PAN)
Theories of Relevance
4 June 2026 &mdash\; Antonio Negro &\; Salvatore Pistoia-Reda (Università\; degli Studi di Siena)
The contradiction puzzle for logicality
Participation is free and open to all scholars.
\nZoom information:
The seminar will be held online. To join the meeting\, please use the Zoom information below:
https://uw-edu-pl.zoom.us/j/92716044372?pwd=0l7PETAOwqQDBKTMCnheYQN7ag7zx1.1
ID: 927 1604 4372
Code: 697648
&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;
We are very pleased to announce the 6th season (2025&ndash\;2026) of:
MONTHLY PHENOMENOLOGY
An online forum of discussion on recent work in phenomenology \;
Description: This series of talks gathers together scholars interested in phenomenology and its relation to contemporary issues in philosophy\, especially in the philosophy of mind. It establishes a forum of discussion where people can meet on a regular basis and present their work-in-progress or recent publications. The topics addressed will stretch from the history of early phenomenology to the systematic application of phenomenological insights in recent debates in analytic philosophy. \;
Schedule: The talks will take place once a month on a Friday from October to May. Time: 10:15am ET\, 3:15pm GMT/GMT+1\, 4:15pm CET. Talks last 90 minutes\, including a 45 minutes Q&\;A. \;
Participation: Talks are held on \;zoom. To participate\, please send an email to \;hamid.taieb@hu-berlin.de \;with the heading "Registration Monthly Phenomenology". A zoom link will be sent to you the day preceding each talk. \;
Programme:
Francesca Forlè\; (Università\; Vita-Salute San Raffaele)
Embodied Affectivity. A Phenomenological Account of the Connection between Affective Phenomena and Bodily Expressions
Friday\, \;24 October 2025
James Kinkaid (Bilkent University)
Husserlian Idealism and the Identity Theory of Truth
28 November 2025
Maryam Ebrahimi Dinani (University of Neuchâ\;tel)
Adolf Reinach's Theory of Social Acts: Illuminating Debates on Joint and Collective Intentionality
5 December \;2025 \;
Pascale Roure (Yildiz Technical University)
Phenomenology in Turkey
16 January 2026 \;
Benoit Guilielmo (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)
Exploring the Essence of Bullshit through Early Phenomenology (Kolnai and Hildebrand)
20 \;February 2026 \;
Lorenza D'Angelo (Pompeu Fabra University)
Pleasure\, Pain and Introspection
6 \;March 2026 \;
Mohammed Saleh Zarepour (University of Manchester)
The Flying Man and the Transparency of (Self-)Knowledge
24 April 2026 \;
Sebastian Watzl (University of Oslo)
Attention Norms and Frames. On the Social Organisation of Experience
8 May 2026
Convenors:
Guillaume Fré\;chette (University of Geneva)
Marta Jorba (Pompeu Fabra \;University)
Alessandro Salice (University College Cork)
Hamid Taieb (Humboldt University Berlin)
Í\;ngrid Vendrell-Ferran (Philipps University Marburg) \;
Organized on behalf of the \;Network for Phenomenological Research \;
&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;
We're delighted to invite you to the research seminar of the Department of Theoretical Philosophy at the University of Bucharest. These are organized in partnership with CELFIS\, the Center for Logic\, Philosophy and History of Science at UB. Here are talks scheduled so far:
\nFall 2025:
\nOctober 28\, 5pm: Alexandru Dragomir &\; Andrei Mărăşoiu (University of Bucharest\, \;f2f)\, "The Inconstant Moral Expert: the case of LLMs"
\nNovember 25\, 4pm: Nicholas Rimell (Chinese University of Hong Kong\, hybrid via Zoom)\, "A Metaphysics of Despair"
\nNovember 28\, 2pm: Micah Thomas Pimaro\, Jr. (University of Calabar\, \;f2f)\, "Placide Tempels&rsquo\;s Metaphysics: A challenge or a trap for African philosophy?"
\nDecember 2\, 3pm: Nora Grigore (Romanian Academy\, Institute of Philosophy and Psychology\, f2f)\, "Worthiness and Expediency: a Distinction without a Difference?"
\nDecember 19\, 2pm: Alin Olteanu (Shanghai International Studies University\, ICUB\, \;f2f)\, "Iconic Imagination in Modeling: A Semiotic Approach to Scientific Inquiry"
\nJanuary 16\, 2pm: Marco Facchin (University of Antwerp\, hybrid via Zoom)\, \;"Is mental content an illusion?" \;
\nJanuary 22\, 12pm: Sandra Brâ\;nzaru (University of Bucharest\, CELFIS\, FPSE\, \;f2f)\, "Conceptualising Empathy"
\nFebruary 10\, 4pm: Marian Călborean (OPTI Software &\; University of Bucharest\, f2f)\, "The minimal ontology of time" \;
\nSpring 2026:
\nMarch 27\, 2pm: Erik Myin (University of Antwerp\, \;hybrid \;via Zoom)\, &ldquo\;Of a Different Mind&rdquo\;
\nMarch 30: \;Mariona Eiren Miyata-Sturm (University of Oxford\, f2f)\, &ldquo\;The metacognitive account of aesthetics in science&rdquo\;
\nApril 3: \;René\; \;van Woudenberg (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam\, \;hybrid \;via Zoom)\, 'Are LLMs Authors?'
\nMay 11\, 12pm: Gheorge Ştefanov (U. Bucharest\, f2f)\; TBD
\nMay 13\, 4pm: Andrei Moldovan (U. Salamanca\, f2f)\, \;&ldquo\;Between Independence and Guidance: A Dilemma for Intellectual Autonomy&rdquo\;
\nMay 19\, 10am: Daian Bica (Heinrich Heine University\, \;hybrid \;via Zoom)\, \;''How to Tame &lsquo\;Abundance&rsquo\;? Roman Frigg&rsquo\;s User Manual''
\nJune 5\, 2pm: Paula Tomi (National University of Science and Technology 'Politehnica' Bucharest\, \;f2f)\, &ldquo\;LLMs and truth pluralism&rdquo\;
\nJune: Alexandru Nicolae (University of Bucharest\, Faculty of Letters\; Romanian Academy\, Institute of Linguistics\, \;f2f)
\nJune: Cătălin Teoharie (University of Bucharest\, CELFIS\, \;f2f)
\nJune: Ioan Muntean (UT Rio Grande Valley\, UI Urbana\, \;f2f)
\nJuly: Mihai Rusu (Babeş Bolyai University\, ICUB\, hybrid)
\nJuly: Constantin Stoenescu (University of Bucharest\, CELFIS\, \;f2f)\, "Revisiting 'The Normative Structure of Science' \;
\nSeptember: Oana Şerban (University of Bucharest\, CCIIF\, \;f2f)
\nPrevious events \;in the series are available at: \;
\n2021-22: \;https://philevents.org/event/show/93365 \;
\n2022-23: \;https://philevents.org/event/show/105249 \;
\nhttps://filosofie.unibuc.ro/category/seminar-cercetare-dft/ \;
\nhttps://icub.unibuc.ro/2022/06/14/workshop-semantic-cognition-and-truth/ \;
\nFor those of you who would like to join some of the meetings but have overlapping commitments\, we will do our best to record the meetings whenever everyone in attendance consents to it\, and to then upload the recordings on the Department's YouTube channel. Previous talks are available here:
\nhttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOgUq3dN8CXI4L6DhZT1f_Q
ORGANIZER;CN="Andrei Mărăşoiu": METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260201T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260630T170000 SUMMARY:Inquiry Network WIP Talks (Spring 2026) UID:20260503T142937Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:The Inquiry Network WIP Talks feature presentations of work in progress related to inquiry\, broadly understood. For example\, presentations might discuss (but are not limited to): the epistemology of inquiry\, the metaphysics of inquiry\, ethical norms of inquiry\, historical perspectives on inquiry\, or the structure of scientific inquiry.
We aim to foster the sharing of ideas in an inclusive\, welcoming and low-pressure environment. Papers that are already accepted for publication will not be accepted. We aim to be sensitive to the needs of early-career scholars.
The group meets biweekly on Zoom during each of the Fall and Spring semesters. Meeting times are determined shortly before the beginning of each semester with the goal of finding a time that works for as many members as possible. Special consideration is given to finding a meeting time that works for presenters of accepted papers.
I am excited to share that the \;Reconstructing Carnap Webinar Series \;will resume in \;February 2026! Please find the official flyer attached. All talks will take place from \;4:30 PM to 6:30 PM CET \;(10:30 AM&ndash\;12:30 PM EST).
The webinar can be accessed via the following link: https://meet.google.com/uaq-jqpf-mwr
Schedule of speakers:
The series is organized in collaboration with \;Carnap in Context IV \;(Ö\;AW\, FWF Grant PAT7905424) and \;Rudolf Carnap Digital \;(MCMP\, LMU Munich). \;
ORGANIZER;CN=Caterina Del Sordo;CN=Luca Oliva;CN=Silvano Zipoli Caiani: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260220T140000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260522T170000 SUMMARY:Online Bayle Seminar 2026 : Education and Pedagogy in the Philosopher of Rotterdam UID:20260503T142939Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:The \;Online Bayle Seminar \;is a study and research group devoted to the figure of Pierre Bayle. In the very spirit of the &ldquo\;Republic of Letters&rdquo\; so dear to Bayle\, it seeks to be both international and interdisciplinary\, and aims&mdash\;thanks to the possibilities offered by online communication&mdash\;to overcome the divisions between schools and approaches that have sometimes characterized Bayle scholarship. Founded in 2025\, the seminar hosted in its first year a series of talks on various themes in Bayle\, such as atheism\, tolerance\, and the \;Dictionary. It thus provided an opportunity to discover the most recent research on Bayle carried out in Europe as well as in the Americas and Asia.
\nFor this second year\, we have chosen to develop the seminar&rsquo\;s format around a concrete theme through which Bayle&rsquo\;s work and thought&mdash\;and the context in which he evolved&mdash\;will be analyzed. The objective of this new format is to examine the production of the philosopher of Rotterdam in a more systematic way. Sessions will alternate between reading workshops devoted to the study of selected passages circulated beforehand\, and talks on specific topics. The theme for this second year is \;&ldquo\;Education and Pedagogy in Bayle.&rdquo\; \;The seminar will begin in 2026.
\nWhether from a biographical or a philosophical perspective\, the question touches closely upon Bayle&rsquo\;s life and writings. As a child\, Bayle himself suffered from an irregular schooling\, which he recalls in his correspondence and from which he draws lessons in the advice he gives to his brother Joseph. Later\, Bayle served as a teacher for almost his entire adult life. As is well known\, he first worked as a tutor\, in Coppet and Rouen\, and then as a professor at Sedan and Rotterdam. His philosophy courses\, included among the \;Miscellaneous Works\, are well known. His work as a writer and philosopher is marked by questions of education. The prefaces and forewords of his works not only provide information on the author&rsquo\;s status and his relationship to an ideal reader\; they also contain pedagogical reflections that fit more broadly within the theme of education. Likewise\, the project of a \;Journal of the Republic of Letters\, based on reviewing recent publications\, not only demonstrates an interest in erudition but also affirms the possibility of a learned public and the importance of its education. One should not forget the Reformed context in which Bayle pursued his schooling and his teaching: can one detect confessional markers in his reflections on education?
\nOn a political and theological level\, royal legislation concerning the children of the Huguenots raised the issue of the right to educate one&rsquo\;s children according to one&rsquo\;s own religious convictions. Religious controversy during the revocation of the Edict of Nantes also raises the question of the purpose and means of education: should one not &ldquo\;instruct&rdquo\; erring consciences rather than persecute them? At what point can one judge that the other has been sufficiently taught and that his error stems from culpable obstinacy? Can religious truth be taught in the same way to all minds? This question of &ldquo\;pedagogical differentiation&rdquo\; must be correlated in Bayle with his moral anthropology&mdash\;namely\, attention to the place and role of temperament and passions in the psychic and intellectual life of the individual. And this is directly linked to the &ldquo\;prejudices of childhood and education\,&rdquo\; where Bayle explicitly equates childhood and education with those factors that hinder the formation and exercise of a critical mind. Although the secondary literature has at times examined these issues in Bayle\, the question of education as such has been little studied in his work.
\nProgramme:
\nFriday 20 February\, 2:00 pm: Andy Serin (EPHE-PSL and Paris 1 University): \;&ldquo\;Text analysis: education and tolerance in the Supplement to the Philosophical Commentary&rdquo\;
\nFriday 20 March\, 2:00 pm: Isabelle Moreau (ENS de Lyon): \;&ldquo\;Bayle: education and religious identity&rdquo\;
\nFriday 24 April\, 2:00 pm: Ana Carmona (University of Geneva): \;&ldquo\;Text analysis: the power of prejudices&rdquo\;
\nFriday 22 May\, 2:00 pm: Chiara Musolino (Paris 1 University): \;&ldquo\;How to read philosophy? The pedagogy of doubt at work in Pierre Bayle&rdquo\;
\nPractical information:
\nThe sessions will take place online on Fridays at 2:00 pm (French time). The language used is French\, but it is possible to participate in English. The videoconference link and the texts can be obtained by sending an email to bayle.seminar@hotmail.com.
ORGANIZER;CN=Andy Serin;CN=Ana Alicia Carmona Aliaga: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260317T170000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261117T170000 SUMMARY:Wittgenstein's Lecture on Ethics: Online Lecture Series UID:20260503T142940Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:&Eta\; &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;-&phi\;&iota\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &sigma\;&kappa\;έ&psi\;&eta\;\, ό&pi\;&omega\;&sigmaf\; &alpha\;&nu\;&alpha\;&delta\;ύ&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&chi\;&alpha\;&sigma\;&mu\;ό &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Alpha\;&lambda\;έ&xi\;&eta\; &Kappa\;&alpha\;&rho\;&pi\;&omicron\;ύ&zeta\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;\, &delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &alpha\;&pi\;&omicron\;&tau\;&epsilon\;&lambda\;&epsilon\;ί &alpha\;&pi\;&lambda\;ώ&sigmaf\; &mu\;&iota\;&alpha\; &nu\;έ&alpha\; &theta\;&epsilon\;&omega\;&rho\;&eta\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &pi\;&rho\;ό&tau\;&alpha\;&sigma\;&eta\; &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;ά &mu\;&iota\;&alpha\; &rho\;&iota\;&zeta\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&tau\;ό&pi\;&iota\;&sigma\;&eta\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; ί&delta\;&iota\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &nu\;&omicron\;ή&mu\;&alpha\;&tau\;&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &phi\;&iota\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;ί&alpha\;&sigmaf\;\, &mu\;&iota\;&alpha\; &kappa\;ί&nu\;&eta\;&sigma\;&eta\; &alpha\;&pi\;ό &tau\;&eta\; &phi\;&iota\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;ί&alpha\; &omega\;&sigmaf\; &sigma\;ύ&sigma\;&tau\;&eta\;&mu\;&alpha\; &pi\;&rho\;&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &tau\;&eta\; &phi\;&iota\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;ί&alpha\; &omega\;&sigmaf\; &alpha\;&nu\;&omicron\;&iota\;&chi\;&tau\;ή &epsilon\;&mu\;&pi\;&epsilon\;&iota\;&rho\;ί&alpha\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\;\, ό&pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &eta\; &sigma\;&kappa\;έ&psi\;&eta\; &delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &pi\;&epsilon\;&rho\;&iota\;&omicron\;&rho\;ί&zeta\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &sigma\;&tau\;&eta\; &lambda\;&omicron\;&gamma\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &alpha\;&nu\;&alpha\;&pi\;&alpha\;&rho\;ά&sigma\;&tau\;&alpha\;&sigma\;&eta\; &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;ά &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&mu\;&omicron\;&rho\;&phi\;ώ&nu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &sigma\;&epsilon\; &tau\;&rho\;ό&pi\;&omicron\; ύ&pi\;&alpha\;&rho\;&xi\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &sigma\;&upsilon\;&mu\;&mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&omicron\;&chi\;ή&sigmaf\; &sigma\;&tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &pi\;&rho\;&alpha\;&gamma\;&mu\;&alpha\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\;. &Sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; &pi\;&upsilon\;&rho\;ή&nu\;&alpha\; &alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;ή&sigmaf\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &pi\;&rho\;&omicron\;&omicron\;&pi\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή&sigmaf\; &beta\;&rho\;ί&sigma\;&kappa\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &eta\; έ&nu\;&nu\;&omicron\;&iota\;&alpha\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &Alpha\;&nu\;&omicron\;&iota\;&chi\;&tau\;ή&sigmaf\; &Omicron\;&lambda\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\;&sigmaf\;\, &mu\;&iota\;&alpha\;&sigmaf\; &delta\;&upsilon\;&nu\;&alpha\;&mu\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή&sigmaf\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &mu\;&eta\;-&kappa\;&lambda\;&epsilon\;&iota\;&sigma\;&tau\;ή&sigmaf\; &epsilon\;&nu\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\;&sigmaf\; &mu\;έ&sigma\;&alpha\; &sigma\;&tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &omicron\;&pi\;&omicron\;ί&alpha\; &omicron\; ά&nu\;&theta\;&rho\;&omega\;&pi\;&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &omicron\; &kappa\;ό&sigma\;&mu\;&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &sigma\;&upsilon\;&nu\;-&sigma\;&upsilon\;&gamma\;&kappa\;&rho\;&omicron\;&tau\;&omicron\;ύ&nu\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &chi\;&omega\;&rho\;ί&sigmaf\; &nu\;&alpha\; &tau\;&alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;ί&zeta\;&omicron\;&nu\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\;\, &sigma\;&upsilon\;&gamma\;&kappa\;&rho\;&omicron\;&tau\;ώ&nu\;&tau\;&alpha\;&sigmaf\; &alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;ό &pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &omicron\; &Kappa\;&alpha\;&rho\;&pi\;&omicron\;ύ&zeta\;&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &omicron\;&nu\;&omicron\;&mu\;ά&zeta\;&epsilon\;&iota\; &Mu\;&eta\;-&Tau\;&alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&gamma\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &Tau\;&alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\;\, &delta\;&eta\;&lambda\;&alpha\;&delta\;ή &mu\;&iota\;&alpha\; &sigma\;&chi\;έ&sigma\;&eta\; ό&pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &tau\;&omicron\; έ&nu\;&alpha\; &delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &alpha\;&pi\;&omicron\;&rho\;&rho\;&omicron\;&phi\;ά &tau\;&omicron\; ά&lambda\;&lambda\;&omicron\; &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;ά &omicron\;ύ&tau\;&epsilon\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &pi\;&alpha\;&rho\;&alpha\;&mu\;έ&nu\;&epsilon\;&iota\; &alpha\;&pi\;&omicron\;&lambda\;ύ&tau\;&omega\;&sigmaf\; &delta\;&iota\;&alpha\;&chi\;&omega\;&rho\;&iota\;&sigma\;&mu\;έ&nu\;&omicron\;\, &mu\;&iota\;&alpha\; &epsilon\;&nu\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\; &sigma\;&epsilon\; &delta\;&iota\;&alpha\;&rho\;&kappa\;ή &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&mu\;ό&rho\;&phi\;&omega\;&sigma\;&eta\; &mu\;έ&sigma\;&alpha\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; &chi\;&rho\;ό&nu\;&omicron\;. &Eta\; &pi\;&rho\;&alpha\;&gamma\;&mu\;&alpha\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\;\, &sigma\;&epsilon\; &alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;ή &tau\;&eta\; &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;-&phi\;&iota\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &sigma\;ύ&lambda\;&lambda\;&eta\;&psi\;&eta\;\, &delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\; &sigma\;&tau\;&alpha\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &omicron\;&upsilon\;&sigma\;ί&alpha\; &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;ά &delta\;&iota\;&alpha\;&delta\;&iota\;&kappa\;&alpha\;&sigma\;ί&alpha\; &Sigma\;&chi\;&epsilon\;&sigma\;&iota\;&alpha\;&kappa\;ή&sigmaf\; &Sigma\;&upsilon\;&nu\;-&Gamma\;έ&nu\;&epsilon\;&sigma\;&eta\;&sigmaf\;\, έ&nu\;&alpha\; &pi\;&lambda\;έ&gamma\;&mu\;&alpha\; &zeta\;&omega\;&nu\;&tau\;&alpha\;&nu\;ώ&nu\; &sigma\;&chi\;έ&sigma\;&epsilon\;&omega\;&nu\; ό&pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &kappa\;ά&theta\;&epsilon\; &mu\;&omicron\;&rho\;&phi\;ή ύ&pi\;&alpha\;&rho\;&xi\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &alpha\;&nu\;&alpha\;&delta\;ύ&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &mu\;έ&sigma\;&alpha\; &alpha\;&pi\;ό &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;&eta\;&lambda\;&epsilon\;&pi\;ί&delta\;&rho\;&alpha\;&sigma\;&eta\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &alpha\;&mu\;&omicron\;&iota\;&beta\;&alpha\;ί&alpha\; &sigma\;&upsilon\;&gamma\;&kappa\;&rho\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&sigma\;&eta\;\, &gamma\;&epsilon\;&gamma\;&omicron\;&nu\;ό&sigmaf\; &pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &sigma\;&upsilon\;&nu\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\;ί&zeta\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &mu\;&epsilon\; &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &eta\;&rho\;&alpha\;&kappa\;&lambda\;&epsilon\;ί&tau\;&epsilon\;&iota\;&alpha\; &epsilon\;&nu\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\; &tau\;&omega\;&nu\; &alpha\;&nu\;&tau\;&iota\;&theta\;έ&tau\;&omega\;&nu\;\, &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &epsilon\;&kappa\;&pi\;ό&rho\;&epsilon\;&upsilon\;&sigma\;&eta\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Epsilon\;&nu\;ό&sigmaf\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; &Pi\;&lambda\;&omega\;&tau\;ί&nu\;&omicron\;\, &tau\;&eta\; &mu\;&omicron\;&nu\;&iota\;&sigma\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &omicron\;&nu\;&tau\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&gamma\;ί&alpha\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Sigma\;&pi\;&iota\;&nu\;ό&zeta\;&alpha\;\, &tau\;&eta\; &delta\;&iota\;&alpha\;&lambda\;&epsilon\;&kappa\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &kappa\;ί&nu\;&eta\;&sigma\;&eta\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Chi\;έ&gamma\;&kappa\;&epsilon\;&lambda\;\, &tau\;&eta\; &sigma\;&upsilon\;&nu\;-&alpha\;&nu\;ή&kappa\;&epsilon\;&iota\;&nu\; &alpha\;&nu\;&theta\;&rho\;ώ&pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &Epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; &Chi\;ά&iota\;&nu\;&tau\;&epsilon\;&gamma\;&kappa\;&epsilon\;&rho\;\, &tau\;&eta\; «\;&sigma\;ά&rho\;&kappa\;&alpha\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &kappa\;ό&sigma\;&mu\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;»\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; Merleau-Ponty &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&eta\; &delta\;&iota\;&alpha\;&delta\;&iota\;&kappa\;&alpha\;&sigma\;&iota\;&alpha\;&kappa\;ή &omicron\;&nu\;&tau\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&gamma\;ί&alpha\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; Whitehead.
\n&Sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\; &kappa\;έ&nu\;&tau\;&rho\;&omicron\; &alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;ή&sigmaf\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &sigma\;&kappa\;έ&psi\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &alpha\;&nu\;&alpha\;&pi\;&tau\;ύ&sigma\;&sigma\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &eta\; &Omicron\;&nu\;&tau\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&gamma\;ί&alpha\; &Mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&mu\;ό&rho\;&phi\;&omega\;&sigma\;&eta\;&sigmaf\;\, &sigma\;ύ&mu\;&phi\;&omega\;&nu\;&alpha\; &mu\;&epsilon\; &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &omicron\;&pi\;&omicron\;ί&alpha\; &tau\;&omicron\; &Epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\; &delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\; &delta\;&epsilon\;&delta\;&omicron\;&mu\;έ&nu\;&omicron\; &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;ά &gamma\;&epsilon\;&nu\;&nu\;ά&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&sigma\;&chi\;&eta\;&mu\;&alpha\;&tau\;ί&zeta\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &delta\;&iota\;&alpha\;&rho\;&kappa\;ώ&sigmaf\;\, &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &epsilon\;&delta\;ώ &alpha\;&nu\;&alpha\;&delta\;ύ&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &eta\; &Pi\;&omicron\;&iota\;&eta\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Kappa\;ό&sigma\;&mu\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &omega\;&sigmaf\; &Kappa\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&mu\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &Pi\;&omicron\;ί&eta\;&sigma\;&eta\;\, &delta\;&eta\;&lambda\;&alpha\;&delta\;ή &omega\;&sigmaf\; &eta\; ί&delta\;&iota\;&alpha\; &eta\; &delta\;&eta\;&mu\;&iota\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&rho\;&gamma\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &pi\;&rho\;ά&xi\;&eta\; &mu\;&epsilon\; &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &omicron\;&pi\;&omicron\;ί&alpha\; &eta\; &pi\;&rho\;&alpha\;&gamma\;&mu\;&alpha\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\; &mu\;&omicron\;&rho\;&phi\;&omicron\;&pi\;&omicron\;&iota\;&epsilon\;ί&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;&omicron\;-&epsilon\;&kappa\;&delta\;&eta\;&lambda\;ώ&nu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\;. &Eta\; &pi\;&omicron\;&iota\;&eta\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\; &alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;ή &pi\;&eta\;&gamma\;ά&zeta\;&epsilon\;&iota\; &alpha\;&pi\;ό &tau\;&eta\; &delta\;&upsilon\;&nu\;&alpha\;&mu\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &sigma\;&chi\;έ&sigma\;&eta\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &Alpha\;&beta\;ύ&sigma\;&sigma\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;\, &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Mu\;&eta\;&delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\;ό&sigmaf\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Pi\;&alpha\;&nu\;&tau\;ό&sigmaf\;\, &kappa\;&alpha\;&theta\;ώ&sigmaf\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Chi\;ά&omicron\;&upsilon\;&sigmaf\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &Tau\;ά&xi\;&eta\;&sigmaf\;\, ό&pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &tau\;&omicron\; &Mu\;&eta\;&delta\;έ&nu\; &delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &sigma\;&eta\;&mu\;&alpha\;ί&nu\;&epsilon\;&iota\; &alpha\;&nu\;&upsilon\;&pi\;&alpha\;&rho\;&xi\;ί&alpha\; &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;ά &delta\;&eta\;&mu\;&iota\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&rho\;&gamma\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &delta\;&upsilon\;&nu\;&alpha\;&tau\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\;\, έ&nu\;&alpha\; &pi\;&rho\;&omicron\;-&omicron\;&nu\;&tau\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&gamma\;&iota\;&kappa\;ό &beta\;ά&theta\;&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &alpha\;&pi\;ό &tau\;&omicron\; &omicron\;&pi\;&omicron\;ί&omicron\; &alpha\;&nu\;&alpha\;&delta\;ύ&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&omicron\; &Pi\;ά&nu\; &omega\;&sigmaf\; &sigma\;&upsilon\;&nu\;&epsilon\;&chi\;ή&sigmaf\; &phi\;&alpha\;&nu\;έ&rho\;&omega\;&sigma\;&eta\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\;\, &epsilon\;&nu\;ώ &tau\;&omicron\; &Chi\;ά&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\; &alpha\;&pi\;&lambda\;ή &alpha\;&tau\;&alpha\;&xi\;ί&alpha\; &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;ά &pi\;&epsilon\;&delta\;ί&omicron\; &Delta\;&eta\;&mu\;&iota\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&rho\;&gamma\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή&sigmaf\; &Alpha\;&beta\;&epsilon\;&beta\;&alpha\;&iota\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\;&sigmaf\;\, &eta\; &alpha\;&nu\;&omicron\;&iota\;&chi\;&tau\;ή &mu\;ή&tau\;&rho\;&alpha\; &tau\;&omega\;&nu\; &mu\;&omicron\;&rho\;&phi\;ώ&nu\;\, &alpha\;&pi\;ό &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &omicron\;&pi\;&omicron\;ί&alpha\; &alpha\;&nu\;&alpha\;&delta\;ύ&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &eta\; &Tau\;ά&xi\;&eta\; &omega\;&sigmaf\; &pi\;&rho\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&omega\;&rho\;&iota\;&nu\;ή &mu\;&omicron\;&rho\;&phi\;&omicron\;&pi\;&omicron\;ί&eta\;&sigma\;&eta\;\, &gamma\;&iota\;&alpha\; &nu\;&alpha\; &epsilon\;&pi\;&iota\;&sigma\;&tau\;&rho\;έ&psi\;&epsilon\;&iota\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &pi\;ά&lambda\;&iota\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\; &Chi\;ά&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &mu\;έ&sigma\;&alpha\; &sigma\;&epsilon\; έ&nu\;&alpha\;&nu\; &rho\;&upsilon\;&theta\;&mu\;&iota\;&kappa\;ό &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;&omicron\;-&upsilon\;&pi\;&epsilon\;&rho\;&beta\;&alpha\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ό &kappa\;ύ&kappa\;&lambda\;&omicron\; &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&mu\;ό&rho\;&phi\;&omega\;&sigma\;&eta\;&sigmaf\;\, &gamma\;&epsilon\;&gamma\;&omicron\;&nu\;ό&sigmaf\; &pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &sigma\;&upsilon\;&nu\;&alpha\;&nu\;&tau\;ά &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &eta\;&rho\;&alpha\;&kappa\;&lambda\;&epsilon\;ί&tau\;&epsilon\;&iota\;&alpha\; &alpha\;&rho\;&mu\;&omicron\;&nu\;ί&alpha\; &tau\;&omega\;&nu\; &alpha\;&nu\;&tau\;&iota\;&theta\;έ&tau\;&omega\;&nu\;\, &tau\;&omicron\; &delta\;&eta\;&mu\;&iota\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&rho\;&gamma\;&iota\;&kappa\;ό &chi\;ά&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Nu\;ί&tau\;&sigma\;&epsilon\;\, &tau\;&eta\; &zeta\;&omega\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &omicron\;&rho\;&mu\;ή &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Mu\;&pi\;&epsilon\;&rho\;&gamma\;&kappa\;&sigma\;ό&nu\;\, &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &pi\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&lambda\;&alpha\;&pi\;&lambda\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Nu\;&tau\;&epsilon\;&lambda\;έ&zeta\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&eta\; &sigma\;ύ&gamma\;&chi\;&rho\;&omicron\;&nu\;&eta\; &epsilon\;&pi\;&iota\;&sigma\;&tau\;&eta\;&mu\;&omicron\;&nu\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &kappa\;&alpha\;&tau\;&alpha\;&nu\;ό&eta\;&sigma\;&eta\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;&omicron\;-&omicron\;&rho\;&gamma\;ά&nu\;&omega\;&sigma\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; &Pi\;&rho\;ί&gamma\;&kappa\;&omicron\;&zeta\;&iota\;&nu\;.
\n&Mu\;έ&sigma\;&alpha\; &sigma\;&epsilon\; &alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;ή &tau\;&eta\; &delta\;&iota\;&alpha\;&delta\;&iota\;&kappa\;&alpha\;&sigma\;ί&alpha\;\, &omicron\; &Kappa\;ό&sigma\;&mu\;&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\; &mu\;&eta\;&chi\;&alpha\;&nu\;&iota\;&sigma\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ό &sigma\;ύ&sigma\;&tau\;&eta\;&mu\;&alpha\; &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;ά &alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;&omicron\;-&pi\;&omicron\;&iota\;&eta\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &delta\;&eta\;&mu\;&iota\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&rho\;&gamma\;ί&alpha\;\, &mu\;&iota\;&alpha\; &zeta\;&omega\;&nu\;&tau\;&alpha\;&nu\;ή &rho\;&omicron\;ή ό&pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &tau\;&omicron\; ά&mu\;&omicron\;&rho\;&phi\;&omicron\; &gamma\;ί&nu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &mu\;&omicron\;&rho\;&phi\;ή &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &eta\; &mu\;&omicron\;&rho\;&phi\;ή &epsilon\;&pi\;&iota\;&sigma\;&tau\;&rho\;έ&phi\;&epsilon\;&iota\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\; ά&mu\;&omicron\;&rho\;&phi\;&omicron\;\, &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; έ&tau\;&sigma\;&iota\; &eta\; ύ&pi\;&alpha\;&rho\;&xi\;&eta\; &epsilon\;&mu\;&phi\;&alpha\;&nu\;ί&zeta\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &omega\;&sigmaf\; &gamma\;&epsilon\;&nu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή\, &sigma\;&chi\;&epsilon\;&sigma\;&iota\;&alpha\;&kappa\;ή &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &pi\;&omicron\;&iota\;&eta\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή. &Eta\; &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;-&phi\;&iota\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &sigma\;&tau\;ά&sigma\;&eta\; &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&tau\;&omicron\;&pi\;ί&zeta\;&epsilon\;&iota\; &tau\;&omicron\; &kappa\;έ&nu\;&tau\;&rho\;&omicron\; &alpha\;&pi\;ό &tau\;&eta\; &gamma\;&nu\;ώ&sigma\;&eta\; &pi\;&rho\;&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &tau\;&eta\; &Beta\;&iota\;&omega\;&mu\;&alpha\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &Sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;ί&alpha\;\, ό&pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &eta\; &alpha\;&lambda\;ή&theta\;&epsilon\;&iota\;&alpha\; &delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\; &alpha\;&pi\;&lambda\;ώ&sigmaf\; &epsilon\;&nu\;&nu\;&omicron\;&iota\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&gamma\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;ά &epsilon\;&mu\;&pi\;&epsilon\;&iota\;&rho\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &sigma\;&upsilon\;&mu\;&mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&omicron\;&chi\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή\, &mu\;&iota\;&alpha\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&tau\;ά&sigma\;&tau\;&alpha\;&sigma\;&eta\; &sigma\;&upsilon\;&nu\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\;&iota\;&sigma\;&mu\;&omicron\;ύ &mu\;&epsilon\; &tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; &rho\;&upsilon\;&theta\;&mu\;ό &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &kappa\;ό&sigma\;&mu\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;\, &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &epsilon\;&delta\;ώ &epsilon\;&mu\;&phi\;&alpha\;&nu\;ί&zeta\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &eta\; &Upsilon\;&pi\;έ&rho\;&beta\;&alpha\;&sigma\;&eta\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &Gamma\;&lambda\;ώ&sigma\;&sigma\;&alpha\;&sigmaf\;\, &kappa\;&alpha\;&theta\;ώ&sigmaf\; &eta\; &alpha\;&lambda\;ή&theta\;&epsilon\;&iota\;&alpha\; &delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &mu\;&pi\;&omicron\;&rho\;&epsilon\;ί &nu\;&alpha\; &pi\;&epsilon\;&rho\;&iota\;&omicron\;&rho\;&iota\;&sigma\;&tau\;&epsilon\;ί &sigma\;&epsilon\; &omicron\;&rho\;&iota\;&sigma\;&mu\;&omicron\;ύ&sigmaf\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &delta\;ό&gamma\;&mu\;&alpha\;&tau\;&alpha\; &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;ά &beta\;&iota\;ώ&nu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &omega\;&sigmaf\; ά&mu\;&epsilon\;&sigma\;&eta\; &pi\;&alpha\;&rho\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&sigma\;ί&alpha\;\, ό&pi\;&omega\;&sigmaf\; &delta\;&iota\;&alpha\;&phi\;&alpha\;ί&nu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; &Sigma\;&omega\;&kappa\;&rho\;ά&tau\;&eta\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&eta\; &phi\;&iota\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;ί&alpha\; &omega\;&sigmaf\; &tau\;&rho\;ό&pi\;&omicron\; &zeta\;&omega\;ή&sigmaf\;\, &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&sigmaf\; &Sigma\;&tau\;&omega\;&iota\;&kappa\;&omicron\;ύ&sigmaf\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &tau\;έ&chi\;&nu\;&eta\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &beta\;ί&omicron\;&upsilon\;\, &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; &Zeta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&eta\; &mu\;&eta\;-&epsilon\;&nu\;&nu\;&omicron\;&iota\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&gamma\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &epsilon\;&pi\;ί&gamma\;&nu\;&omega\;&sigma\;&eta\;\, &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; Wittgenstein &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&alpha\; ό&rho\;&iota\;&alpha\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &gamma\;&lambda\;ώ&sigma\;&sigma\;&alpha\;&sigmaf\;\, &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; Heidegger ό&pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &eta\; &sigma\;&kappa\;έ&psi\;&eta\; &pi\;&lambda\;&eta\;&sigma\;&iota\;ά&zeta\;&epsilon\;&iota\; &tau\;&eta\; &sigma\;&iota\;&omega\;&pi\;ή &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\;. &Eta\; &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;-&phi\;&iota\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;ί&alpha\;\, &epsilon\;&pi\;&omicron\;&mu\;έ&nu\;&omega\;&sigmaf\;\, &delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &sigma\;&upsilon\;&gamma\;&kappa\;&rho\;&omicron\;&tau\;&epsilon\;ί &kappa\;&lambda\;&epsilon\;&iota\;&sigma\;&tau\;ό &sigma\;ύ&sigma\;&tau\;&eta\;&mu\;&alpha\; &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;ά έ&nu\;&alpha\;&nu\; &Alpha\;&nu\;&omicron\;&iota\;&chi\;&tau\;ό &Omicron\;&rho\;ί&zeta\;&omicron\;&nu\;&tau\;&alpha\;\, &mu\;&iota\;&alpha\; &delta\;&iota\;&alpha\;&rho\;&kappa\;ή &kappa\;ί&nu\;&eta\;&sigma\;&eta\; &pi\;&rho\;&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &tau\;&omicron\; Ά&pi\;&epsilon\;&iota\;&rho\;&omicron\; ό&pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &eta\; &epsilon\;&nu\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\; &delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\; &omicron\;&mu\;&omicron\;&iota\;&omicron\;&mu\;&omicron\;&rho\;&phi\;ί&alpha\; &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;ά &Kappa\;&alpha\;&theta\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &Epsilon\;&nu\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\;/&Pi\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&lambda\;&alpha\;&pi\;&lambda\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\;\, &delta\;&eta\;&lambda\;&alpha\;&delta\;ή &mu\;&iota\;&alpha\; &epsilon\;&nu\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\; &pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &epsilon\;&kappa\;&delta\;&eta\;&lambda\;ώ&nu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &mu\;έ&sigma\;&alpha\; &alpha\;&pi\;ό &tau\;&eta\; &delta\;&iota\;&alpha\;&phi\;&omicron\;&rho\;&omicron\;&pi\;&omicron\;ί&eta\;&sigma\;&eta\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &pi\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&lambda\;&alpha\;&pi\;&lambda\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\;\, &gamma\;&epsilon\;&gamma\;&omicron\;&nu\;ό&sigmaf\; &pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &sigma\;&upsilon\;&nu\;&delta\;έ&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &mu\;&epsilon\; &tau\;&eta\; &sigma\;ύ&mu\;&pi\;&tau\;&omega\;&sigma\;&eta\; &tau\;&omega\;&nu\; &alpha\;&nu\;&tau\;&iota\;&theta\;έ&tau\;&omega\;&nu\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; &Nu\;&iota\;&kappa\;ό&lambda\;&alpha\;&omicron\; &Kappa\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&zeta\;&alpha\;&nu\;ό\, &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &epsilon\;&xi\;&epsilon\;&lambda\;&iota\;&kappa\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &epsilon\;&nu\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; Teilhard de \;Chardin\, &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &pi\;&omicron\;&lambda\;ύ&pi\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&kappa\;&eta\; &sigma\;&kappa\;έ&psi\;&eta\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; Morin\, &tau\;&eta\; &delta\;&eta\;&mu\;&iota\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&rho\;&gamma\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &phi\;&alpha\;&nu\;&tau\;&alpha\;&sigma\;&iota\;&alpha\;&kappa\;ή &theta\;έ&sigma\;&mu\;&iota\;&sigma\;&eta\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; Castoriadis &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&eta\; &phi\;&iota\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;ί&alpha\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &pi\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&lambda\;&alpha\;&pi\;&lambda\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\;&sigmaf\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; Deleuze.
\n&Sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\; &beta\;&alpha\;&theta\;ύ&tau\;&epsilon\;&rho\;&omicron\; &epsilon\;&pi\;ί&pi\;&epsilon\;&delta\;&omicron\;\, &eta\; &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;-&phi\;&iota\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;ί&alpha\; &omicron\;&delta\;&eta\;&gamma\;&epsilon\;ί &sigma\;&tau\;&eta\; &Sigma\;&iota\;&omega\;&pi\;&eta\;&lambda\;ή &Epsilon\;&pi\;ί&gamma\;&nu\;&omega\;&sigma\;&eta\;\, ό&pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &eta\; &gamma\;&nu\;ώ&sigma\;&eta\; &delta\;&epsilon\;&nu\; &epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\; &pi\;&lambda\;έ&omicron\;&nu\; &alpha\;&nu\;&alpha\;&lambda\;&upsilon\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &alpha\;&lambda\;&lambda\;ά &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&chi\;&alpha\;&sigma\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &pi\;&alpha\;&rho\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&sigma\;ί&alpha\; &mu\;έ&sigma\;&alpha\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\; &Mu\;&upsilon\;&sigma\;&tau\;ή&rho\;&iota\;&omicron\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\;\, &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &epsilon\;&delta\;ώ &eta\; &phi\;&iota\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;ί&alpha\; &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&tau\;&rho\;έ&pi\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &sigma\;&epsilon\; &sigma\;&tau\;ά&sigma\;&eta\; &delta\;έ&omicron\;&upsilon\;&sigmaf\; &alpha\;&pi\;έ&nu\;&alpha\;&nu\;&tau\;&iota\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\; ά&rho\;&rho\;&eta\;&tau\;&omicron\;\, ό&pi\;&omega\;&sigmaf\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; Pascal &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&sigmaf\; &lambda\;ό&gamma\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&sigmaf\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&rho\;&delta\;&iota\;ά&sigmaf\;\, &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; Meister Eckhart &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &epsilon\;&sigma\;&omega\;&tau\;&epsilon\;&rho\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &sigma\;&iota\;&omega\;&pi\;ή\, &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; Levinas &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&omicron\; ά&pi\;&epsilon\;&iota\;&rho\;&omicron\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; Ά&lambda\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;\, &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\;&nu\; Blanchot &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&omicron\; ό&rho\;&iota\;&omicron\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &gamma\;&lambda\;ώ&sigma\;&sigma\;&alpha\;&sigmaf\;. Έ&tau\;&sigma\;&iota\;\, &eta\; &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;-&phi\;&iota\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &sigma\;&kappa\;έ&psi\;&eta\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Kappa\;&alpha\;&rho\;&pi\;&omicron\;ύ&zeta\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &alpha\;&nu\;&alpha\;&delta\;ύ&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &omega\;&sigmaf\; &omicron\;&nu\;&tau\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&omicron\;&gamma\;ί&alpha\; &delta\;&eta\;&mu\;&iota\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&rho\;&gamma\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή&sigmaf\; &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&mu\;ό&rho\;&phi\;&omega\;&sigma\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &tau\;&alpha\;&upsilon\;&tau\;ό&chi\;&rho\;&omicron\;&nu\;&alpha\; &omega\;&sigmaf\; &upsilon\;&pi\;&alpha\;&rho\;&xi\;&iota\;&alpha\;&kappa\;ό&sigmaf\; &tau\;&rho\;ό&pi\;&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &zeta\;&omega\;ή&sigmaf\;\, ό&pi\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &eta\; &pi\;&rho\;&alpha\;&gamma\;&mu\;&alpha\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\; &epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\; &alpha\;&nu\;&omicron\;&iota\;&chi\;&tau\;ή\, &sigma\;&chi\;&epsilon\;&sigma\;&iota\;&alpha\;&kappa\;ή &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &pi\;&omicron\;&iota\;&eta\;&tau\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή\, &eta\; &gamma\;&nu\;ώ&sigma\;&eta\; &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&mu\;&omicron\;&rho\;&phi\;ώ&nu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &sigma\;&epsilon\; &sigma\;&omicron\;&phi\;ί&alpha\;\, &eta\; &epsilon\;&nu\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\; &phi\;&alpha\;&nu\;&epsilon\;&rho\;ώ&nu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &omega\;&sigmaf\; &pi\;&omicron\;&lambda\;&lambda\;&alpha\;&pi\;&lambda\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\;\, &kappa\;&alpha\;&iota\; &omicron\; ά&nu\;&theta\;&rho\;&omega\;&pi\;&omicron\;&sigmaf\; &kappa\;&alpha\;&lambda\;&epsilon\;ί&tau\;&alpha\;&iota\; &nu\;&alpha\; &mu\;&epsilon\;&tau\;έ&chi\;&epsilon\;&iota\; &sigma\;&upsilon\;&nu\;&epsilon\;&iota\;&delta\;&eta\;&tau\;ά &sigma\;&tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &kappa\;&omicron\;&sigma\;&mu\;&iota\;&kappa\;ή &delta\;&iota\;&alpha\;&delta\;&iota\;&kappa\;&alpha\;&sigma\;ί&alpha\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; &delta\;&eta\;&mu\;&iota\;&omicron\;&upsilon\;&rho\;&gamma\;ί&alpha\;&sigmaf\;\, &beta\;&iota\;ώ&nu\;&omicron\;&nu\;&tau\;&alpha\;&sigmaf\; &tau\;&eta\;&nu\; &Alpha\;&nu\;&omicron\;&iota\;&chi\;&tau\;ή &Omicron\;&lambda\;ό&tau\;&eta\;&tau\;&alpha\; &omega\;&sigmaf\; &alpha\;&delta\;&iota\;ά&kappa\;&omicron\;&pi\;&eta\; &kappa\;ί&nu\;&eta\;&sigma\;&eta\; &tau\;&omicron\;&upsilon\; &Epsilon\;ί&nu\;&alpha\;&iota\; &mu\;έ&sigma\;&alpha\; &sigma\;&tau\;&omicron\; ά&pi\;&epsilon\;&iota\;&rho\;&omicron\; &mu\;&upsilon\;&sigma\;&tau\;ή&rho\;&iota\;&omicron\; &tau\;&eta\;&sigmaf\; ύ&pi\;&alpha\;&rho\;&xi\;&eta\;&sigmaf\;.
ORGANIZER;CN=Abhijith Jose: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260422T180000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260715T170000 SUMMARY:Representations in Minds\, Brains\, and AI UID:20260503T142942Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:This series was prompted by a recent wave of fascinating new work on the topic of representations. We are honored and happy that so many authors agreed to participate and we hope to provide a platform for further interdisciplinary discussion. Most papers are already available and you can find links here: \;https://www.pe.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/philosophie/ii/bewusstsein/lehre.html.en \;
Schedule
22 April\, \;Rosa Cao \;(Stanford): The Scientist in the Machine \;(paper forthcoming)
29 April\, \;Ken Aizawa \;(Rutgers): \;The Evidence for Representation \;
06 May\, \;Corey Maley \;(Purdue): \;Structural Representation is Analog Representation
13 May\, \;Kevin J. Mitchell \;(Dublin): \;The Origins of Meaning: From Pragmatic Control Signals to Semantic Representation
20 May\, \;Eric Hochstein \;(Victoria\, Canada)): \;Neural Representations as Scientific Posits and Metaphysical Entities
10 June\, \;Manolo Martí\;nez \;(Barcelona): \;The Information-Processing Perspective on Representation
17 June\, \;John Krakauer \;(Johns Hopkins/Champalimaud Foundation) &\; \;Bill Ramsey \;(Nevada\, Las Vegas): \;Mental Representation without Neural Representation
24 June\, \;Nina Poth \;(Radboud\, Nijmegen) &\; \;Annika Schuster \;(Dortmund): \;Mental\, Scientific\, and Artificial Representations
01 July\, \;Lotem Elber-Dorozko \;(Jerusalem) &\; \;Devin Gouvê\;a \;(Holy Cross): \;"Neural Representation" is not a Defective Concept
08 July\, \;Zina B. Ward \;(Florida State): \;Directive Representation and the Job Description Challenge
15 July\, \;Krzysztof Dolega \;(Ruhr-University Bochum): The Gloss on the Machine: Egan's Representations in Mechanistic Explanation \;(paper forthcoming)
All sessions will be on Zoom:
https://ruhr-uni-bochum.zoom-x.de/j/64692924755?pwd=803uh1OEPBkBrEONeL87zJFudGjlw7.1 \; \;
Meeting-ID: 646 9292 4755 | Passwort: 531564
Everybody interested is welcome!
Women have long contributed to the development of theology and philosophy\, yet their voices have often been marginalized\, mediated through restrictive frameworks\, or silenced altogether. At the same time\, women have consistently found innovative means of expression &mdash\; from letters\, diaries\, and poetry to public lectures\, activism\, and today&rsquo\;s digital platforms &mdash\; to engage in theological and philosophical discourse.
This seminar approaches communication not only as a neutral means of expression\, but also as a form of power: the choice of medium\, style\, and platform can grant authority\, negotiate legitimacy\, or challenge dominant structures. From early modern women writing in private correspondence to contemporary digital influencers shaping theological debates\, the act of communication becomes a way to establish intellectual presence\, resist exclusion\, rethink society\, or reshape normative traditions.
The rise of digital culture has introduced new dynamics. Social media\, for example\, can amplify women&rsquo\;s perspectives and create alternative networks of recognition\, while also enabling ideologically charged phenomena &mdash\; such as the &ldquo\;tradwife&rdquo\; movement &mdash\; that recast debates about gender\, religion\, and philosophy. Situating such case studies within longer histories of women&rsquo\;s communicative practices allows us to explore continuities\, ruptures\, and tensions between tradition\, innovation\, and the struggle for authority.
The seminar thus invites critical reflections on the interplay of gender\, communication\, and power\, considering both historical trajectories and contemporary challenges. Contributions may address individual thinkers\, broader cultural movements\, or theoretical frameworks that illuminate how female voices have engaged with and transformed theological and philosophical discourse.
28.04.2026\, 4.30-6pm (Paris time): 2 lectures
\nFloris Verhaart &ndash\; Johanna Dorothea Lindenaer: Memoirist\, Translator\, and Religious Polemicist
\nMargaret Matthews &ndash\; Rhetoric\, Method\, and Genre in Gabrielle Suchon&rsquo\;s Treatise on Ethics and Politics
\n\n05.05.2026\, 4.30-6pm (Paris time): 2 lectures
\nElodie Pinel &ndash\; Vernacular Theology and Authority: Marguerite Porete\, Mechthild of Magdeburg\, Hadewijch of Antwerp
\nLila Braunschweig &ndash\; A Voice of One&rsquo\;s Own: Philosophizing as Feminized Subjects (Impostor Syndrome &\; Authority)
\n\n12.05.2026\, 4.30-6pm (Paris time): 2 lectures
\nElżbieta Filipow &ndash\; Women&rsquo\;s Writing of Harriet Taylor Mill and its Various Modes of Self-expression
\nShamoni Sarkar &ndash\; Karoline von Gü\;nderrode: Fragmentation\, Philosophy\, and Early German Romanticism
\n\n19.05.2026\, 4.30-6pm (Paris time): 2 lectures
\nMaxim Demin &ndash\; Philosophy\, God-Seeking\, and Developmental Psychology: Stolitsa and Volkovich in Late Imperial Russia
\nPatricia Guevara Wozniak &ndash\; The Metaphysical Tenacity of Barbara Skarga &ndash\; Metaphysics in Totalitarianism
\n\n02.06.2026\, 4.30-6pm (Paris time): 2 lectures
\nJake Nicholas Brooks &ndash\; Autonomy Beyond Kant: Butler\, Tronto\, and Interdependence
\nKaimé\; Guerrero Valencia &ndash\; Intervening Assemblages of Trans-formation/Action: Beatriz Nascimento (1942-1995)
\n\n09.06.2026\, 4.30-6pm (Paris time): 2 lectures
\nMarianne Najm Abou-Jaoude &ndash\; Beneficent Communication as Power
\nRoula Azar Douglas &ndash\; Women&rsquo\;s Digital Voices and the Reconfiguration of Public Debate
\n\nFor further information about the talks and the speakers\, please visit the webpage: \;
Le Ré\;seau Arendtien Francophone\, cré\;é\; en 2024\, vise à\; favoriser une synergie entre celles et ceux qui\, des amateurs aux chercheuses\, fré\;quentent la pensé\;e de Hannah Arendt. Dans cette optique\, nous cherchons à\; mettre en place un rendez-vous ré\;gulier pour en discuter les diffé\;rents interpré\;tations et aspects.
\nDu fait de l&rsquo\;é\;tendue de la francophonie\, ces sé\;minaires auront lieu en ligne. Leur principe sera le suivant : les participant-e-s auront tous et toutes pré\;alablement lu un article ou un chapitre ré\;cent\, lequel sera pré\;senté\; trè\;s rapidement par souci de prioriser les é\;changes (10 minutes) par son autrice ou auteur. À\; partir de celui-ci\, un-e membre du ré\;seau ouvrira (5 min) à\; un dé\;bat plus large afin de discuter\, outre l&rsquo\;article\, les diffé\;rents interpré\;tations et aspects de l&rsquo\;&oelig\;uvre d&rsquo\;Arendt (1h30).
\nProgramme 2026\nEn 2026\, nous proposons quatre sé\;ances ordinaires du sé\;minaire et une sé\;ance spé\;ciale : «\; Arendt et la science é\;conomique »\;\, «\; Arendt et le travail »\;\, «\; Liberté\;\, volonté\;\, politique »\;\, «\; Arendt et la violence »\;\, «\; Philosophie\, é\;ducation et politique »\;.
\nLe sé\;minaire est ouvert à\; toutes et tous sans inscription pré\;alable \; n&rsquo\;hé\;sitez pas à\; venir y assister et y participer. Les articles et textes discuté\;s sont disponibles sur le site du RAF. N&rsquo\;hé\;sitez pas non plus à\; nous contacter pour toute demande d&rsquo\;information complé\;mentaire.
\nLe RAF ?\nLe Ré\;seau Arendtien Francophone (RAF) se veut un espace divers et pluriel\, rassemblant une communauté\; de doctorant-e-s\, enseignant-e-s\, chercheurs/ses\, intellectuel-le-s et toute personne inté\;ressé\;e ou engagé\;e dans l'é\;tude et la diffusion de la pensé\;e d'Hannah Arendt en France et le monde francophone. À\; travers cette plateforme\, nous souhaitons favoriser les é\;changes intellectuels\, offrir une visibilité\; accrue aux travaux de recherche et cré\;er des liens solides entre francophones s'inté\;ressant à\; et puisant dans l'&oelig\;uvre de cette autrice majeure du XXe siè\;cle.
\nOutre l&rsquo\;organisation de ce sé\;minaire et d'é\;vè\;nements acadé\;miques lié\;s à\; la pensé\;e d'Arendt\, le ré\;seau actualise continuellement un site web qui met à\; disposition : une bibliographie des textes de langue franç\;aise consacré\;s à\; Arendt ou la mobilisant\, un annuaire des membres du ré\;seau\, un agenda des activité\;s francophones qui lui sont dé\;dié\;es et une lettre d'information mensuelle.
\nN'hé\;sitez pas à\; rejoindre le ré\;seau ou à\; nous contacter pour rejoindre l&rsquo\;é\;quipe d&rsquo\;animation !
\n ORGANIZER;CN="Rémi Zanni": METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20260501T140000 DTEND;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20260501T153000 SUMMARY:Democracy and AI UID:20260503T142945Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Australia/Melbourne LOCATION:Monash Clayton Campus\, Melbourne\, Australia DESCRIPTION:Abstract: \;The question of what positive and negative effects AI might have on democracy requires understanding the situation in which democratic polities find themselves today. It is significant that the advent of AI in forms that can be powerfully applied in ways that affect democratic practices and institutions\, whether to enhance or endanger them\, occurs just as these practices and institutions have begun to appear more fragile\, even (in some eyes) less desirable\, than they have been since the persuasiveness of democracy\, both as concept and practice\, emerged from the Enlightenment.
\n \; \; \;There are numerous considerations in play in thinking about the interaction of AI and democracy\, most of them familiar: on the one hand negatives such as misinformation\, deep fakes\, electoral interference\, on the other hand positives such as participation\, fact-checking\, accountability and transparency\, but I will focus on two considerations that lie at the base of much of these. One is the role of education in dealing with the &lsquo\;epistemic crisis&rsquo\; threatened to a key desideratum in democratic process\, viz. reliability of information. The other is the question of whether democracy itself can exert influence over AI development and use.\n \; \; These are two different challenges in that whereas the first (education and the epistemic crisis) offers a route to countering negative effects of AI on democracy\, the second &ndash\; given that the speed of AI developments is fuelled by private enterprise competition and the government support it gets because of both GDP and military effects of supremacy in the AI race &ndash\; offers grounds for great pessimism and worry. How democratic control can be exerted over technologies already capable of escaping and overthrowing democratic control is a major challenge for our time.\n \; \; \;Some of the relevant background to this discussion is to be found in AC Grayling \;For the People \;(Oneworld 2025) and in his previous books about democracy and constitutionality \;Democracy and its Crisis \;(2017) and \;The Good State \;(2020). \;\n\nJoin Zoom meeting:
\nhttps://monash.zoom.us/j/86351045263?pwd=1gHMLhmDnXiFJIV0Jl8s6GxhgBgylb.1 \;
\nMeeting ID: 863 5104 5263 // Passcode: 184791
ORGANIZER;CN=Sandra Leonie Field: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260501T080000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260501T080000 SUMMARY:Genocide and Democratic Theory (MANCEPT Workshop 2026) UID:20260503T142946Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:Convenors: Torsten Menge\, Tereza Hendl
\nAs Israel continues its genocide in Gaza and genocidal violence continues to be waged against the Rohingya in Myanmar\, Uyghurs in China\, the people of Sudan\, Ukraine\, Yemen and other places\, this calls for the re-examination of the basic contours of democratic theory. What are the implications for our thinking about democracy and democratic ideals when a genocide is perpetrated\, in the case of Israel\, by a regime that understands itself and is understood by many to be a democracy? What does it mean when genocidal violence is supported and facilitated in one way or another by democracies? When some genocides are sidelined\, minimized\, or denied by democratic publics or even by left movements that appeal to democratic ideals? How should this affect our analyses of democracy\, of its central commitments and tensions\, its values and authority\, its current crises and its futures? The goal of the workshop is to bring political philosophy and democratic theory into conversation with insights from genocide studies and other relevant fields.
\nGenocide has received relatively little attention from contemporary political philosophers (notable exceptions include contributions from Anne O&rsquo\;Byrne\, Mathias Thaler\, Larry May\, Claudia Card). Few contributions consider it from the perspective of democratic theory. The logic and practice of genocide is usually seen to be the antithesis of a presumed universalistic and egalitarian ethos of liberal democracy. Helpful starting points for addressing this theoretical disconnect include Mahmood Mamdani&rsquo\;s (2020) genealogy of political modernity. The political anthropologist argues that nation-states (first as settler democracies) are created from an ethnonationalist logic for which ethnic cleansing and genocide are\, if not inevitable\, always an option. This logic has led to ongoing cycles of political violence as nation-building necessarily creates permanent minorities. Genocide scholar Dirk Moses (2021) has argued that a liberal notion of permanent security\, which envisions the world to be secured from &ldquo\;enemies of humanity&rdquo\; in the name peace and self-determination\, has been used to justify civilian destruction and mass displacements. Malcom Bull (2006) has polemically argued that liberal just war theory&rsquo\;s consideration of &ldquo\;supreme emergencies&rdquo\; and humanitarian interventions in &ldquo\;outlaw states&rdquo\; have allowed for the liberal justification of mass violence against civilian populations. Sociologist Michael Mann (2004) has suggested that murderous ethnic cleanings are the &ldquo\;dark side of democracy\,&rdquo\; where the democratic ideal of rule by the people entwines the demos with the dominant ethnos. Philosopher Anne O&rsquo\;Byrne (2023) has emphasized the intricate tension between demos and genos\, the &ldquo\;empty form of democratic citizenship&rdquo\; and the need for a people&rsquo\;s reproduction over time and the creation of boundaries of belonging (which are attacked by genocidal violence). \;
\nFellow philosopher Melanie Altanian (2024) has observed that long-term genocide denialism serves to &ldquo\;consolidate relations of domination through epistemic means&rdquo\;\, with serious implications for the presumably egalitarian ethos of democracies. Indeed\, theorist of psychoanalysis Sarah El Bulbeisi (2026) argues that the suppression of the Palestinian experience of violence serves a social function\, especially in post-Holocaust Germany\, where it enables the construction of &ldquo\;a national narrative of atonement and moral righteousness&rdquo\; despite the country&rsquo\;s historical and continuous entanglements in racializing and colonial violence. Meanwhile\, these and other legacies of erasure and genocide denial have also significantly shaped scholarly debates. In response\, environmental humanities scholar and theorist of ecocide Darya Tsymbalyuk (2022) has highlighted that academia ought to re-center embodied and uncomfortable knowledges\, as its ongoing normalized detachment from the &ldquo\;wreck of reality&rdquo\; and lived experience reinforces hierarchies of knowledge&mdash\;and thereby arguably undermines the egalitarian character of democratic deliberation. Concerningly\, decolonial scholar Madina Tlostanova (2025) has observed that too often\, these hierarchies of knowledge reinforce the hierarchies of suffering\, fueling a binary either-or logic dividing the world into us and them\, which effectively enables various forms of exceptionalism that fuel genocides\, and in turn\, fail to uphold humanity and protection of life for all. \;
\nAgainst the backdrop of these persistent issues\, workshop contributions will confront genocidal aspects and tendencies of (or at least seeds in) central concepts of democratic theory and political philosophy\, such as peoplehood\, popular sovereignty\, majority rule\, national self-determination\, citizenship\, security\, and self-defense. How do seemingly emancipatory democratic ideals and rhetorics become intertwined with the large‑scale destruction of civilian life and social worlds? What does it mean when democratic publics authorize\, support\, tolerate\, or deny such genocidal violence? What are blind spots of global left\, decolonial and anticapitalist movements in recognizing and supporting victims of genocidal violence? How do colonial and imperial legacies shape who is removable\, killable\, and grievable? How does the so-called boundary problem of democratic theory relate to genocidal forms of boundary-drawing? How do anti-imperialist national movements avoid the pitfalls of postcolonial nationalism\, and simultaneously\, how can we better distinguish between the forms of ethnonationalism that drive genocides and the political forms of nationalism that resist the genocidal erasure and annihilation of a people? How do we imagine genuinely non-genocidal forms of political life (building on\, for example\, Wendy Brown&rsquo\;s notion of &ldquo\;reparative democracy&rdquo\; or Mamdani&rsquo\;s project of &ldquo\;decolonizing political community&rdquo\;)? And which approaches to knowledge making and political deliberation can best nurture such communities and support livable and equitable conditions across the world?
\nThe discussions in the workshop are meant to be exploratory and generative. The workshop is open to contributions from various disciplines and philosophical traditions\, and welcomes systematic and historical contributions and discussions of particular case studies\, specific theoretical approaches\, or individual thinkers. \;
\nPlease send abstracts of 300-500 words to \;gdt.mancept2026@protonmail.com. The deadline is May 1\, 2026. We will encourage participants to share a draft of their thoughts in some form (short paper\, handout\, etc.) by Aug. 1\, if feasible. \;
\nThe workshop will be held in person on Sept. 2-4\, 2026 as part of the annual MANCEPT Workshops. Please visit the \;conference website \;for information about costs and registration. \;MANCEPT provides a limited number of bursaries to participants on the basis of need. \;
\nIf you have any questions\, please feel free to contact us directly (torsten.menge@northwestern.edu).
ORGANIZER;CN=Torsten Menge;CN=Tereza Hendl: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260501T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260501T090000 SUMMARY:MANCEPT Workshop 2026 - Just Profit UID:20260503T142947Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:This workshop explores the relevance of a philosophical and political theoretical debate on just profit. \;Most wealth is generated through corporate profit making. Together with inheritances the corporate machine and its financialization seem to be mainly responsible for the growing concentration of wealth. Against this backdrop\, it is somewhat surprising that philosophical and political theoretical debates have largely focused on limiting wealth in general and on inheritance taxation\, but not so much on a regulation of profits. \;
\nOne possible explanation lies in a somewhat unquestioned acceptance of the classical liberal framing of profits. According to this framing it is reasonable to regulate profits as little as possible in order to stimulate economic activity and growth\, which will ultimately benefit society as a whole. Another argument is the fear of capital flight with the potential of serious disruption of economic functionalities and great welfare losses. \;
\nAt the same time\, the historical failure of social democratic and liberal socialist transformations in the second half of the 20thcentury seems to be connected to a lack of profit regulation. An important case in point is the failing of the implementation of the Meidner plan in Sweden due to strong unregulated profit concentration and a corresponding political power structure.
\nWe aim to promote interdisciplinary dialogue across political philosophy\, political theory\, and critical social theory. \;
\nPossible themes include (but are not limited to): \;
\nSubmission Guidelines:
\nUp to 15 speakers will be selected for the workshop. Each speaker will be given approximately 30 minutes to speak\, followed by 30 minutes for Q&\;A.
\nBursaries are available to help cover the conference registration fee\, and participants are encouraged to apply if needed.
\nThe workshop will take place as part of the MANCEPT Workshops in Political Theory at the University of Manchester (September 2-4\, 2026).
\nFor the panel description and details see also: https://research.manchester.ac.uk/en/activities/just-profit/
ORGANIZER;CN=Stefan Gosepath;CN="Christian Neuhäuser";CN=Laura Opolka: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260501T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260501T090000 SUMMARY:The Aftermath of Being and Time (1927-1932)/ Die Nachwirkungen von Sein und Zeit (1927-1932) UID:20260503T142948Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:Upon the appearance of Being and Time in 1927\, Martin Heidegger found himself suddenly transformed from a provincial university lecturer &ndash\; whispered about as "the hidden king of philosophy" &ndash\; to an internationally recognised figurehead of a new kind of thinking.
From then\, until he publically aligned himself with National Socialism in 1933\, Heidegger's thinking underwent major development.
ECHS invites abstracts for papers which seek to illuminate important aspects of Heidegger's thinking between those two points in time.
\nPossible topics include but are not limited to:
\n&ndash\; Discussion of the so-called "Kant Buch" (Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics)
\n&ndash\; The 1929 lecture series The Fundamental Concepts of Metaphysics: World - Finitude - Solitude
\n&ndash\; The Beginning of Western Philosophy (GA 35)
\nEach presentation of a paper should be between 30-45 minutes\, and the time allotted to each is 60 minutes. Please submit a title\, short summary\, and short biographical information before 1st May\, 2026.
\nContact: Alfred Denker at \;alfred.denker@yahoo.com \;or The European Centre for Heidegger Studies at \; \;info@europeancentreforheideggerstudies.org.
\nhttp://europeancentreforheideggerstudies.org ORGANIZER;CN=Alfred Denker;CN=Louise Shale: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260501T170000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260501T170000 SUMMARY:MANCEPT Workshop - Epistemic Injustice and Backlash UID:20260503T142949Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:MANCEPT Workshop - Epistemic Injustice and Backlash: Call for Abstracts \; Recent years have been characterized by significant backlash to progressive social movements and social changes such as the #MeToo movement\, the Black Lives Matter movement\, and the increased visibility of trans people in public life. Dimensions to this backlash include the electoral &ndash\; i.e.\, the rise of far-right political parties\; the legal &ndash\; legislation\, executive orders and judicial decisions e.g. overturning rights to abortion and gender-affirming healthcare\, banning affirmative action and DEI initiatives\, and excluding trans people from participation in sport\; and the necropolitical &ndash\; e.g. the misogynistic murder of René\;e Good and the rising tide of anti-trans violence. A further important dimension to this backlash is the epistemic &ndash\; e.g. the widespread repudiation of the testimonies of Christine Blasey Ford and Amber Heard\, the ridiculing of slogans such as &lsquo\;defund the police&rsquo\;\, and the growing dissemination of myths and disinformation concerning trans people. This dimension to the backlash has recently begun to receive philosophical attention\, with aspects of it being theorized variously as 'hermeneutical backlash' (George &\; Goguen 2021)\, 'hermeneutical sabotage' (Edgoose 2024)\, and 'hermeneutical disarmament' (Morgan 2025) &ndash\; all phenomena thought either to constitute or to result in epistemic injustices. It has also been argued that previously proposed strategies for preventing epistemic injustices are frequently ineffective when confronted by backlash\, prompting a search for other strategies which might be pursued more effectively towards this end (Clanchy forthcoming). Much work on epistemic injustice and backlash remains to be done\, however &ndash\; especially in light of the epistemic injustice literature&rsquo\;s &lsquo\;methodological commitment to the primacy of the nonideal&rsquo\; (Medina 2013: 11). The aim of this workshop is to provide a space for the development of such work.
We invite submissions of abstracts of up to 500 words to a MANCEPT workshop on this topic. Abstracts should be submitted by \;May 1st \;and should be sent to \;han.edgoose@glasgow.ac.uk
Questions that papers may address include\, but are not limited to:
&bull\;How is the epistemic dimension related to other dimensions of backlash?
&bull\;To what kinds of epistemic injustice does backlash give rise? What strategies can be most effectively pursued to prevent epistemic injustices in times of backlash? What kinds of epistemic agency can be exercised by members of targeted groups (Pohlhaus 2020)?
&bull\;Does 'epistemic injustice' (Fricker 2007) in fact provide an adequate framework for thinking about these issues? What about these issues might this framework miss or distort but the frameworks provided by e.g. 'epistemic oppression' (Dotson 2014) or 'epistemologies of ignorance' (Mills 2007) capture?
&bull\;How should previous work on epistemic injustice and e.g. the #MeToo movement (e.g. Jackson 2018) or the Black Lives Matter movement (e.g. Anderson 2017) be developed or rethought in light of the current backlash?
&bull\;What practical lessons can be drawn for the present moment from a study of the epistemic dimension of previous backlashes (e.g. Faludi 1991)?
&bull\;Who bears responsibility\, in both backward- and forward-looking senses (Young 2011)\, for the epistemic dimension of backlash?
&bull\;How can thinking about epistemic injustice and backlash inform methodological debates concerning the relative merits of ideal and nonideal theory? \; The panel will take place in-person at the University of Manchester\, between September 2nd \;and September 4th \;2026. Further details about the MANCEPT workshops can be
found here: \;MANCEPT Workshops 2026 - Research Explorer The University of Manchester \; Han Edgoose and Nick Clanchy (organisers) \;
Political philosophy has long privileged public speech and institutional political discourse as central sites of analysis. Increasingly\, however\, attention has shifted toward the normative dimensions of ordinary language use and the dynamics of linguistic change in non-ideal social contexts.
Language is a social practice through which shared forms of understanding\, coordination\, and mutual orientation are sustained over time. Shifts in linguistic conventions can reshape how individuals relate to one another\, influence how social differences are marked or obscured\, and affect patterns of inclusion within pluralistic and diverse societies. The ways in which linguistic expressions are used\, repeated\, and taken up also structure expectations about what can be said and contribute to the reinforcement or attenuation of prejudices and stereotypes. In this sense\, language plays a constitutive role in shaping the normative environment in which social and political life unfolds.
This constitutive role gives rise to a range of philosophical questions concerning the emergence\, stability\, and contestation of norms governing language use. It invites reflection on how such norms are maintained over time and on the extent to which participants in shared linguistic practices are answerable to one another for their contributions to evolving communicative environments.
This panel seeks to bring together normative and descriptive perspectives on how patterns of language use emerge\, stabilize\, and transform across different settings. It therefore welcomes contributions that offer conceptual\, normative\, or empirically informed philosophical analyses of language as a social practice. These include\, but are not limited to\, the following areas:
&bull\; language in social construction
&bull\; the relationship between language use and social coordination
&bull\; feminist philosophy of language
&bull\; communicative responsibilities
&bull\; normative views on stereotyping and discrimination in communication
&bull\; social/political speech and social norm change
&bull\; linguistic injustice
&bull\; the distribution and justification of normative expectations across different speakers and contexts
&bull\; methodological issues in language and analytic ideology critique
&bull\; counterspeech
To apply\, please send a 500 words anonymized abstract at: martina.rosola@gmail.com
\nApplication deadline: May\, 2nd
\nNotification of acceptance: May\, 10th (to allow selected speakers to possibly apply for the conference fee waiver bursary)
ORGANIZER;CN=Martina Rosola;CN=Corrado Fumagalli: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260501T234500 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260501T234500 SUMMARY:The Cavendish's Collective's Fourth Annual Virtual Workshop UID:20260503T142951Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:The Cavendish Collective Virtual Workshop:
Call for Submissions
Submission Deadline: May 1\, 2026
\nThe Cavendish Collective is a virtual reading group dedicated to investigating the philosophical writings of Margaret Cavendish\, Duchess of Newcastle (1623-1673). Our participants are primarily early career scholars working on Margaret Cavendish and adjacent authors in the early modern period. We are excited to host our fourth annual virtual workshop to promote collaboration among researchers interested in the philosophical writings of Margaret Cavendish.
\nThe event will be held virtually on \;Saturday\, August 1\, 2026 \;and will consist of a series of presentations arranged thematically by topic. Each participant will receive 20 minutes of presentation time followed by 20 minutes of discussion. Since research on Margaret Cavendish is expansive and interdisciplinary\, we encourage submissions from researchers in any discipline. All topics relevant to Cavendish&rsquo\;s writings are welcome\, including but not limited to:
\nAffect\, Emotion\, and Passion
Epistemology
Fame and Fortune
Feminism
Gender and Queerness
Genre and Literary Forms
History of Science
Imagination and Fancy
Materialism
Metaphysics
Mind and Mentality
Religion
Social and Political Philosophy
Women&rsquo\;s Writings
We welcome submissions from researchers at any career stage. We ask that interested participants submit either abstracts of around 150-300 words or papers of about 2800-3000 words for review. To send your submission\, please use the Google form available on our website:
https://thecavendishcollective.weebly.com/workshop2026.html
The deadline for submissions is \;May 1\, 2026\, and presenters will be notified of acceptance by the end of the month. Upon acceptance\, we ask that participants prepare papers of about 2800-3000 words in length (or slides suitable for 20 minute presentations).
\nWe look forward to hearing from you! To register for the event\, please submit your e-mail address using the registration form on our website. Please direct any questions to: \;thecavendishcollective@gmail.com
\nA full schedule for the event will be posted after the submission deadline has passed.
ORGANIZER;CN=Kevin Lower;CN=Brooke Sharp;CN=Tessa Brunnenmeyer;CN=Yining Wu;CN=Claudia Aguilar: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20260501T234500 DTEND;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20260501T234500 SUMMARY:The Twentieth Annual Conference of the Leibniz Society of North America UID:20260503T142952Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:America/Los_Angeles LOCATION:900 University Ave\, Riverside\, United States\, 92523 DESCRIPTION:The Twentieth Annual Conference of the Leibniz Society of North America will be held at the University of California\, Riverside\, October 23&ndash\;October 25\, 2026. Papers on any aspect of Leibniz&rsquo\;s philosophy will be considered and should have a reading time of approximately 45 minutes. Commentators will be paired with accepted submissions.
\n\nProposals that explore connections between Leibniz&rsquo\;s thought and other non-canonical early modern philosophers\, especially women\, are particularly welcome. Papers on figures within the loosely Leibnizian orbit\, including (but not limited to) Masham\, Conway\, Wolff\, Du Châ\;telet\, etc.\, will also be considered.
\n\nSubmissions from graduate students and early career scholars will be given special consideration. Along these lines\, the LSNA may be able to offer some travel funding to accepted submissions from graduate students and early career scholars\, who do not have sufficient funding from their home institutions\, in order to offset the costs of attending the meeting.
\n\nSubmissions should take the form of abstracts of approx. 500 words in length\, prepared for anonymous review. They should be submitted\, as attachments to emails in PDF format\, to Adam Harmer (adam.harmer@ucr.edu). The deadline for the receipt of submissions is May 1\, 2025. Authors will be notified by July 1 of the program committee&rsquo\;s decision. Selected authors will be expected to send complete drafts of their presentations to their commentators by September 23\, 2025.
ORGANIZER;CN=Adam Harmer: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260502T234500 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260502T234500 SUMMARY:Land\, Territory\, and Justice (MANCEPT Workshop 2026) UID:20260503T142953Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:Convenors:
Kaitie Jourdeuil (Queen&rsquo\;s University\, Canada)
Michael Luoma (University of Northern British Columbia\, Canada)
Land\, Territory\, and Justice
\n\n2026 MANCEPT Workshops in Political Theory\, 2-4 September 2026 \;
\n\nThere is now a rich debate within and across diverse traditions of political and moral thought about the meaning\, use\, and desirability of the concepts of land and territory\, and their relation to justice. These debates extend beyond analytical moral and political philosophy and include vital perspectives within Indigenous political theory\, eco-phenomenology\, critical theory\, and dialogical traditions. The goal of this workshop is to bring together researchers working in these diverse traditions to discuss both established questions concerning the relations between land\, territory\, and justice\, and new questions arising from dialogue across these traditions.
\n\n\nFor example\, the past fifteen years have been marked by an uptick in dedicated theorizing about territorial rights in contemporary Anglo-American moral and political philosophy (see for example: Miller\, 2012\; Moore\, 2014\, 2015\, 2019\; Nine\, 2012\, 2022\; Ochoa-Espejo\, 2020\; Simmons\, 2016\; Stilz\, 2019). While the first wave of this literature focused on core conceptual questions about the nature and scope of various territorial rights (including jurisdiction\, self-determination\, resource control\, and immigration)\, the kinds of agents who hold these rights\, and the normative justifications for them\, this literature has now self-reflexively entered a &ldquo\;second wave&rdquo\; characterised by a deeper concern for questions of global inequality\, decolonization\, overlapping projects of self-determination\, and the environmental crisis (Moore &\; Ugalde\, 2025). For example\, recent inquiries have asked (but not fully answered) questions such as: What is the extent of morally mandatory restitution in cases of territorial wrongdoing\, including settler colonialism (Luoma\, 2023\; Luoma and Moore\, 2024\; Moore\, 2019\; Stilz\, 2024\; Riebold\, 2022\, 2023)? How may multiple peoples\, with distinct normative and ontological systems\, overlap in the same place without retrenching relationships of structural injustice and inter-group domination (Jourdeuil 2024\, 2025a\, 2025b\; Luoma\, 2022\, 2023\, 2024\, 2025)? What forms of governance are required in ecologically integrated regions spanning borders (Nine\, 2022)? How are territorial rights contingent on respect for biodiversity and ecological integrity (Moore\, 2023\; Kwan\, 2025)? And how can the benefits and burdens of natural resources\, energy transition\, and climate change mitigation/adaptation be fairly distributed between groups (Armstrong\, 2017\; De Biaso 2024a\, 2024b\; Li\, 2022\; Moore\, 2019)?
\n\n\nConcurrently to these discourses\, Indigenous scholars\, environmental philosophers\, and eco-phenomenologists interrogate the core normative\, ontological\, and epistemological assumptions of these discourses. Indigenous theorists challenge the hegemony of rights-based territorial frameworks\, contending that the natural world is not a stockpile of &ldquo\;resources&rdquo\; to be distributed and controlled according to a theory of justice\, but is better conceived of as a kinship network populated by beings deserving of intrinsic concern and respect with whom we must live harmoniously (e.g.\, Allard-Tremblay 2023\, 2025\; Burkhart\, 2019\; Mills 2017\, 2018\, 2019\; Simpson 2011\, 2017\; Temin 2023). Eco-phenomenologists challenge conceptions of land as a neutral background container against which we exercise our agency\, demonstrating how land and place structure our lived experience and subjectivity\, our ethical encounter with the alterity of the other-than-human\, and the possibilities for political agency (Casey\, 1993\, 2018\; Ingold\, 2010\; Malpas\, 1998\; Rose\, 2005\; Seamon\, 2018\; Smith\, 2001\, 2011\; Toadvine\, 2019). Beyond political theory\, land and territory are at the heart of intensifying international political conflicts\, including attempted territorial annexations\, rising majority and minority nationalism\, struggles against (neo-)colonialism\, and the global climate and environmental crises.
\n\n\nConsequently\, this workshop welcomes submissions that investigate conceptual\, ontological\, normative\, methodological\, and/or applied questions at the intersection of land\, territory\, and justice. We invite paper submissions from diverse methodological perspectives (including\, but not limited to analytical\, moral and political philosophy\, environmental philosophy and eco-phenomenology\, Indigenous political thought\, critical theory\, and comparative dialogue) from researchers at all stages of their career. Works in progress are encouraged. Workshop sessions will be pre-read\, with a brief presentation (10 min. max.) from the author\, followed by a 40-minute Q&\;A.
\n\n\nSubmission Guidelines:
\n\nAbstracts should be anonymised and must not exceed 500 words (including references). Please include your name\, affiliation\, and contact details in the email submission. Abstracts should be submitted by email to both convenors (kaitie.jourdeuil@queensu.ca and michael.luoma@unbc.ca) by May 2nd. Selected participants will be notified by May 26th. Participants will be expected to circulate their papers by August 16th. Please do not hesitate the contact the convenors with any questions.
\n\n\nAbout MANCEPT:
\n\nThe MANCEPT Workshops is an annual conference in political theory\, organised under the auspices of the Manchester Centre for Political Theory. The conference is run fully-in person at the University of Manchester. Bursaries are available to speakers based on need. Further instructions on registration and bursary applications will be released in due course.
\n\n ORGANIZER;CN=Kaitie Jourdeuil;CN=Michael Luoma: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Lisbon:20260504T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Lisbon:20260508T170000 SUMMARY:6th International Conference on Philosophy of Mind: Artificial Intelligence (6ICPH) UID:20260503T142954Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/Lisbon LOCATION:Via Panorâmica\, s/n: 4150-564\, Porto\, Portugal DESCRIPTION:[Call for Abstracts]
\n6th International Conference on Philosophy of Mind: Artificial Intelligence \;(6ICPH)
\nFaculty of Arts and Humanities\, University of Porto\, Porto\, Portugal
4-8 May 2026 (4-5 May\, Online | 6-8 May\, in-person)
About: The 6th International Conference on Philosophy of Mind: Artificial Intelligence (6ICPH) brings together researchers\, academics\, and students working on central problems in philosophy of mind\, with this edition placing artificial intelligence at the center of the programme. Hosted by the Faculty of Arts and Humanities of the University of Porto (Porto\, Portugal)\, the conference invites dialogue across philosophy of mind\, philosophy of cognitive science\, and adjacent fields that take AI as both an empirical phenomenon and a conceptual stress-test for our theories of mentality. The guiding aim is to examine what contemporary AI \; &mdash\; especially language-based and multimodal systems &mdash\; does (and does not) illuminate about understanding\, intentionality\, representation\, rationality\, agency\, and consciousness. Alongside classic debates (e.g.\, functionalism\, computationalism\, connectionism\, embodied and enactive approaches)\, the conference foregrounds questions that have become newly urgent: whether large language models support attributions of semantic competence or merely simulate it\; how norms of reasoning and explanation should be reconceived when behaviour emerges from distributed statistical structures\; whether artificial systems can participate in social cognition (coordination\, trust\, testimony\, deception) and what this implies for mindreading and second-person interaction\; and how reliance on AI tools reshapes human cognition through extended and scaffolded practices (search\, writing\, memory\, attention\, and self-interpretation).The event runs in a hybrid format: online sessions on 4&ndash\;5 May 2026\, followed by in-person sessions on 6&ndash\;8 May 2026 at the Faculty of Arts and Humanities\, University of Porto.
\nPHILOSOPHY OF MIND AWARD 2026 (in-person talks only): The best-submitted abstract will receive the opportunity to deliver a special Award Talk similar to a keynote talk (note: the selected author will have the fee waived).
\nThe final deadline to submit proposals in different research topics is \;March 29\, 2026.
\n\;
\nKEYNOTES SPEAKERS:
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Anil Seth is Professor of Cognitive and Computational Neuroscience at the University of Sussex and Director of the Sussex Centre for Consciousness Science.
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Diana I. Pé\;rez is a Full Professor in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Buenos Aires (UBA) and the Director of the IIF&ndash\;SADAF&ndash\;CONICET.
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Paul Thagard is Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the University of Waterloo\, where he founded and directed the Cognitive Science Program.
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Gloria Andrada is a Ramó\;n y Cajal researcher at the Institute of Philosophy (IFS)\, Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)\, Madrid.
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Miguel Pais-Vieira is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Medical Sciences at the University of Aveiro (iBiMED).
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Â\;ngela Leite is a Researcher at the Centre for Philosophical and Humanistic Studies (CEFH) at the Catholic University of Portugal (Braga).
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Marina Trakas is an Assistant Researcher at CONICET (Argentina) and next year (2026) she will be a FCT Researcher at the Centre for Philosophy at the University of Lisbon.
\n\;
\nTopics might include (but are not limited to):
\n1. Consciousness\, Subjectivity\, and Artificial Systems
\na. Competing theories of consciousness (global workspace\, higher-order\, predictive processing) and what they imply for AI
b. The &ldquo\;hard problem&rdquo\; and whether AI changes (or merely rephrases) it
c. Machine consciousness: criteria\, tests\, and the status of &ldquo\;phenomenal&rdquo\; ascriptions to AI
2. Perception\, World-Modelling\, and Machine Inference
\na. Perception as active construction: implications for artificial perception (vision-language models\, robotics)
b. Predictive coding\, Bayesian perception\, and AI as &ldquo\;prediction machines&rdquo\;
c. 4E cognition and AI: embodied agents\, sensorimotor contingency\, and situated learning
3. Representation\, Meaning\, and Intentionality in Humans and AI
\na. Internalism vs. externalism under contemporary AI (training data\, environment\, social embedding)
b. From symbols to vectors: what do embeddings represent (if anything)?
c. Artificial intentionality: original vs. derived content\; can AI have aboutness or only mimic it?
4. Reasoning\, Rational Agency\, and Autonomy
\na. Reasoning beyond correlation: inference\, explanation\, and &ldquo\;competence vs. performance&rdquo\; in AI
b. Agency and control in human&ndash\;AI systems: who acts when decisions are AI-mediated?
c. Bias\, rationality\, and epistemic norms: when AI recommendations count as reasons
5. The Self\, Personal Identity\, and Digital Mediation
\na. Minimal\, narrative\, and extended self under AI scaffolding (assistants\, recommender systems)
b. Memory\, identity\, and externalised cognition (search\, notes\, &ldquo\;AI memory&rdquo\;)
c. Uploading\, duplication\, and continuity: metaphysics of identity with AI simulations
6. Mind&ndash\;Brain Relations and Computational Neuroscience
\na. Reductionism vs. pluralism: what computational models explain (and what they don&rsquo\;t
\nb. First-person data in an AI age: experience sampling\, neurophenomenology\, and modelling
\nc. AI in neuroscience: limits of decoding\, prediction\, and mechanistic explanation
\n7. Explainability\, Understanding\, and Epistemic Responsibility
\na. What counts as an explanation for a mind? Contrast: mechanistic\, functional\, and narrative explanation
b. Interpretability vs. justification: explanations for users\, clinicians\, regulators\, and researchers
c. Trust\, opacity\, and epistemic dependence: when reliance on AI is rational (or negligent)
\;
\n8. Ethics of AI\, Neurotechnology\, and Cognitive Liberty
\na. Brain&ndash\;computer interfaces and AI: agency\, enhancement\, and responsibility gaps
b. Neuroprivacy and &ldquo\;mind-reading&rdquo\; claims: conceptual and ethical boundaries
c. Governance of human&ndash\;AI cognition: auditability\, contestability\, and moral crumple zones
\;
\n9. Emotion\, Social Cognition\, and Human&ndash\;AI Interaction
\na. Affective states and AI: recognition\, simulation\, and the ontology of &ldquo\;emotion&rdquo\; in machines
b. Empathy\, testimony\, and trust in conversational AI
c. Moral cognition with AI advisors: persuasion\, manipulation\, and norm-shaping
\;
\n10. Extended\, Embedded\, and Collective Minds in the Age of AI
\na. Where does cognition end? LLMs as cognitive artefacts and &ldquo\;thinking with tools&rdquo\;
b. Language as a social technology: AI-driven standardisation and normative drift
c. Collective epistemology: AI\, group cognition\, and the reshaping of public reason
\;
\n11. Psychiatry\, Classification\, and Algorithmic Diagnosis
\na. Mental disorder: natural kinds\, social constructs\, and algorithmic categories
b. Prediction vs. understanding in computational psychiatry and clinical AI
c. Identity\, stigma\, and self-interpretation under diagnostic AI systems
\;
\n12. Evolution\, Cognition\, and Artificial Minds
\na. Evolutionary perspectives on intelligence: what AI lacks (development\, embodiment\, niche construction)
b. Modularity and architectures: are LLMs &ldquo\;general\,&rdquo\; or just wide?
c. Language evolution and AI language: what &ldquo\;fluency&rdquo\; shows (and what it can&rsquo\;t show)
13. Attention\, Salience\, and Control in Humans and Machines
\na. What is attention? Comparative models: neural attention vs. transformer &ldquo\;attention&rdquo\;
b. Control\, distraction\, and optimisation: how AI systems capture and steer attention
c. Situated attention: organism&ndash\;environment loops\, interfaces\, and cognitive ecology
\;
\nSpecial Track I: Artificial Intelligence and the Philosophy of Mind
\nThis track explores the philosophical implications of AI\, cognitive models\, and the nature of artificial cognition. Topics may include:
\na. \; \; \; \; \; \; Can AI be conscious? Theories of artificial consciousness
\nb. \; \; \; \; \; \; Computational models of thought and mental representation
\nc. \; \; \; \; \; \; \; AI and intentionality: can machines have beliefs and desires?
\nd. \; \; \; \; \; \; The problem of explainability in AI
\ne. \; \; \; \; \; \; LLMs\, ChatGPT\, DeepSeek: philosophical approaches
\n\;
\nSpecial Track II: Conceptualizing Polysemy
\nThe focus of this panel is on ways of capturing \;polysemy \;at the conceptual level. Work on the nature\, structure and role of concepts expressed or encoded by polysemic words is welcome. Topics may include:
\na. \; \; \; \; \; \; Arguments for &ldquo\;rich&rdquo\; or &ldquo\;thin&rdquo\; theories of lexical meaning of polysemous words
\nb. \; \; \; \; \; \; Approaches to co-predication
\nc. \; \; \; \; \; \; \; Accounts of communication with polysemous words
\nd. \; \; \; \; \; \; Mechanisms of sense-selection or alternatives to it
\ne. \; \; \; \; \; \; Experimental studies that bear on polysemy and have impact on the debate
\nf. \; \; \; \; \; \; \; \; Applications of the polysemy idea to less-discussed or novel expressions
\n\;
\nFEES (accepted speakers)
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Early Stage (until 10 April 2026)
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Professionals (posdoc\, professor\, tenure-track): &euro\; 160\,00
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Students: (Master\, PhD): &euro\; 100\,00
\n\;
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Later Stage (10April &ndash\; 30 April 2026)
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Professionals (posdoc\, professor\, tenure-track): &euro\; 220\,00
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Students: (Master\, PhD): &euro\; 150\,00
\n\;
\nFEES (attendance)
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Online Segment (4-5 May 2026\, Microsoft Teams)
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Professionals (posdoc\, professor\, tenure-track): &euro\; 30\,00
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Students: (Master\, PhD): &euro\; 20\,00
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; In-Person Segment (6-8 May 2026\, FLUP)
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Professionals (posdoc\, professor\, tenure-track): &euro\; 30\,00
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Students: (Master\, PhD): &euro\; 20\,00
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Both Segments (4-5May 2026\, Microsoft Teams + 6-8 May 2025\, FLUP)
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Professionals (posdoc\, professor\, tenure-track): &euro\; 50\,00
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Students: (Master\, PhD): &euro\; 30\,00
\n\;
\nLanguages of the colloquium: English and Portuguese.
\nSUBMISSIONS:
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; IMPORTANT: you should clearly state if you are submitting for the online segment (OS) (4-5 May) or the in-person segment (PS) (6-8 May). If online\, you need to provide a preferred day (4 or 5 May) and time schedule (Morning: 9h30-12h30\; Afternoon: 14h00 &ndash\; 18h) considering the Lisbon Time Zone.
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; In-person submissions have a higher chance of being accepted (more slots available) and are automatically registered for the Philosophy of Mind Award 2026.
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Proposals should include two files: (in word. format: pdf. formats will not be accepted):
\no \; \; (1) a cover page with identification\, clear academic affiliation (if several\, choose the main)
\no \; \; (2) an anonymized title and abstract (maximum 250 words\, up to 10 references)
\no \; \; (3) sent to interconfphilmind@gmail.com
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Paper duration: 30 minutes (20 minutes presentation + 10 minutes for discussion)\;
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Notification Info: in order to facilitate the request for funding of the accepted talks so speakers can prepare their travel in advance\, notification of acceptance or rejection will be given in a 7-10 days period (review) after the submission\;
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Publications: Some of the papers presented at the conference are expected to be published in several projects (edited volume\, special issue\, etc.\; the publication process will be independent and optional\; more details after the conference)\;
\n·\; \; \; \; \; \; \; Any doubts or concerns can be addressed to: interconfphilmind@gmail.com
\nVenue: Faculty of Humanities of the University of Porto (Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto) | Address: Via Panorâ\;mica\, s/n: 4150-564\, Porto\, Portugal.
\nOrganization: Mind\, Language and Action Group | Institute of Philosophy | University of Porto
\nOrganizing Committee
\nSteven S. Gouveia (Chair)
\nSofia Miguens
\nDan Zeman
\nRafael Antunes Padilha
\nJé\;ssica Azevedo
\nMaria Luiza llenaco
\nThales Maia
\nInê\;s Silva
\n\;
\nSupport:
\nCEEC Project by FCT 2022.02527.CEECIND
\nTL Modern &\; Contemporary Philosophy
\nRG Mind\, Language and Action Group (MLAG)
\nInstituto de Filosofia da Universidade do Porto &ndash\; UID/00502
\nFundaç\;ã\;o para a Ciê\;ncia e a Tecnologia (FCT)
ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Rome:20260504T113000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Rome:20260505T170000 SUMMARY:SIFA-SISFA Workshop on Platonism in Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Mathematics: Ancient and Contemporary UID:20260503T142955Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/Rome LOCATION:via Ostiense 236\, Roma\, Italy\, 00146 DESCRIPTION:Link Microsoft Teams: \;https://teams.microsoft.com/meet/36618696218237?p=XUI8EBOdKNsHKNBPQM
ORGANIZER;CN=Sofia Bonicalzi;CN=Roberto Granieri: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260504T100000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260504T113000 SUMMARY:Slaves to the algorithms? Algocracy and republican liberty UID:20260503T142956Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:Increasingly\, governments are relying on artificial intelligence to make\, or inform\, important decisions&mdash\;a phenomenon that John Danaher has styled\, &ldquo\;algocracy&rdquo\;. Republicanism implies that there are at least four different reasons to be concerned about algocracy. First\, decisions made using AI will often be impossible for citizens to contest because the reasons for the decisions will be inscrutable\, which calls into question the legitimacy of these decisions. Second\, the inability of citizens to contest the outcomes of government decisions made using AI and/or the justification for the use of AI will render these arbitrary and inimical to liberty on a republican account. Third\, overreliance on AI is likely to undermine civic virtues that are necessary to the defence of liberty. Fourth\, AI is such a powerful technology that it may free governments from any fear of revolution. If we wish to benefit from the use of AI in government without sacrificing liberty\, we must: ensure that decisions made by AI can be publicly contested\; investigate ways to mitigate the impact of algocracy on the political culture of democracies\; and resist the temptation to develop AI for applications that would grant governments too much power over their citizens.
\nRobert Sparrow is Professor of Philosophy at the Monash Data Futures Institute. His work focuses on the ethical implications of adopting new technologies\, ranging from artificial intelligence to genetic engineering\, with an emphasis on formulating ethical arguments that contribute to public and political debate. He is also an Associate Investigator at the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making &\; Society (ADM+S) and is listed as a Chief Investigator at the ARC Centre of Excellence for Electromaterials Science.
ORGANIZER;CN=Christopher Watkin: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260504T141500 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260504T154500 SUMMARY:Is It Control or Boundary-Setting? UID:20260503T142957Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:We are pleased to announce a series of three online seminars\, each dedicated to the discussion with the author(s) of a draft paper circulated among participants in advance.
\nEach paper and seminar engages\, in a different way\, with the moral limits of shaping others. The first seminar will focus on a paper by Areti Theofilopoulou (Warwick) that examines the distinction between coercive control and boundary-setting in romantic relationships. The second will discuss a paper by Christie Harley (Georgia State) and Ashley Lindsley-Kim (British Columbia)\, arguing for abortion rights on the grounds that state-enforced pregnancy and childbirth are incompatible with the status of equal citizenship. The third and final seminar will consider a paper by Nanette Ryan (Singapore) and Joshua Lucza (Singapore) which argues that\, in response to the climate crisis\, children&rsquo\;s capacities for responsible\, reflective\, and ethically engaged citizenship should be prioritized over cultivating frugal preferences in children.
\nMonday\, May 4\, 2026: Areti Theofilopoulou (Warwick)\, &ldquo\;Is It Control or Boundary-Setting?&rdquo\;
\nMonday\, May 11\, 2026: Christie Hartley (Georgia State) and Ashley Lindsley-Kim (British Columbia)\, &ldquo\;Equality and the Right to Abortion&rdquo\;
\nMonday\, May 18\, 2026: Nanette Ryan (Singapore)\, &ldquo\;Cultivating Frugal Preferences in Children: A Response to the Climate Crisis&rdquo\; (co-authored with Joshua Lucza)
\nThe seminars will be held online on Mondays at 2.15-3.45 p.m. CET. \;
\nWe welcome participants at any or all of the seminars! Please email justparenthood.project@gmail.com \;to receive the draft papers and the online meeting link.
\nThe seminars are organized by Francesca Miccoli (Basel)\, Tom Bailey (John Cabot)\, and Johanna Rensing (Basel).
ORGANIZER;CN=Tom Bailey: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260504T170000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260504T170000 SUMMARY:MANCEPT Workshop on Intimate (In)Justices UID:20260503T142958Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:Convenors: Kristin Kä\;uper\, Isobel Logan\, Charlotte Curran (University of Leeds)
Contact: \;i.j.logan@leeds.ac.uk
This workshop will explore the relationship between intimacy and justice. We encourage speakers to ask: When and how should considerations of justice extend into our intimate lives and influence our actions? How are intimate relationships shaped by\, reproduce\, and resistant to broader structures of injustice and oppression? Should we worry about the distribution of opportunities for intimacy? How do we balance the responsibilities of the individual\, communities\, and the state in promoting just forms of relating?
We hope to better understand the ways in which hegemonic norms\, institutions\, and intersecting forms of oppression structure intimate life\, governing who is able to form certain relationships\, which relationships are socially valued\, and how power operates within them. We seek to explore the potential of intimate practices and communities of care as sites of resistance\, solidarity\, and social transformation.
By intimacy\, we mean forms of closeness and connection upon which special relationships are based. This encompasses a wide range of relationships\, including but not limited to sexual\, romantic\, platonic\, collegial\, familial\, and parental relationships\, whether in-person or technologically mediated.
We are particularly interested in submissions which explore non-normative ways of relating (e.g. asexuality/aromanticism\, polyamory\, relationship anarchy) and matters of intersecting identities that are underrepresented in philosophy (e.g. sexuality\, disability\, race\, age\, socio-economic status).
We invite abstracts of no more than 500 words for a presentation of approximately 30 minutes to engage with the theme of intimate (in)justices. Here is a non-exclusive list of some indicative questions:
We actively welcome in-progress work and seek to foster a friendly and collaborative environment. Postgraduate and early career researchers are especially welcome. We are also receptive to interdisciplinary explorations of these ideas\, provided they are accessible to non-specialists.
Please send your abstract to \;i.j.logan@leeds.ac.uk \;by end of day on the 4th of May\, 2026. Selected speakers will be notified by the 18th of May\, in time for eligible participants to apply for a bursary.
Programme: \;
\n
09:30&ndash\;10:00 Arrival and Coffee
10:00&ndash\; 11:00 Certainty and Construction in Kant&rsquo\;s Mathematical Principles \;- Christoph von Villiez (Humboldt-Universitä\;t zu Berlin). Commentator Dr. Jessica Leech (King's College London)
11:15&ndash\; 12:45 Empirical Truth\, Fallibility\, and the Progress of Inquiry \;(ONLINE) - Prof. Katharina Kraus (University of Vienna). Commentator: Dr. Rima Hussein (Humboldt-Universitä\;t zu Berlin)
12:45&ndash\;14:00 Lunch Break
14:00&ndash\; 15:00 The Unerring Understanding - Kant on the Source of Errors in Judgements - Juuso Rantanen (King's College London- Humboldt-Universitä\;t zu Berlin). Commentator Dr. Mario Schä\;rli (Humboldt-Universitä\;t zu Berlin)
\n
15:05&ndash\; 16:05 The Problem of Inner Experience in Kant: Losing and Regaining Substance Marharyta Rouba (Humboldt-Universitä\;t zu Berlin). Commentator: Dr. John Callanan
16:05&ndash\; 16:30 Coffee Break
\n16:30&ndash\; 18:00 Kant on the Separation of Powers and the Form of a Practical Syllogism \;- Prof. Tobias Rosefeldt (Humboldt-Universitä\;t zu Berlin). Commentator: Fearghus Horan (Johns Hopkins)
ORGANIZER;CN=Juuso Rantanen: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260505T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260505T170000 SUMMARY:Attitude Reports\, Unarticulated Constituents\, and Mental Files UID:20260503T143000Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:The notions of unarticulated constituent and mental file have been applied to problems related to language and mind in the tradition of analytic philosophy. This one-day workshop will explore these two notions and their relation to \;the attributions of beliefs and other attitudes. \;
\nThe topics addressed in the workshop will include:
\nThe semantics and pragmatics of attitude reports
\nThe nature and psychological role of mental files
\nThe \;content \;of mental files and their relation to proper names
\nThe motivations for positing unarticulated constituents \;
\nThe relationship between mental files and attitude reports
\nThe relationship between \;unarticulated constituents \;and attitude reports
\n
Speakers
When: Tuesday May 5\, at 11am in Houston/18.00 in Bochum \;
\nWhere: \;https://riceuniversity.zoom.us/j/93096236283?pwd=s6SO6NqrM5mnGpqjFtKNfTNoxaHGUg.1
\nWho: Leonard Dung
\nWhat: "Varieties of Sentientism About Moral Standing" \;
\nAbstract \;
\nA being has moral standing exactly if it matters morally for its own sake. According to sentientism\, moral standing is grounded in sentience\, that is\, the capacity for conscious experiences which feel good or bad. There is strong evidence for sentientism based on its extensional adequacy\, the resonance constraint\, its explanatory properties\, and introspection. At the same time\, sentientism is limited by the epistemic inaccessibility of sentience\, challenges to the trustworthiness of our introspection of sentience\, and the existence of other plausible grounds of moral standing\, such as some forms of agency. My conclusion is that these objections should lead us to reject exceptionalist sentientism: the view that sentience has unique metaphysical\, epistemic\, and practical relevance with respect to moral standing. Nevertheless\, modest sentientism should be retained: It is plausible that sentience is a sufficient ground of moral standing\, even though we cannot be certain of that\, there may be other sufficient grounds of moral standing\, and there are practical reasons to place significant weight on criteria of moral standing other than sentience.
\n
\;
Register here: https://indico.uni-paderborn.de/event/156/
\n05.05.2026\, 4.30-6pm (Paris time)
\nElodie Pinel - Vernacular Theology and Authority: Marguerite Porete\, Mechthild of Magdeburg\, Hadewijch of Antwerp
\nThis paper examines the writing of Marguerite Porete\, Mechthild of Magdeburg\, and Hadewijch of Antwerp as a distinct mode of speculative discourse that can be understood\, following McDonnell\, as vernacular theology. Rather than denoting a merely linguistic choice\, &ldquo\;vernacular&rdquo\; here refers to a relocation of theological authority outside clerical\, scholastic\, and institutional frameworks\, into forms of expression rooted in lived experience and the rhetorical resources of lyric and narrative. Each of these writers develops a conceptual reflection on the soul&rsquo\;s union with God that is neither derivative of scholastic thought nor reducible to affective piety. Porete articulates a radical theology of dispossession of the will: the soul in Love becomes &ldquo\;without why\,&rdquo\; beyond virtue and rational effort. Hadewijch theorizes Minne as a demanding reciprocity between the soul and God\, where love is both ontological ground and ethical trial. Mechthild describes the divine as a dynamic &ldquo\;flowing light&rdquo\; that both consumes and renews the soul\, elaborated through intensely embodied imagery. In each case\, theological insight is embedded in poetic\, dialogical\, and visionary forms\, which are not ornamental but constitutive of meaning. These women write in vernacular languages&mdash\;Old French\, Middle High German\, Middle Dutch&mdash\;but more importantly\, they write in vernacular forms: song\, dialogue\, allegory\, visionary narrative. Such media allowed them to communicate theology as transformation\, not proposition. Their texts construct communities of reception independent of academic institutions: readers\, listeners\, fellow laywomen\, informal circles of devotion. Communication is therefore not simply transmission but negotiation of authority. By claiming the right to speak of God from lived experience\, they challenge clerical monopoly over theological discourse.This paper argues that the theological originality of these mystics lies precisely in this convergence of speculative rigor and vernacular expression. Their work demonstrates that the history of philosophy cannot be restricted to scholastic production\, and that forms of communication themselves shape what counts as legitimate knowledge.
\nAbout the Speaker:
\nÉ\;lodie Pinel is a lecturer in philosophy and a specialist in medieval French literature. Agré\;gé\;e in both modern literature and philosophy\, she focuses on Marguerite Porete and the intellectual legacy of female mystics. She explores the intersections of theology\, literature\, and philosophy\, with a special interest in will\, language\, and freedom. She completed her PhD on Le Miroir des â\;mes simples at Université\; Paris Nanterre\, where she is affiliated with the research center CSLF (Centre des Sciences des Litté\;ratures en Langue Franç\;aise). She is also active in public philosophy through podcasts and feminist publishing.
\nLila Braunschweig -A Voice of One&rsquo\;s Own: Philosophizing as Feminized Subjects (Impostor Syndrome &\; Authority)
\nThis presentation offers an investigation into the complicated\, doubtful\, and sometimes painful relationship feminized subjects have with philosophical activity. Drawing on the analyses of French philosopher Michè\;le Le Doeuff regarding the place of women in philosophy\, as well as accounts from women philosophers\, I aim to identify some of the reasons behind what has been termed "feminine doubt" (Casselot 2018)\, commonly known today as impostor syndrome. I will argue that these doubts regarding one&rsquo\;s philosophical authority cannot solely be explained by the now well-known reasons\, such as the lack of female figures in the traditional canon of continental philosophy\, or the hostility of certain philosophical texts or contexts towards women\, whether they are philosophers or not.By linking Le Doeuff&rsquo\;s arguments with those of other Francophone and Anglophone Western feminist thinkers and writers\, I will demonstrate that these doubts may also stem from the unique relationship to knowledge and authority shaped by feminine socialization and its intersection with class and race. This\, in turn\, hinders feminized subjects from expressing and asserting their own unique voice. I will argue that philosophy\, and more broadly the ability to generate new ideas in the academic field\, requires an attitude of self-assertion\, as well as a capacity for disruption that is sometimes at odds with the attitudes of submission promoted by certain feminine norms and societal expectations for women in Western societies. Therefore\, the ability to assert oneself as a philosophizing subject not only requires &ldquo\;a room of one&rsquo\;s own&rdquo\; (Woolf\, 1929)\, but also the development of a voice of one&rsquo\;s own. Finally\, on a more personal note\, I will reflect on the remedies and practices that\, in a non-ideal world\, have helped me find my own voice as a theorist\, assert my viewpoint\, and assume a certain philosophical authority. In particular\, I will discuss the rich and transformative experience of creating and participating in a women-only writing group with young Francophone feminist scholars
\nAbout the Speaker:Lila Braunschweig is an assistant professor of French literature and culture and a research affiliate at the Institute for Cultural Inquiry (ICON) at Utrecht University. She holds a PhD in political science from Sciences Po (France). Before joining Utrecht\, she was a British Academy Newton international postdoctoral fellow at the University of Kent\, and a postdoctoral fellow in philosophy at the Centre de recherche en é\;thique (CRÉ\;) in Montreal\, and the Chaire de recherche du Canada en é\;thique fé\;ministe at the Université\; du Qué\;bec à\; Trois-Riviè\;re. Previously\, she has also been a visiting researcher and international Fox fellow at Yale University (2019-2020). Her first book (Neutriser: emancipation par le neutre) was published in French by Les Liens qui Libè\;rent in 2021. Her second monograph (Vers la dé\;licatesse. Une philosophie relationnelle de la liberté\;) will be published by Gallimard in 2026. Her work has also appeared in La Revue franç\;aise de science politique\, Philosophiques\, Political Theory\, Recherches fé\;ministes\, the International Journal for Gender\, Sexuality and Law\, and Genre\, Sexualité\;s\, Socié\;té\;.
ORGANIZER;CN=Marguerite El Asmar Bou Aoun;CN=Jil Muller;CN=Daniel Fischer;CN=Katia Raya Rami: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20260505T190000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20260505T203000 SUMMARY:"Freiheit und Gnade" - ein Gang durch ein Frühwerk Edith Steins UID:20260503T143003Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/Vienna LOCATION:KarmelZentrum Wien\, Silbergasse 35\, Vienna\, Austria\, 1190 DESCRIPTION:Der frü\;he Aufsatz &bdquo\;Freiheit und Gnade&ldquo\; (1921) geht ü\;ber die kö\;rperlich festgelegte Natur des Menschen deutlich hinaus. Edith Stein nimmt Freiheit als Schlü\;sselbegriff menschlichen Daseins. Aber wie ist Freiheit ü\;berhaupt mö\;glich angesichts der menschlichen Nä\;he zum Tier? Selbsterkenntnis und Selbstdistanz ermö\;glichen jenen Abstand zur eigenen &bdquo\;Natur&ldquo\;\, das Wä\;hlenkö\;nnen\, die Zustimmung oder Ablehnung des eigenen Trieblebens\, die dem Tier nicht mö\;glich ist. Doch ist Autonomie noch nicht die entscheidende Gestalt von Freiheit. Der mü\;ndige Mensch hat sich letztlich durchringen gegen die Grundversuchung aller Autonomie: die Selbsthabe. Sie bleibt solange leer\, bis sie in die freie Hingabe mü\;ndet: an die gö\;ttliche Fü\;lle. Dorthin wird ein Weg gezeichnet.
\nPreisinformation 10&euro\;/ ermä\;ß\;igt 7&euro\;
ORGANIZER;CN=Joshua Roe: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260505T234500 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260505T234500 SUMMARY:Tolerance and Education: Concepts\, Justifications\, and Limits (MANCEPT Panel 2026) UID:20260503T143004Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:University of Manchester\, Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:Tolerance and Education: Concepts\, Justifications\, and Limits \;
\nPanel at the 2026 MANCEPT Workshops in Political Theory\, 2-4 September 2026
\n&ldquo\;Toleration&rdquo\; has long been a central concept in political philosophy\, yet its role in education remains surprisingly under-theorised. Philosophers typically analyse tolerance as forbearance: refraining from interfering with practices or ways of life one disapproves of. By contrast\, educational policy\, public debate\, and classroom practice often invoke tolerance in a thicker sense\, associating it with open-mindedness and being &ldquo\;non-judgemental&rdquo\;. This divergence raises a set of questions about what tolerance should mean in educational contexts\, and what schools can legitimately be expected to teach.
\nThis panel will explore the concept\, justification\, and practical implications of tolerance in education. It will bring together work in political philosophy and philosophy of education to examine how tolerance should be understood when the subjects are children and young people rather than adults\, and when the setting is the classroom rather than the public square.
\nOne set of questions concerns conceptual analysis. In the educational context\, is tolerance best understood as non-interference\, as non-disapproval\, as open-mindedness\, or as something else entirely? Are these rival concepts in tension\, or can they play complementary roles at different stages of education or in relation to different kinds of disagreement? Should tolerance be understood as a civic virtue\, a moral attitude\, an epistemic virtue\, or a cluster of beliefs and practices? And how does tolerance differ from neighbouring ideals such as respect\, recognition\, and inclusion?
\nA second set of questions concerns \;legitimacy and justification. Liberal political theory has traditionally been wary of state efforts to shape citizens&rsquo\; beliefs or attitudes. Yet schools routinely aim to influence how students think and feel about others\, and educational policy often treats certain attitudes &ndash\; racism and sexism\, for example &ndash\; as objectionable in themselves. When\, if ever\, is it legitimate for the state\, acting through its educational institutions\, to promote or discourage particular attitudes? And does the justification for tolerance in education rest on harm prevention\, autonomy\, or something else?
\nThird\, there are questions relating to \;feasibility and efficacy. Can tolerance be taught\, and if so\, what does successful teaching look like? How should philosophical accounts of tolerance respond to recent challenges questioning whether tolerant attitudes can be taught?
\nPresentations are likely to take the form of 30 mins presentation followed by 25 mins Q&\;A. The Q&\;A will be friendly and exploratory\, and there is no need for your paper to be near final form &ndash\; it can be a work-in-progress. Participants will be encouraged to submit and read papers in advance\, but this will not be a requirement.
\nLike all other MANCEPT workshops this year\, this event will take place in-person only.
\nFor information about the conference\, see the conference website: https://sites.manchester.ac.uk/mancept/mancept-workshops/
\nPlease note that registration\, travel and accommodation fees must be covered by speakers themselves. Information on current registration fees will be available on the MANCEPT website. Bursaries are available to help cover the conference registration fee\, and participants are encouraged to apply for these if needed (deadline 10th June).
\nSubmission Guidelines:
\n\;
\nPlease also feel free to reach out to Christina Easton\, the workshop convener\, with any questions.
ORGANIZER;CN=Christina Elizabeth Easton: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20260506T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20260507T170000 SUMMARY:Neuroethics in Transition: Challenges and Opportunities for Research\, Politics\, and Society UID:20260503T143005Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/Berlin LOCATION:Adenauerallee 131\, Bonn\, Germany\, 53113 DESCRIPTION:Organizer: \;Research Hub Neuroethics (RHUNE)
\nLanguage: \;German or English
\nKeynotes: \;Prof. Dr. Surjo Soekadar &\; Prof. Dr. Birgit Beck
\nDate: 05/06 9-14\, 05/07 9-17
ORGANIZER;CN=Bert Heinrichs;CN=Jan-Hendrik Heinrichs;CN=Orsolya Friedrich;CN=Philipp Kellmeyer: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260506T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260506T170000 SUMMARY:Imagination Day UID:20260503T143006Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:The Scores\, Saint Andrews\, United Kingdom\, KY16 9AL DESCRIPTION:A one-day workshop on the philosophy of imagination\, addressing such questions as: What is the epistemic role of imagination? How does it work in our engagement with fiction and in thought experiments? How does it help with planning ahead? How does it relate to inner speech and to other attitudes\, such as belief and desire?
\n\nPlease register using this link: \;Imagination Day Registration &ndash\; Fill in form
ORGANIZER;CN=Franz Berto;CN=Alice Murphy;CN=Petronella Randell;CN=Soroush Rafiee Rad: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260506T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260508T170000 SUMMARY:Philosophy and Generative Grammar 3 UID:20260503T143007Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:For more than sixty years\, \;developments in linguistic theory (particularly in the generative tradition) have significantly influenced philosophers' thinking about language and the mind. Likewise\, philosophers' discussions on the nature of language\, the mind\, and the world have influenced how linguists understand and model language.
\nThis conference brings together philosophers and linguists to discuss topics in the philosophy of generative grammar and linguistic developments that may be of interest to philosophers.
\nSpeakers
\nIf you want further information about the conference\, please visit our website:
ORGANIZER;CN=David Rey;CN=Rafael Gutierrez: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Madrid:20260507T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Madrid:20260508T170000 SUMMARY:Conceptual Engineering and Metalinguistic Awareness UID:20260503T143008Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/Madrid LOCATION:P.º de la Senda del Rey 5\,\, Madrid\, Spain DESCRIPTION:Conceptual engineering projects aim to improve our conceptual repertoire. Yet\, they face at least two significant challenges. First\, concepts may be revised so extensively that the resulting engineered concept no longer tracks the original subject matter\, effectively leading to a change of topic. Second\, the prospects for implementing conceptual change at scale are often limited\, given the entrenched and socially distributed nature of our conceptual practices. This workshop is guided by the hypothesis that both challenges can be better understood (and potentially addressed) by attending to metalinguistic awareness. In psycholinguistics\, this is typically understood as the ability to reflect on and manipulate the structural features of language\, including its phonetic\, syntactic\, semantic\, and pragmatic dimensions. The aim of the workshop is to bring together perspectives that connect the notion (and practice) of metalinguistic awareness with central themes in conceptual engineering. Some of the questions to be addressed include: How does metalinguistic awareness help disentangle conceptual improvement from subject change? How can it support the uptake of engineered concepts? How might it be cultivated within scholarly practice to better understand case studies of conceptual change?
\nSpeakers:
\nPedro Abreu (NOVA University\, Lisbon)
\nIsabella Bartoli (University of Oslo)
\nDelia Belleri (Spanish National Research Council\, Madrid)
\nTeresa Marques (University of Barcelona)
\nJoanna Odrowąż-Sypniewska (University of Warsaw)
\nYael Peled (MPI-MMG\, Gö\;ttingen)
\nRachel Katharine Sterken (Hong Kong University)
\nYinqi Zhou (Hong Kong University)
\n*
\nSCHEDULE
\nDay 1 - May 7th (Thursday)
\n10:00&ndash\;11:20 &mdash\; Talk 1 &mdash\; Teresa Marques: "Beyond Contestation and Manipulation: Rethinking Meaning Perversions"
\n11:20&ndash\;11:50 &mdash\; Break (30 min)
\n11:50&ndash\;13:10 &mdash\; Talk 2 &mdash\; Rachel Katharine Sterken: "LLMs\, Conceptual Disruption\, and Metalinguistic Awareness"
\n13:10&ndash\;15:10 &mdash\; Lunch break
\n15:10&ndash\;16:30 &mdash\; Talk 3 &mdash\; Isabella Bartoli: "Revising Semantic Deference"
\n16:30&ndash\;17:00 &mdash\; Break (30 min)
\n17:00&ndash\;18:20 &mdash\; Talk 4 &mdash\; Pedro Abreu: "&ldquo\;Diversity&rdquo\;: Fading Semantics\, Shifting Lexical Impact\, and the Plurality of Meanings"
\nDay 2 - May 8th (Friday)
\n10:00&ndash\;11:20 &mdash\; Talk 5 &mdash\; Delia Belleri: "Conceptual engineering\, the subject-change challenge\, and metalinguistic awareness"
\n11:20&ndash\;11:50 &mdash\; Break (30 min)
\n11:50&ndash\;13:10 &mdash\; Talk 6 &mdash\; Yael Peled: "TBA"
\n13:10&ndash\;15:10 &mdash\; Lunch break
\n15:10&ndash\;16:30 &mdash\; Talk 7 &mdash\; Joanna Odrowąż-Sypniewska: "Topics\, lying\, and dual-character concepts"
\n16:30&ndash\;17:00 &mdash\; Break (30 min)
\n17:00&ndash\;18:20 &mdash\; Talk 8 &mdash\; Yinqi Zhou: "Systems of Categorization and the Development of Discourse"
ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260507T160000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260507T180000 SUMMARY:Giulia DE CESARIS (Torino) - 'Tra percezione e spazio/tempo: un argomento senocrateo sull’esperienza o sulla realtà?' UID:20260503T143009Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:Link Microsoft Teams: \;https://teams.microsoft.com/meet/361465226425174?p=7dRqrrh0JeJwVLReJN
ORGANIZER;CN=Roberto Granieri;CN=Riccardo Chiaradonna: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260507T234500 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260507T234500 SUMMARY:MANCEPT Workshops - Respect for Persons: Foundations\, Varieties\, and Challenges UID:20260503T143010Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:Among Kant&rsquo\;s most enduring contributions to modern moral and political philosophy is the idea that there is a moral duty of respect for persons\, and that persons are owed respect simply in virtue of being persons. This Kantian insight reshaped subsequent debates by suggesting that the fundamental moral relation among citizens is not primarily one of benevolence\, utility\, or shared ends\, but of reciprocal recognition of equal status.
\nIn contemporary political theory\, respect for persons has become a central idiom for expressing ideals of legitimacy\, civic equality\, and the just state. Rawls describes a just society as &ldquo\;a social cooperation on a footing of mutual respect between citizens regarded as free and equal&rdquo\; (Justice as Fairness: A Restatement\, p. 28). Dworkin maintains that &ldquo\;individuals have a right to equal concern and respect in the design and administration of the political institutions that govern them&rdquo\; (Taking Rights Seriously\, p. 180). Nussbaum characterizes her capability approach as providing &ldquo\;the philosophical underpinning for an account of basic constitutional principles that should be respected and implemented by the governments of all nations\, as a bare minimum of what respect for human dignity requires&rdquo\; (Women and Human Development\, p. 5).
Despite its influence\, the idea that persons are owed respect (and that there is a corresponding duty of respect for persons) raises persistent puzzles and theoretical concerns. What kind of thing is respect: an attitude\, a pattern of conduct\, or a relation? How\, if at all\, can the duty of respect be justified? And does the language of respect for persons illuminate debates about justice\, or does it risk obscuring them?
We invite submissions of abstracts of up to 500 words to a MANCEPT workshop on this topic. Abstracts should be submitted by \;May 7st \;and should be sent to \;nethanel.lipshitz@biu.ac.il
\nPossible topics include:
\n&bull\; The relation between respect and other central concepts in political philosophy\, such as justice\, equality\, freedom\, welfare\, and rights.
&bull\; Different kinds of respect at work in political philosophy\, including recognition versus appraisal respect (Darwall)\, opacity respect (Carter)\, care-respect (Dillon)\, and others.
&bull\; Applications of respect for persons to specific debates in political philosophy\, for example\, debates about wrongful discrimination\, state neutrality\, and distributive justice.
&bull\; Respect&rsquo\;s relation to cognate notions such as dignity\, moral status\, and inviolability.
&bull\; Criticisms of respect for persons\, including doubts about its usefulness in political theory and doubts about its role as a foundational political value.
&bull\; Feminist perspectives on respect.
&bull\; Respect for persons and justice toward nonhuman entities\, such as nonhuman animals and artificial intelligence.
Who "knows" what Gender is? Arguments and Debates at the Intersection between Epistemic Injustice and Gender Identity
\nOrganisers: Miriam Ronzoni (University of Manchester)\; Esa Dí\;az Leó\;n \;(University of Barcelona).
\nApplication form:
\n\nIn \;recent years\, the "Gender Wars" have dominated public debates in several Western countries. Whilst in the US the debate is largely one between progressives and conservatives\, the UK debate\, and many other European debates\, are often framed as being internal to feminism and what a feminist public policy should look like. Gender critical feminists argue that gender is an oppressive social construct\; thus\, the feminist thing to do with it is simply to destroy it (while failing to recognize trans identities). Trans-inclusive scholars contend that both gender and gender identity cannot be erased without committing very serious harms to some of the already most marginalised people. Predictably\, very different public policy agendas follow.
\nAt closer look\, however\, trans-inclusive scholars and activists agree that gender is largely a social construct. The idea that trans activists and scholars consider gender identity (whether cis or trans) as immutable and innate is largely a myth. The trans-inclusive claim is\, however\, that something can be a social construct yet be very real and serve important social purposes within a certain social context &ndash\; such that destroying the concept *whilst maintain the broader social context* would produce significant harms. Most trans-inclusive actors also agree that gender has many oppressive elements &ndash\; yet contend that\, all things considered\, trans-inclusion is the most promising way to deconstruct those elements. Gender critical feminists usually counter-argue that this stand is simply confused: if gender and gender identity are not something innate but social constructs\, then what are they if not just the oppressive creation of the patriarchy? What else can they be? Thus\, according to gender critical feminism\, either gender identity is conceived as something immutable and innate &ndash\; and that is an implausible claim\, or it is part of an oppressive ideology which should be dismantled. Everything else is mysterious.
\nThis workshop aims to bring together this debate with developments in feminist epistemology. Recently\, much has been written about how the marginalised can be wronged not just in material terms\, but also in their &ldquo\;capacity as knowers&rdquo\; (Fricker 2007). This can happen because their very plausible accounts of their lived experiences are discredited\; because mainstream language and knowledge lack the terms and concepts for their experiences\; and because\, as a result\, marginalised people have struggled to make sense of their own experiences &ndash\; both to themselves and to others. All of this is compatible with marginalised people being\, in spite of all\, very competent or even uniquely insightful knowers in certain domains (Medina 2013).
\nThe workshop asks whether this can be the case for the concepts of gender and gender identity. Could it be that\, when the opponent says that trans-inclusive accounts of gender identity are &ldquo\;confused\,&rdquo\; &ldquo\;mysterious\,&rdquo\; or &ldquo\;don&rsquo\;t make sense\,&rdquo\; epistemic marginalisation is playing a role? It would not\, after all\, be the first time. A standpoint of uncertainty and puzzlement is not necessarily one of ignorance: it can indeed be the starting point of productive epistemic innovations. Indeed\, paradigmatic cases of hermeneutical injustice confirm that: the working women who struggled to make sense of their experience of unwelcome sexual flirtation in the workplace are the very same women who went on and developed a new concept for it &ndash\; workplace sexual harassment.
\nThe aim is to explore whether this can apply to trans-inclusive conceptual innovations about gender and gender identity and\, if so\, how barriers of intelligibility can be overcome. Conceptions of gender identity are undergoing revisions in feminist philosophy (e.g.\, Barnes 2022\, Cosker-Rowland 2023\, Cull 2024\, Hernandez &\; Bell 2025\, Jenkins 2023). Our aim is to further explore the connections between debates about conceptual innovations on gender and gender identity\, on the one hand\, and questions about epistemic injustice\, epistemic marginalization and conceptual interventions\, on the other hand.
\nIf you are unsure about whether your proposal might fit\, please feel free to reach out to the organisers before submitting. Abstracts should be between 500-1000 words.
\nTo apply\, please fill in and submit the application form below by 30th April \;(EXTENDED UNTIL 7 MAY):
\n\nReferences
\nBarnes\, Elizabeth (2022). Gender without Gender Identity: The Case of Cognitive Disability. Mind 131 (523):836-862.
\nBriggs\, R &\; B. R. George (2023). What Even Is Gender? Routledge.
\nCosker-Rowland\, Rach (2023). Recent Work on Gender Identity and Gender. Analysis 83 (4):801-820.
\nCull\, Matthew J. (2024). What Gender Should Be. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
\nFricker\, Miranda (2007). Epistemic injustice: power and the ethics of knowing. New York: Oxford University Press.
\nHernandez\, E. M. &\; Bell\, Rowan (2025). Much Ado About Nothing: Unmotivating "Gender Identity". Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 12 (50):1313-1340.
\nJenkins\, Katharine (2023). Ontology and Oppression: Race\, Gender\, and Social Reality. New York: Oxford University Press.
\nMedina\, José\; (2013). The Epistemology of Resistance: Gender and Racial Oppression\, Epistemic Injustice\, and the Social Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.
ORGANIZER;CN=Esa Diaz-Leon;CN=Miriam Ronzoni: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20260508T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20260508T170000 SUMMARY:Symposium: Philosophy in Practice (PiP) UID:20260503T143012Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/Brussels LOCATION:Rodestraat 14\, Antwerpen\, Belgium\, 2000 DESCRIPTION:Symposium Philosophy in Practice (PiP)
\nTheme and aim
\nOver the past 20 years\, philosophical research has undergone a &lsquo\;practice turn.&rsquo\; Philosophers are increasingly and more explicitly drawing on empirical data and methods from the social sciences to support philosophical reflection. This methodological shift is accompanied by a growing interest in researching concrete social\, scientific\, and political practices. This is evident in various &lsquo\;in practice&rsquo\; research programs. \;
\nDespite the growing interest in empirical philosophy and the growing group of young researchers at (among others) Flemish institutions who use empirical methods\, adequate support and a stable network are still missing. Regardless of their innovative work and capacity for real-world impact\, young researchers involved in Philosophy in Practice (PiP) are therefore often isolated. They do not seem to fit within various disciplinary boundaries and are therefore generally unable to build on existing methodological expertise within their department. For example\, philosophy curricula currently offer few opportunities to develop empirical research skills\, and the necessary expertise for this is limited. Without a broader network of peers\, PiP risks being an extremely labor-intensive and lonely process.
\nWith this first PiP symposium\, we want to address this gap by introducing young researchers in this field\, who are currently scattered across various Flemish universities\, to each other and by stimulating the dialogue between various existing approaches to empirical philosophy in Flanders and elsewhere. We bring together researchers from different universities and sub-disciplines of philosophy to discuss &ndash\; together with established (national and international) researchers &ndash\; the possibilities and obstacles that empirical research in philosophy entails. \;
\nAt PiP\, early career researchers come first: we want to offer them the opportunity to share their personal experiences with practical philosophical research. In addition\, we will examine methodological and conceptual questions raised by the practice turn. In practice\, philosophy is not a clearly applicable methodological framework\, but rather a collective term for all kinds of approaches that lie at the intersection of philosophy and other empirical disciplines. For example\, which (qualitative and quantitative) methods are suitable for philosophical questions? How do we assess the quality of empirical philosophical research? \;
\nA second important pillar for PiP is emphasizing the intra- and interdisciplinary nature of empirical-philosophical research. Unfortunately\, cross-pollination has remained limited to date. In order to introduce young researchers to the diversity of empirical-philosophical research\, we therefore encourage applications from researchers in fields such as bioethics\, philosophy of science\, philosophy of mind\, social philosophy\, or other philosophical disciplines where empirical methods are gaining ground. In this way\, we hope that the PiP symposium will lay the foundation for a robust\, cross-disciplinary network of Philosophy in Practice.
\nProgram and preparation
\nConfirmed speakers on the program are Dr. Sophie Veigl (University of Vienna\, University of Johannesburg)\, Dr. Julie Mennes (Ghent University\, ILVO)\, and Prof. Dr. Kristien Hens (University of Antwerp). Other speakers will be selected from the abstracts submitted. The full program will follow.
\nParticipants are expected to read a number of short texts in preparation for the symposium. These texts will be sent to them well in advance. \;
\nPractical information
\nWhere? \;
\nCity campus of the University of Antwerp\, building R (Rodestraat 14).
\nWhen? \;
\nMay 8 from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
\nHow?
\nParticipation is free\, but places for this symposium are limited. To ensure the interdisciplinary nature of the event\, we are working with a selection procedure. We welcome international applications.
\nYou can register via this link:https://forms.cloud.microsoft/e/rntpr9j12h \;
\nApplication deadline: March 31st \;
\nParticipants will be notified of their acceptance by April 8th. \;
\nWould you like more information or are you unsure about whether your research fits this description? Please contact us at this email address:pipnetwork@proton.me \;
\nSubmitting an abstract?
\nParticipants also have the opportunity to submit an abstract to present their research during the symposium. Nine participants will be selected from the submitted abstracts to give a 10-15 minute flash talk. Submitting an abstract is not a requirement for participation in the symposium. \;
\nAbstracts may contain a maximum of 300 words (excluding references) and can be sent to:pipnetwork@proton.me \;
\nSubmission deadline: March 15th
ORGANIZER;CN=Kato Van Roey;CN=Sofie Avery;CN=Giulia Di Rienzo;CN=Ina Devos;CN=Daan Kenis: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Bucharest:20260508T100000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Bucharest:20260510T170000 SUMMARY:Treasuring Old and New in Social Theology: from Rerum novarum to the Present Pontificate UID:20260503T143013Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/Bucharest LOCATION:Strada General Berthelot 19\, Bucharest\, Romania\, 010164 DESCRIPTION:The Symposium of our Faculty (8&ndash\;10 May 2026) proposes an interdisciplinary reflection on social theology understood as a space of creative continuity between tradition and renewal. The notion of &ldquo\;old and new things&rdquo\; (cf. Matthew 13:52) expresses the fruitful tension between the Church&rsquo\;s doctrinal heritage and its capacity to interpret and orient the social realities of each historical period.
\nThe symposium aims to explore the theological\, biblical\, philosophical\, and cultural foundations of Christian social engagement\, as well as its concrete forms of expression within the life of the Church and in the public sphere. \;Rerum novarum \;is taken both as a point of departure and as a paradigmatic moment in the dialogue between theology\, society\, and public responsibility.
\nContributions are welcome from systematic and moral theology\, biblical exegesis\, patristics\, canon law\, social sciences\, and philosophy\, as well as from approaches that explore the spiritual\, symbolic\, and cultural dimensions of social theology. The symposium seeks to provide a space of encounter between different disciplines and methods\, united by a shared concern for human dignity\, the common good\, and the social vocation of Christian faith.
ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260508T230000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260508T230000 SUMMARY:MANCEPT Workshop on Historical Injustice UID:20260503T143014Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:University of Manchester\, Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:This panel aims to bring together scholars working on philosophical questions that fall within the general scope of the topic of historical injustice. This includes substantive questions which concern certain kinds of past injustice\, such as racial injustice\, colonialism\, or territorial possession\, among others. Relevant also are theoretical questions about the ethics and politics of contemporary responsibilities for historical injustice. Among such theoretical questions are those that concern the grounds of responsibility for repairing past injustice\, what such repair must consist of when it is owed\, whether (and if so\, how) those grounds can be superseded over time\, and how facts about past injustice matter for contemporary political communities\, which includes questions about how (if at all) past injustice bears on normative features of contemporary political communities such as their justice\, legitimacy\, or authority. Projects falling within any of these subjects\, as well subjects broadly pertaining to historical injustice that were not mentioned here\, are welcome submissions to this panel.
If you are interested in participating in the workshop\, please submit an extended abstract (approx. 500-750 words) to aam5jm@virginia.edu by May 8th\, 2026. \;
The panel will take place in-person in Manchester\, UK between September 2nd and September 4th\, 2026. Further details about the MANCEPT workshops can be found here: https://research.manchester.ac.uk/en/activities/mancept-workshops-2026/ \;
Conference online
\nCFP:
How do we remember and represent our migration experiences? Who is involved in these processes? How does history remember these events? What helps migrants and societies to adapt? The significance of these and related questions have made their way into our daily lives\, from the refugee crisis to policy decisions\, individual psychotherapy to (re)building identities\, communities\, and memories.
During the conference\, we are going to turn our attention to processes that are integral to human experience: migration\, adaptation\, and memory. We are interested in all aspects of migration and adaptation\, in their individual and collective dimensions\, in the past and in the present-day world. We would like to examine the role of memory\, the processes of migrating and adapting to various dynamic life circumstances\, across time\, space\, culture\, language\, and discipline.
Therefore\, we strive to represent and discuss the crossroads of migration\, adaptation\, and memory in their multiple representations: psychological\, social\, historical\, cultural\, philosophical\, religious\, neurological\, organizational\, methodological\, economic\, political\, and many others. We will also devote considerable attention to how these phenomena appear and transform in artistic practices: literature\, film\, theatre\, and visual arts. This is why we invite researchers representing various academic disciplines: anthropology\, history\, psychiatry\, psychology\, psychoanalysis\, sociology\, politics\, philosophy\, economics\, law\, literary studies\, theatre studies\, film studies\, design\, project management\, memory studies\, migration studies\, consciousness studies\, dream studies\, gender studies\, postcolonial studies\, medical sciences\, cognitive sciences\, and urban studies\, to name a few.
Different forms of presentations are encouraged\, including case studies\, theoretical inquiries\, personal reflections\, problem-oriented arguments\, comparative analyses\, and creative expressions.
We will be happy to hear from experienced scholars and young academics\, doctoral and graduate students\, as well as professionals from various disciplines. We also invite all persons interested in participating in the conference as listeners\, without giving a presentation.
Our repertoire of suggested topics includes but is not limited to:
I. Arts
-Literature\, poetry\, film\, theatre\, etc. as adaptive mediums
-Adaptation through artistic creation and destruction
-Artistic imagination and adaptation
-Migration as represented in arts
-Art created during migration
-Creative expression through memories
II. History
-Adaptation across history
-Memory processes in writing history
-Documenting history and memories in migration
III. Political Sciences and Law
-Policies related to migration and adaptation
-Human rights and migration
-Bureaucracy in relation to migration policies
-Judiciary systems
-Political agendas\, memory and migration
-Objective vs. subjective memory in politics
-International politics and adaptation
IV. Psychology and Psychiatry
-Mental health and adaptation
-Abnormal behaviors and adaptation
-(Mal)adaptive memory processes
-Social and transcultural psychiatry
-Perception/cognition/attention
-Personality
-Psychoanalysis
V. Medical sciences
-Genetics/epigenetics in adaptation processes
-Neurobiology and biochemistry of adaptation and memory
-Evolutionary approaches to memory\, adaptation and migration
-Chronic diseases\, memory\, and adaptation
VI. Humanitarian work\, Governments and NGOs
-Roles and responsibilities
-Management of temporary and transitory spaces
-Project management and evaluation
-Best practices
-Welcome contexts
VII. Philosophy and Worldviews (Eastern\, Western\, Indigenous...)
-Epistemology and metaphysics
-Existential and postmodern adaptation
-Ethics in migratory context
-Philosophy of memory
VIII. Sociology and Anthropology
-Cultural determinants and adaptation
-Race/ethnic identity and adaptation
-Religion\, adaptation and migratory experiences
-Gender\, adaptation and migratory experiences
-Social networks and adaptation
-Language of adaptation\, memory and migration
-Family relations and adaptation
-Urban planning and adaptation
-Diaspora and community development
IX. Economics
-Adaptation and job security
-Private sponsorship and adaptation
Please submit abstracts (no longer than 300 words) of your proposed 20-minute presentations\, together with a short biographical note to: \;migrationconferenceoffice@gmail.com \;or
online presenters - by 10 May 2026
The conference language is English.
Our conference email: \;migrationconferenceoffice@gmail.com
For all details please visit our website.
https://www.inmindsupport.com/migration-adaptation-and-memory
ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260510T234500 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260510T234500 SUMMARY:MANCEPT Workshop on Republican Political Economy UID:20260503T143016Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:Since the publication of Quentin Skinner (1997) and Philip Pettit&rsquo\;s (1999) groundbreaking analyses of the republican tradition and the notion of freedom as non-domination associated with it\, political theorists and philosophers have applied the &ldquo\;neo-republican&rdquo\; lens to a wide variety of political issues. One domain where the implications of neo-republicanism are particularly contested is political economy. While some neo-republicans posit that republicans should simply want a familiar type of competitive market economy supplemented by a universal basic income (Pettit 2006\, Lovett 2009)\, many others have argued that the implications of republican values may well be more radical. To truly realize freedom as non-domination\, they have argued\, we may need a property-owning democracy (Thomas 2017)\, an economy of worker cooperatives (Gourevitch 2014)\, or even some form of socialism (O&rsquo\;Shea 2020\, Muldoon 2022). In addition to these big-picture questions about economic systems\, however\, neo-republican theory has much to offer for the normative analysis of more particular economic phenomena\, such as work\, debt\, housing\, financialization\, trade\, and many others.
This panel will serve as a venue for theorists to further interrogate the implications of republican values for normative political economy. We invite proposals that address\, but are not limited to\, the following questions:
If you are interested in participating\, please send a 500-word abstract to mjaarte@stanford.edu by May 10th. \;
\n
The MANCEPT Workshops is an annual conference in political theory\, organised under the auspices of the Manchester Centre for Political Theory. The conference offers academics an opportunity to come together in a series of workshops to develop specialised work and engage in lively philosophical discussion. Attracting scholars throughout the world\, the conference is now established as a leading international forum dedicated to the development of research in all subfields of political theory. You can find more information here: \;https://research.manchester.ac.uk/en/activities/mancept-workshops-2026/
Abstract submission deadline: 10th May 2026
\n\nExpressing the political anxieties of our moment\, the term 'technocracy' has become increasingly popular in political discourse. Largely orthogonal to the debate on technocracy\, the connate term 'epistocracy' (i.e.\, rule of the knowers) has made its fortune in normative democratic theory due to the rise in popularity of epistemic theories of democracy (Gauss 1996\; Anderson 2007\; Estlund 2008\; Landemore 2013\; Peter 2023). These theories have developed increasingly sophisticated normative political epistemologies\, arguing that ""epistemic success"" (i.e. the extent to which political decisions\, procedures\, or institutions realize\, or are reliably oriented towards the achievement of some epistemic good that is relevant to political decision-making) is either a necessary or even a sufficient condition to ground political legitimacy and/or authority. Epistemic democrats thus go against the grain of traditional approaches which ground political legitimacy solely upon fairness\, equality\, or self-authorship.
Epistemic theories suffer from unresolved questions. First\, except for Jason Brennan (2016)\, the literature lacks a systematic conceptualization of epistocracy. While epistocracy is frequently invoked by epistemic democrats as a negative contrast\, it often functions implicitly rather than as a fully theorized position (Estlund 2008\; Landemore\, 2022). Epistocracy plays a crucial boundary-setting role: it marks the point at which epistemic considerations are taken to unduly override equality or fairness\, thereby rendering a theory of legitimacy incompatible with democratic norms. Second\, the metaethical dimension of epistemic democratic theories remains underdeveloped. What constitutes epistemic success is often underspecified\, even though it does significant work. Epistemic democrats frequently argue that one cannot have an &ldquo\;epistemically abstinent&rdquo\; normative theory since non-epistemic values such as fairness or equality presuppose epistemic claims (Talisse 2009). However\, the precise sense in which non-epistemic considerations have an epistemic character\, and how this affects their normative significance\, is rarely made explicit. Thirdly\, clarifying these metaethical commitments is crucial because they determine the boundary between epistemic democracy and epistocracy. How demanding one&rsquo\;s notion of truth or epistemic success is\, and how it relates to other democratic values\, will shape how epistemic considerations ground legitimacy.
In this workshop\, we seek to delve deeper into the meta-normative commitments of epistemic democracy and explore the relation between knowledge and political normativity. This should provide a venue for epistemic democrats to clarify these commitments and an opportunity for its critics to sharpen their criticism. This workshop will tackle the following questions:
1. Can knowledge ground political legitimacy? Should it?
2. What is the relation between epistemic considerations and non-epistemic democratic considerations at the level of normative justification? Can there be a strict demarcation between epistemic and non-epistemic considerations? Are democratic values simply a species of epistemic value or distinct from the latter? If so\, when do epistemic and democratic values diverge or conflict and what should we do when they conflict?
3. What counts as \;"epistemic success" and how demanding should it be? What are the different ways in which truth enters political justification? Are there more benign and less benign ways from a democratic standpoint?
4. What is epistocracy and why might it \;be dangerous? What core normative and metaethical commitments constitute an epistocratic theory?
If you are interested\, please send a 500-word abstract to Roger Ventura Cossin (roger.venturacossin@kuleuven.be) by end of day on the 10th of May\, 2026. Selected speakers will be notified by the 18th of May\, in time for eligible participants to apply for a bursary that covers the workshop fees.
\nThe MANCEPT Workshops is an annual conference in political theory\, organised under the auspices of the Manchester Centre for Political Theory. The conference offers academics an opportunity to come together in a series of workshops to develop specialised work and engage in lively philosophical discussion. Attracting scholars throughout the world\, the conference is now established as a leading international forum dedicated to the development of research in all subfields of political theory. You can find more information here: \;https://research.manchester.ac.uk/en/activities/mancept-workshops-2026/
ORGANIZER;CN=Roger Ventura Cossin: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260501T052653Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260511T000000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260511T000000 SUMMARY:MANCEPT Workshop on Justice in Climate Litigation UID:20260503T143018Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:This workshop will focus on questions of justice raised by efforts to litigate the climate crisis. \;
\nAs climate change progresses\, individuals and groups are increasingly turning to the courts in pursuit of climate justice. As of March 31\, 2026\, the Climate Litigation Database maintained by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law lists over 4800 climate court cases\, nearly 70% of which were filed in the USA. Climate lawsuits have been used to pursue a variety of goals\, including injunctions on fossil fuel extraction\, stronger regulation of greenhouse gas emissions\, the implementation or funding of adaptation measures\, compensation for climate loss and damage\, and even punishment of those who contribute to severe climate-related harm. Climate litigation may also be undertaken for strategic reasons\, in an effort to promote awareness of the climate crisis\, undermine the social license of those contributing to it\, and spur more systemic change.
\nThough climate litigation is often used in an attempt to pursue goals of climate justice\, its use for this purpose raises various normative questions. These include questions about the legitimate role of the courts in climate governance\, and the potential for litigation to reproduce patterns of disadvantage due to the unequal accessibility of legal remedies. Some have also raised concerns that climate litigation could prove strategically counterproductive\, for example by spurring political backlash. \;
\nThis workshop will examine how litigation might be used as a tool in the pursuit of climate justice\, new concerns of justice that are raised by such efforts\, and how such concerns might be addressed.
\nQuestions that papers may examine include:
\nHow might litigation serve to promote or undermine climate justice?
\nWhat role should courts play in climate governance?
\nWhen should judicial interventions into climate policy be viewed as legitimate or illegitimate?
\nHow might climate litigation provide access to justice without reproducing existing inequalities?
\nWhat kinds of legal innovation or evolution might be required for the law to adequately respond to the challenge of climate change?
\nWhat are the ethical responsibilities of legal practitioners regarding climate litigation?
\nWhat is the proper role of scientists\, and scientific research\, in supporting climate litigation?
\nWhat role might philosophers and political theorists play in supporting climate litigation?
\nConfirmed speakers: Megan Blomfield\, Laura \;Garcí\;a‐Portela\, Santiago Truccone\, and Paula Nieto \;Herná\;ndez
\nCFA
\nIf you would like to present a paper at this workshop\, please send an abstract of 300-500 words to m.blomfield@sheffield.ac.uk\, by midnight UK time on Monday the 11th of May. Please include your name and any affiliation. We will endeavour to inform you whether your paper has been accepted by May 22nd.
\nPapers will be pre-circulated and everyone attending the workshop will be asked to read the whole set of papers in advance (anticipated to be approx. 6-10 papers). The deadline to submit full versions of the conference papers (maximum 8000 words) will be confirmed after acceptance\, but is likely to be around August 20th.
\nPractical information
\nPlease note that this workshop will take place on Thursday the 3rd and Friday the 4th of September. This year&rsquo\;s MANCEPT workshops are expected to take place in-person only. If this will be a barrier to your participation\, please make note of this in your submission.
\nParticipants will be required to register in full for the MANCEPT workshops (September 2nd to 4th) and will be free to attend other panels when ours is not running. This year's registration fees are £\;325 for academics (including postdocs) and £\;175 for those up to graduate level (including PhD candidates). More information about registration and how to apply for a bursary is available at:https://research.manchester.ac.uk/en/activities/mancept-workshops-2026/
\nIf you have any questions\, please don&rsquo\;t hesitate to contact us at: m.blomfield@sheffield.ac.uk
ORGANIZER;CN=Megan Blomfield;CN="Laura García-Portela";CN=Santiago Truccone: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR