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: Violet Victoria
Date and Time: October (TBA) 2026\, 18:00 CET
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)\; "Ce nu pot vedea neuroștiințele? &mdash\; \;Gramatica \;libertății: Wittgenstein\, Anscombe și critica determinismului tare"
\nMay 13\, 3pm: 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 15\, 6.45pm: Ioan Muntean (UT Rio Grande Valley\, UI Urbana\, \;f2f)\, "Reflective equilibrium and scientific progress"
\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:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260218T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261209T170000 SUMMARY:Reconstructing Carnap Webinar Series 2026 UID:20260811T024334Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION: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:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260317T170000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261117T170000 SUMMARY:Wittgenstein's Lecture on Ethics: Online Lecture Series UID:20260811T024335Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 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:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260429T210000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261126T170000 SUMMARY:Séminaire Arendt 2026 UID:20260811T024337Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION: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:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260528T163000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260924T170000 SUMMARY:Inner Speech Colloquium UID:20260811T024338Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:We are happy to announce another season of the online Inner Speech colloquium starting next month\, with a new list of speakers: \;
\n- May 28th - Gary Lupyan (University of Wisconsin-Madison)
\n- June 25th - \;Kasia Jaszczolt (University of Cambridge)
\n- July 16th - \;Romain Bourdoncle (Collè\;ge de France) &\; Axel Baptista (Institut Jean Nicod)
\n- August 20th - Aleksandr Fadeev (University of Leuven)
\n- September 24th - Keith Frankish (University of Sheffield) \;
\nTimes are all 16:30 CEST
\nMore info about the first talk coming soon. We hope to see many of you there next month! For more information or to subscribe to the mailing list\, contact: jonida.kodra@uni-osnabrueck.de
\nBest regards\,
\nJonida Kodra\, Daniel Mü\;ller and Mathijs Geurts (University of Osnabrü\;ck and \;University of Salzburg)
ORGANIZER;CN=Jonida Kodra;CN=Mathijs Geurts;CN="Daniel Lennart Müller": METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Athens:20260727T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Athens:20260823T170000 SUMMARY:School of Materialist Research Summer Institute 2026 UID:20260811T024339Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/Athens LOCATION:Olympiada Halkidiki (near Stavros\, ancient Stagira)\, Thessaloníki\, Greece\, 57014 DESCRIPTION:&ldquo\;Political&rdquo\; in the contemporary sense\, and as bound by its disciplinary definitions in political science and political philosophy\, assigns societal categories\, forms of law and moralities to the edges or beyond the limits of what is political. Yet again\, these excluded categories are both legislated by the Political within its limits of &ldquo\;discursive legibility\,&rdquo\; in Judith Butler&rsquo\;s parlance\, and relegated to the realms of the pre-political (including anti-political\, non-political). The &ldquo\;beyond political&rdquo\; serves to constitute the political as its Other\, to be subjugated or negated by it\, but also to be kept at bay as the source of elemental revolt\, i.e.\, &ldquo\;prepolitical.&rdquo\; (27 July-31 July 2026)
\n"Realism\, Materialism\, Epistemology: What is Living and What is Dead in Contemporary Thought?\," is the title of a summer school\, part of the SMR Summer Institute in Stagira/Olympiada (Greece)\, scheduled for August 17&ndash\;23\, 2026. It will explore the 21st century provocations and challenges to the dominance of the poststructuralist epistem across the humanities\, social sciences\, political philosophy\, and beyond. \;
\nThe School of Materialist Research is pleased to announce the third edition of its Advanced Design Practices Summer Institute\, Living Design: Ontological Design Redux. The program is aimed at graduate students (Master&rsquo\;s and doctoral) and early-career researchers who wish to expand their creative and critical research on questions related to design\, calling for a fundamental rethinking and redoing of design praxis. The school is taught by internationally renowned faculty in design and the arts from Goldsmiths\, University of London (UK)\, Politecnico di Milano (Italy)\, Arizona State University (USA)\, and Sandberg Instituut (Netherlands).
\n ORGANIZER;CN=Katerina Kolozova;CN=Adam Nocek: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20260811T153000 DTEND;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20260811T170000 SUMMARY:Heidegger on Herder: Between "Herderism" and the Spirit of Hebrew Poetry UID:20260811T024340Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Australia/Melbourne LOCATION:250 Victoria Parade\, East Melbourne\, Australia DESCRIPTION:In the summer of 1939\, Heidegger delivered a seminar devoted to Herder's Treatise on the Origin of Language\, treating it as emblematic of modern metaphysics and its reduction of language to human agency. Against this\, Heidegger develops an alternative in which language is not a tool humans invent and master but the way being itself grounds human existence. Herder\, adopting naturalistic assumptions\, accounts for the origins of language through the faculties of hearing and reflection. But this\, Heidegger argues\, launches the metaphysics of subjectivity on its course toward "machination". Herder's theory of the origins of language thus marks a decisive point in the destiny of German metaphysics\, steering it off course. Heidegger's positive program consists in steering that history back on course\, where it is a matter of a language that hearkens (Horchen) to being\, not one that takes language as a property of the reflecting animal. \; \;\nSeveral striking comments in the Black Notebooks from this very time confirm that the 1939 seminar on Herder is not only an intervention into "the metaphysics of language\," as it purports to be\, but also into "meta-politics\," as Heidegger called it. The Notebooks rally against a degenerate "Herderism\," the monstrous overgrowth of Herder's theory of language\, people (Volk)\, and place\, while the seminar takes up the problem from its root\, as Heidegger diagnoses it in the theory of the origins of language defended by the young Herder in the Treatise. On the one hand\, I argue that Heidegger's reading of Herder is precise\, reasonable\, and illuminating\, which helps account for how the political malaise Heidegger calls "Herderism" degenerated from Herder. On the other hand\, I argue that the positive program Heidegger seeks as an alternative was already grasped by Herder himself\, notably in On the Spirit of Hebrew Poetry (two vols.\, 1782-83). This work is especially significant because of the influence it likely exerted on the poet Friedrich Holderlin\, whom Heidegger takes as the paragon for his alternative proposed\, the "crossing-over" from "the metaphysics of language" to "the essencing of language". I argue that Heidegger's critique of Herder conceals the alternative Herder himself describes in his account of "the spirit of Hebrew poetry". This raises questions about what Marlè\;ne Zarader referred to as Heidegger's "unthought debt" to the ""Hebraic heritage\," which the paper address in conclusion. \; \; \;\n \;\n ORGANIZER;CN=Caleb Perl: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Dublin:20260813T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Dublin:20260814T170000 SUMMARY:Feminism and the Corporation: Radical Metaphysics\, Radical Politics? UID:20260811T024341Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/Dublin LOCATION:Dublin\, Ireland DESCRIPTION:A two-day workshop on feminist philosophy\, social ontology and the corporation. The workshop forms a part of the ERC grant Corporate Moral Progress\, and will take place at Trinity College Dublin. \;
\nSpeakers
\nJade Fletcher (St Andrews)
\nCarol Gould (CUNY)
\nNaï\;ma Hamrouni (UQTR)
\nVanessa Wills (George Washington)
\nLuciana Soria (Barcelona)
\nEllen Vieira de Paiva \;(Maranhã\;o / TU Berlin)
\nCarolina Berrutti (Vienna)
\nSitian Liu (Guangxi)
\nWishy Kane (ASU)
\nWorkshop Summary
\nFeminist philosophy has gone from strength to strength in recent years\, with feminist work on social ontology and power asking us to rethink our very understanding of the social world. However\, one relative lacuna in this growing field has been feminist work on the corporation. With philosophers like Å\;sa Burman urging emancipatory metaphysicians to engage with the &lsquo\;economic base&rsquo\; alongside work on traditional topics like gender and race\, this conference seeks to find ways to begin to fill that gap. In a world where corporate domination is near-universal\, where platforms like Google are rapidly entrenching a new (and potentially post-capitalist) ruling class\, and where corporate power has helped to give rise to increasingly fascist national governments around the world\, the need for feminist theorisations and critiques of the corporation has never been more urgent.
\nRegistration
\nPlease register by emailing cullm@tcd.ie \;
\nAccessibility
\nThe planned location\, Trinity Business School\, is wheelchair accessible\, and we are keen to provide for other disability accommodations - please let us know if we can make the workshop more accessible for you! \;
ORGANIZER;CN=Matthew J. Cull: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260813T120000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260813T120000 SUMMARY:The Aesthetics of Games UID:20260811T024342Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:British Society of Aesthetics Conference &ndash\; The Aesthetics of Games
\n7-9 September 2026
\nUniversity of Manchester\, UK
\nOver the past two decades\, games - both digital and non-digital - have become increasingly prominent within philosophy. As well as receiving attention from aestheticians\, games have been examined in ethics\, philosophy of action\, metaphysics\, philosophy of mind\, and social philosophy\, prompting questions about: agency\; responsibility\; rule-following\; normativity\; meaning\; responsibility for in-game actions\; the organisation of rule-governed activity\; the phenomenology of skilled performance\, and the ontological status of fictional and virtual entities. At the same time\, game studies has developed a rich interdisciplinary body of research addressing narrative\, space\, identity\, labour\, and politics.
\nThis conference aims to bring other philosophical discussions about games into sustained contact with aesthetics\, to furnish a more comprehensive picture of what kinds of aesthetic categories\, evaluative standards\, and conceptual tools are needed to understand the experiences games generate. At the same time\, it seeks to explore what pressure games place on familiar distinctions within aesthetics (e.g.\, between object and experience\, form and performance\, or representation and action)\, and to clarify what is at stake in treating games as aesthetically significant.
\nSpeakers include Kumru Akdoğan (Manchester)\, Craig Bourne\, Emily Caddick Bourne (Manchester)\, Alex Fisher (Leeds)\, Luca Marchetti (Genova)\, Emily Ryall (Gloucestershire)\, Jaakko Stenros (Tampere)\, Daniel Vella (Malta).
\nWe have some spaces available for further papers. If you are interested in giving a paper\, please send an abstract of around 300-400 words to kumru.akdogan@manchester.ac.uk and emily.caddickbourne@manchester.ac.uk\, by August 13th. Speakers will have up to 40 minutes presentation time\, followed by 20 minutes for questions.
\nTopics could include\, but are not limited to:
\n- Games as objects of aesthetic evaluation\, e.g.: How do traditional concepts such as unity\, coherence\, and form apply to interactive media? How does the relation between ludic and narrative structures shape aesthetic experience? Should games be understood as artworks\, practices\, performances\, or hybrids thereof? What does this imply for aesthetic judgement?
\n- Narrative\, fiction\, and counterfactual structure\, e.g.: Do non-linear narrative forms require attention to different standards of evaluation? What is the aesthetic significance of alternative narrative paths? How do modes of play relate to the exploration of counterfactuals? How might interactive fiction rethink familiar narrative conventions from literature and film?
\n- Aesthetics of space and environment\, e.g.: How should we distinguish space as an aesthetically active dimension of games from space as a neutral backdrop for action? How do spatial composition\, atmosphere\, and environmental design structure perception\, movement\, and affect? How can phenomenology\, architecture\, or theories of place enable us to analyse game environments as aesthetic constructs? How should narrativity be understood in environmental storytelling?
\n- Action\, performance\, and play\, e.g.: How does aesthetic value emerge not only from designed forms but from enacted play? Can the exercise of player agency usefully be understood as a form of aesthetic\, or artistic\, performance? What is the significance of improvisation\, failure\, and skill? What are the possible roles of teamwork and coordination in shaping evaluative ideals such as 'beautiful play'?
\n- Formal and procedural aesthetics\, e.g.: What constitutes aesthetic engagement with rules\, systems\, and procedures\, and is this a crucial part of the aesthetic experience of games? What does it mean for rule systems to be elegant? What is the aesthetic experience of mastering complex mechanics\, or of navigating repetition and looping? How can opacity of rules or absence of rules be deployed as aesthetic strategies?
\n- Ethical\, social\, and political dimensions of game aesthetics\, e.g.: How do social and material factors shape aesthetic experience and evaluation? Under what circumstances does a game express a moral perspective on the actions it allows as part of engagement? How do cultural and historical framings of games and play impact on how games should be understood as aesthetic objects? How do games\, and the contexts in which they are played\, navigate questions about who is represented and who participates? What counts as an ethical transgression in gameplay?
\nTo register to attend the conference\, or for any questions\, please send an email to kumru.akdogan@manchester.ac.uk and/or emily.caddickbourne@manchester.ac.uk. Registration is free and refreshments will provided each day. When registering\, please include a note of any dietary requirements. Please also let us know about any accessibility requirements you would like us to be aware of\, which we will aim to accommodate wherever possible.
\nWe hope to see you there!
ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20260814T140000 DTEND;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20260814T153000 SUMMARY:The Ethical View of Civilization and the Future of Humanity UID:20260811T024343Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Australia/Melbourne LOCATION:Monash University\, Melbourne\, Australia\, 3800 DESCRIPTION:Join Zoom Meeting ID: 89630608339
Passcode: 443228
This lecture explores the relationship between the ethical view of civilization and the future of humanity through three questions.
\nFirst\, human civilization today is undergoing a philosophical crisis in both concept and actuality. At the conceptual level\, civilizational centrism has pushed the concept of civilization toward the limits of its usefulness. At the level of actuality\, conflict now unfolds among civilizational tribes\, between humanity and nature\, and between humanity and itself. An apocalyptic civilizational mindset is therefore taking shape.
\nSecond\, where does the future of civilization lie? A philosophical crisis must be resolved philosophically\, and civilizational conflict is fundamentally a conflict between different views of civilization. We must therefore seek the third idea beyond both civilizational conflict and dialogue among civilizations: the return and construction of the ethical view of civilization.
\nThird\, what can Chinese ethics contribute? Chinese ethics and morality give rise to a distinctive tradition of virtue\, shape an ethically oriented and ethical-rather-than-religious form of civilization marked by the continuity of family and state\, and generate the Chinese ethical view of civilization. This view is articulated through six major formulations covering civilization&rsquo\;s foundational vision\, driving force\, ideals and historical models\, principles of construction\, view of the human world\, and cosmic view.
\nThe ethical view of civilization can make two major contributions to the future. The first is a civilizational driving force generated through the modern transformation of Self-discipline and Social Commitment and the dialectical interaction between the most powerful and the ethically best driving forces. The second is a future opened by the primacy of ethics\, in which humanity learns to be governed by ethical reflection.
\nThe ethical view of civilization is a view of civilization governed by ethical reflection. Its essential meaning is learning to live together&mdash\;with &ldquo\;us&rdquo\; and with &ldquo\;them\,&rdquo\; with ourselves\, with nature\, with the cosmos\, and with the future.
\nKeywords: modern civilization\; philosophical crisis\; ethical view of civilization\; governed by ethical reflection\; Chinese ethics
ORGANIZER;CN=Robert Sparrow: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260815T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260815T090000 SUMMARY:JIS Symposium 2026: The Future of Democracy: Renewing Ordered Liberty UID:20260811T024344Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:CALL FOR PAPERS\n JIS SYMPOSIUM 2026 \n THE FUTURE OF DEMOCRACY: RENEWING ORDERED LIBERTY\n PASADENA\, CALIFORNIA\, USA\, 17 October 2026 (Online: Zoom)\n HOSTED BY OMEGA GRADUATE SCHOOL\n Suggested Themes:\nBy its 250th anniversary\, American democracy is at a crossroads. The American experiment in self-government faces a triple challenge. In The Fragility of Order\, George Weigel recounts America’s major twentieth-century challenges whose successes have come into question. Weigel argues that order is a “fragile thing\,” and needs continual renewal\, specially in a postmodern cultural context unsure about the truth of anything. Order rapidly unraveled in the United States on three levels: moral\, cultural\, and political. Skepticism and relativism of the moral order found expression in nihilism and subjectivism in both popular and high culture\, which translated also into increased partisanship in the political order. The question arises how to restore the American Founders’ ideal of a government that invoked “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” that set up a constitutional framework with checks and balances to circumscribe the exercise of political power\, and secure “life\, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” If this “One nation under God\, with liberty and justice for all” is to endure\, then its Judeo-Christian cultural roots need to be rediscovered to nurture individuals\, families\, and communities\, reaffirming America’s promise of equality of opportunity\, in contrast to quasi-Marxist “equity” as leveling egalitarianism or “equal outcomes\,” a democratic temptation that Alexis de Tocqueville warned against in his Democracy in America. The neo-Freudian obsession with sex and its perversions needs to yield to the imago Dei vision of human dignity (Gen 1:27)\; the un-American emphasis on race and gender in education and public policy (affirmative action/DEI) replaced by merit as the best criterion for gauging individual effort\; while politics need the leaven of respect for all. In brief\, can America find its soul and redeem the American Dream?\n JIS Symposium 2026 endeavors to bring together scholars from a wide range of disciplines and denominations for an exciting international conference which takes both scholarship and faith seriously. Keynote: Dawn Lewis Sutherland (Liberty University): "Democracy After Datafication: Personhood and the Renewal of Ordered Liberty."\n JIS Symposium 2026: The Future of Democracy: Renewing Ordered Liberty (Online via Zoom) is co-sponsored by IIR-ICSA-JIS. All conference participants must pre-register. Abstracts (250 words) due: August 15\, 2026: c/o Dr. O. Gruenwald\, JIS Editor\, 1065 Pine Bluff Dr.\, Pasadena\, CA 91107\, USA\, per e-mail (no attachments) to: info@jis3.org. Include: Paper Title\, First & Last Name\, department\, institution\, mailing address\, telephone & e-mail. Fully-developed papers will be considered for publication in the refereed Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies XXXIX 2027. Web: https://www.jis3.org/symposium2026. ORGANIZER;CN=Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies;CN=Oskar Gruenwald: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=America/Detroit:20260815T120000 DTEND;TZID=America/Detroit:20260815T120000 SUMMARY:16th Annual Midwestern Medical Humanities Conference UID:20260811T024345Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:America/Detroit LOCATION:Kalamazoo\, United States DESCRIPTION:The 16th Annual Midwestern Medical Humanities Conference will be on Friday\, \;October 2nd\, 2026. The theme of this year&rsquo\;s meeting is Medical Technologies\, which will comprise (at least) one track. Note that this track includes\, but is not limited to\, artificial intelligence in medicine. Other tracks will be on any topic related to medical humanities.
\nWe invite submissions for presentations (with up to two presenters)\, and we also encourage panel submissions (with three or more presenters) that bring together participants from diverse backgrounds or academic disciplines. We further encourage proposals that involve community partners\, would be of interest to the general public\, and/or create opportunities for students.
\nSubmission Guidelines: Submissions should include name\, department/institutional affiliation\, project title\, and an abstract not to exceed 500 words. Proposals should be submitted by August 15th\, 2026 via \;Oxford Abstracts. Conference registration will be required of all presenters.
\nConference Format: \;As in recent years\, the Midwestern Medical Humanities Conference will have a robust online program\, hosted through Microsoft Teams. Our abstract submission form additionally asks whether anyone would like to present in-person (in Kalamazoo\, Michigan). When submitting abstracts\, please indicate your preferred format.
\nWe will explore a dual (online and in-person) program\, given sufficient interest. However\, it is important for us to retain our online format\, to be more inclusive of international presentations\, those with limited travel funding\, and others.
\nPlease see the link to our Oxford Abstract submission form and others at our conference site:
ORGANIZER;CN="Fritz Allhoff, J.D., Ph.D.";CN=Dominic Aishe: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=America/Edmonton:20260815T150000 DTEND;TZID=America/Edmonton:20260815T150000 SUMMARY:MAiD at Ten: Lessons from Canada’s First Decade UID:20260811T024346Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:America/Edmonton LOCATION:Lethbridge\, Canada DESCRIPTION:Ten years after the Supreme Court of Canada&rsquo\;s Carter decision\, Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) has become an established part of Canadian healthcare\, law\, and public life. Yet despite broad public support\, it remains one of the most controversial and poorly understood issues in the country.
\nThe first decade of MAiD in Canada was largely defined by its legalization and subsequent expansion. Today\, Canada appears to be entering a period of reassessment. Continued delays surrounding the implementation of MAiD for mental illness\, Alberta&rsquo\;s recent MAiD restrictions\, growing critiques from the disability community\, increasing concerns about structural vulnerabilities and social suffering\, debates over conscientious refusal and institutional participation\, and broader questions concerning safeguards\, oversight\, and public trust have prompted renewed reflection on the future of assisted dying in Canada.
\nThis conference seeks to take stock of Canada&rsquo\;s first decade of MAiD.
\nTen years in\, the central question is no longer simply whether MAiD should be legal. Rather\, the debate increasingly concerns where the boundaries should be drawn\, how these boundaries are justified\, and what values should guide future MAiD policy.
\nDisagreements about MAiD are often presented as conflicts between supporters and opponents. Yet many of the most difficult questions arise among people who share similar values but disagree about how these values should be interpreted and balanced\, especially in hard cases. Concepts of autonomy\, compassion\, dignity\, equality\, protection\, and care continue to animate the debate\, yet these are not fixed rules that can be applied mechanically. Rather\, they require judgment under conditions of uncertainty. Consequently\, reasonable disagreement can persist even among those who share many of the same moral commitments.
\nThe conference does not aim to advance a particular position on assisted dying. Rather\, it seeks to promote a deeper understanding of the legal\, ethical\, clinical\, and social questions that continue to shape Canada&rsquo\;s MAiD system. By bringing together scholars\, clinicians\, policymakers\, legal experts\, students\, and members of the public\, the conference seeks to foster thoughtful discussion on what Canada has learned from its first decade of MAiD\, what questions remain unresolved\, and how the next decade should be approached.
\nWe welcome submissions from a broad range of disciplines\, including philosophy\, bioethics\, medicine\, nursing\, psychiatry\, psychology\, law\, public policy\, political science\, disability studies\, sociology\, social work\, and religious studies. \;
\nPossible topics include\, but are not limited to:
\n&bull\; Lessons from the first decade of MAiD in Canada
&bull\; Legal and constitutional developments post-Carter
&bull\; Public trust\, safeguards\, and oversight
&bull\; Clinical judgment\, professional discretion\, and assessor variability
&bull\; Disability and Indigenous perspectives on MAiD
&bull\; Structural vulnerability\, inequality\, and social suffering
&bull\; Mental illness as the sole underlying medical condition (MI-SUMC)
&bull\; Dementia and advance requests
&bull\; Mature minors
&bull\; Conscientious refusal and institutional participation
&bull\; Equality\, discrimination\, and access
&bull\; Comparative and international perspectives
&bull\; Empirical research on MAiD practice and outcomes
&bull\; Media representation and public discourse
&bull\; Lived experiences of patients\, families\, and providers
&bull\; The future of MAiD policy in Canada
We are particularly interested in contributions that illuminate the complexities of assisted dying and engage constructively with competing perspectives. We welcome submissions from participants representing diverse backgrounds\, viewpoints\, and methodological approaches.
\nSubmission instructions
\nAbstracts of approximately 500-600 words should be submitted by August 15\, 2026 to Nicholas Dunn (nicholas.dunn@uleth.ca). We welcome both individual papers and panel proposals. Papers should be suitable for a 30-minute presentation\; panel presentations will be allocated 1 hour.
\nNotification of acceptance: August 30.
\nFormat
\nIn order to maximize participation\, this event will be hybrid. Speakers may present in-person or online.
ORGANIZER;CN=Nicholas Dunn: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260816T230000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260816T230000 SUMMARY:The 2026 Online Symposium of the Network of Asian Environmental Philosophy UID:20260811T024347Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:Call for Papers
\nThe 2026 Online Symposium of the Network of Asian Environmental Philosophy
\nMud\, Islands and Ocean
\nDates: November 5 (Thu) - 6 (Fri)\, 2026 \; \; \; \; \; \; No conference fee\, participation is free.
\nMud\, islands and ocean are places of mixture and changes. Animals and people leave traces in the mud. The NAEP symposium 2026 dives into blue humanities and interrogates the fringes between worlds and aims to explore views in terms of fluidity and process. In the mud\, soil and water shift forms and transform. Boundaries are not clearly apparent. Environmental philosophy forces us to reconsider certain assumptions about clear boundaries delimiting and isolating things\, and mud invites us to this journey.
\nOceans can be places of both encounters and separations\, and \; islands can easily trigger narratives of isolation. Mud involves and interconnects lands and seas. Mud also hosts specific ecosystems and bridges the worlds of different species. But places of mixtures and changes can also be places of tensions\; the encounter between different worlds can unleash clashes about access and belonging. Many struggles about justice unfold in muddy waters.
\nThe NAEP 2026 Online Symposium welcomes contributions from scholars\, practitioners and stakeholders on a broad range of aspects within Asian worldviews\, including but not limited to:
\nSilt\, sand and shells\, changing materialities and temporalities
\nPhilosophies of microbiology and oceanology
\nSea-faring people\, slow living\, Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) and practices
\nJustice and radical approaches to transformation
\nMangroves and coastal ecosystems as protectors from climate change
\nSea level rise and the futures of islands
\nEcofeminism insights on water and birth
\nPhilosophical explorations about natural boundaries\, artificial delimitations\, holism and animism
\nWhale songs and artistic expressions (narratives\, artforms\, storytelling\, memory landscape&hellip\;) related to mud\, islands and ocean in Asian cultures
\nEarly- and mid-career scholars are especially encouraged to send proposals.
\nWe welcome abstracts for individual presentations\, panels\, online posters and workshop proposals. Please submit your 200-250 words abstract with your name\, affiliation and contact informationthrough this form\, by August 16th\, 2026 (or by email toasiaenviphilo@gmail.com).
\nLanguage: The primary language of the conference is English. We aim to be non-native friendly\, so we make it a rule that we speak slow and accessible English. If you would like to present in a language other than English\, please contact us.
\nOrganisation: Laÿ\;na Droz\, Orika Komatsubara\, Dipanwita Pal\, Concordia Marie Lagasca-Hiloma\, Romaric Jannel\, Spriha Roy\, Felipe Cuervo\, May Aye Thiri.
\nAbout the Network of Asian Environmental Philosophy (NAEP)
\nThe Network of Asian Environmental Philosophy (NAEP) was founded by agroup of scholarsin the field of environmental philosophy in Asia in 2019 with the goal to supportworks related to environmental philosophy within Asian traditions of thoughts broadly conceived or related to grassroots perspectives on environmental issues in Asia. \; \; Visit our website:www.asiaenviphilo.com
ORGANIZER;CN="Laÿna Droz";CN=Romaric Jannel: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20260817T153000 DTEND;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20260817T170000 SUMMARY:Useful for the Purposes of Fascism? Philosophy under National Socialism UID:20260811T024348Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Australia/Melbourne LOCATION:250 Victoria Parade\, East Melbourne\, Australia DESCRIPTION:What use was philosophy for National Socialism? How did the academic discipline of philosophy contribute to the projects of National Socialism? And how did the agencies of the Nazi regime assess the usefulness of individuals philosophers or modes of thinking? This paper analyzes these questions by reconstructing philosophy&rsquo\;s usefulness for National Socialism through surveillance files compiled on the discipline of philosophy. By avoiding a narrow focus on ideology and by focusing instead on philosophy&rsquo\;s material contributions to National Socialism\, the paper develops a vocabulary for modes of complicity drawn from internal surveillance assessments. How can the rubric of usefulness guide the robust denazification of academic disciplines? What modes of complicity might emerge through such an analysis? Walter Benjamin famously wrote of developing an aesthetic theory that was &ldquo\;useless for the purposes of fascism.&rdquo\; With an eye towards the present insurgence of fascist and fascist-adjacent thinking\, this paper explores what it means for academic philosophy to be useless of the purposes of fascism.
ORGANIZER;CN=Caleb Perl: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=America/Chicago:20260817T090000 DTEND;TZID=America/Chicago:20260818T170000 SUMMARY:Philosophy of Breakups UID:20260811T024349Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:America/Chicago LOCATION:USC School of Philosophy\, Los Angeles\, United States\, 90089-3617 DESCRIPTION:CFCP Conference: Philosophy of Breakups
\nMany - if not most - relationships eventually end. Their endings can be good - or they can be bad. Philosophers have devoted a great deal of ink to committed relationships and enduring friendships\, and to the rehabilitation of relationships - to topics like apology\, forgiveness\, and reconciliation. Less ink has been spilled over breakups and divorce. This event seeks to remedy this omission.
\nOn August 17-18\, 2026\, the Conceptual Foundations of Conflict Project at the University of Southern California will sponsor a two-day conference on the philosophy of breakups. Quill Kukla will keynote\, and remaining presentation slots will be filled via a call for abstracts. Topics to be covered include\, but are not exhausted by:
\nWhat makes breakups good or bad?
\nWhat is the difference between a relationship ending or merely changing?
\nWhen do conflicts call for reconciliation and when for breakup?
\nWhat are the morally important differences\, if any\, between divorce and other forms of breakup?
\nBreaking up with parents or children as compared to friends or romantic partners
\nWhy haven&rsquo\;t philosophers paid more attention to breakups?
\nBreakups at scale: secession\, civil war\, organizational separation
\nThe ethics of navigating breakups in progress
\nAnd more! We hope you&rsquo\;ll come show us some of the interest and complexity in this comparatively neglected topic.
ORGANIZER;CN=Mark Schroeder: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20260818T123000 DTEND;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20260818T140000 SUMMARY:Blak voices and white noise: on the silencing and resurgence of Indigenous bioethics in Australia UID:20260811T024350Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Australia/Melbourne LOCATION:1 Gheringhap St\, Geelong\, Australia\, 3220 DESCRIPTION:Blak voices and white noise: on the silencing and resurgence of Indigenous bioethics in Australia
\nChristopher Mayes (Deakin University)
Abstract: \;"We didn't know" is a common refrain used by white politicians\, academics and publics in Australia when confronted with examples of racism. Bioethics is no different. While bioethicists in the late-20th century were preoccupied with cloning and reproductive technologies\, the biomedical abuses and neglect suffered by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia received scant attention.
\nWhite epistemologies of ignorance are used to silence and suppress recognition of past wrongs and support the defence "we didn't know". However\, the historical record suggests otherwise. Ethical breaches and racial injustices were known and were vocalised by Indigenous communities\, scholars and activists.
\nDespite these efforts\, professional bioethicists remained largely silent on institutional racism and failed to make connections between colonialism\, denial Indigenous sovereignty\, and health outcomes. While institutional reforms have occurred in recent years\, broader bioethical discourse has often failed to engage meaningfully with Indigenous voices. Drawing on archival sources and interviews\, this paper retrieves subjugated knowledges to highlight how an early Aboriginal bioethics from the 1980s and 90s prefigured the resurgence of Blak bioethics today\, which emphasizes Indigenous sovereignty and decoloniality. This paper calls for a reorientation of bioethics to include Indigenous moral authority and lived experience as central to ethical deliberation.
\nBio: \;Christopher Mayes is an Associate Professor in Philosophy\, Faculty of Arts &\; Social Sciences and the co-convener of the Philosophy and Religious Studies research group. He joined Deakin in 2017\, having previous held research fellowships at the Rock Ethics Institute (Pennsylvania State University) and Sydney Health Ethics (University of Sydney). He is an interdisciplinary scholar with disciplinary backgrounds in sociology\, history and philosophy. His research interests include history and philosophy of healthcare\, sociology of health and food\, and bioethics. He co-hosts Undisciplinary: a podcast the explores the history\, ethics and politics of health.
\nZoom Link: \;https://deakin.zoom.us/j/87904604135?pwd=9FBGQ0KzQJ5ct1iBrrDWaKnQQK7nmZ.1 \;
\nMeeting ID: \;879 0460 4135 \;// Password: \;73627693
\nThis meeting is at 12:30pm Australian Eastern Standard Time (AEST) 18 August 2026 [02:30am UTC 18 August 2026]
ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260819T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260822T170000 SUMMARY:21st European Conference on Science and Theology UID:20260811T024351Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Leeds\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:Lost in Translation? Celebrating Language Diversity in Science and Religion
\nMany questions arise for the study of science and religion. For one\, to what degree is our discipline a study of differing kinds of &lsquo\;language&rsquo\; which might or might not be translatable backwards and forwards? More pointedly\, the field of science and religion has long been dominated by English. In what ways does the use of English as the lingua franca of some areas of academic discourse pre-determine the kinds of questions and solutions that can be asked and offered? How does the science-religion discourse change when conducted in other languages? And how might we overcome these linguistic limitations in future conferences and publications\, without isolating ourselves into linguistic silos? What are the benefits and limitations of linguistic metaphors for understanding interdisciplinary dialogue and collaboration?
\nThe topic of linguistic diversity is also timely for at least three further reasons. (1) The acceleration of artificial intelligence and the wide-spread use of Large Language Models promises to revolutionize how humans use language and experience linguistic diversity. (2) Ever \;increasing discoveries in animal communication and the increasing possibility of symbolic communication with other species offers a new frontier for linguistic diversity. (3) The rise of the &lsquo\;neurodiversity&rsquo\; paradigm offers a new way to celebrate diversity within monolinguistic \;communities\, as we discover the potential advantages of dyslexic\, autistic\, aphasic\, and deaf communication. What can theological reflection offer to these societal changes and scientific discoveries? What can religious traditions learn?
The cognitive sciences have made significant progress in our understanding of core cognitive capacities like motivation\, self-regulation\, and working memory. Many questions remain at the interface of these capacities: How are they related? Can one of them explain others? What is their relationship to human agency? And how is their operation altered by the agent&rsquo\;s practical context\, such as structural conditions and social background? The two-day Agential Capacities Workshop will examine these questions. \;
\nAll speakers attend the event in-person\, but it will be possible to follow the talks online.
\nThere will be a pre-workshop\, "Mind in the Age of AI"\, on the 19th. The pre-workshop is in-person only.
\n
Full speaker line-up:
Denise de Ridder (Utrecht University)
\nMarina Milyavskaya (Carleton University)
\nSantiago Amaya (Rice University)
\nVeronika Job (University of Vienna)
\nDavid Barack (Carnegie Mellon University &\; University of Pittsburgh)
\nAngelica Kaufmann (University of Milan)
\nAnssi Bwalya (University of Turku)
\nFrederik Junker (University of Copenhagen)
\nJ-P Bermú\;dez (University of Southampton)
\nMarina Trakas (Universidade de Lisboa)
\nAndrea Hiott (University of Heidelberg)
\nMohsen Forghani (University of Warsaw)
\nSamuel Delorme (UC San Diego)
\nPhilipp Thamer (King's College London)
\n
For more information\, please see the event website: \;https://sites.utu.fi/agencyproject/2026-agential-capacities-in-context-workshop/
Conference online
\nABOUT THE CONFERENCE: \;
\nResearchers have long confirmed the importance of studying food-related issues in the past and in the today's world. During our interdisciplinary conference\, we are going to concentrate on the relationships between food and memory. In what sense &ndash\; and in what circumstances &ndash\; can food be regarded as an identity-forming factor? What role does it play in shaping our individual and collective memories? How can food studies deepen our knowledge on the social and cultural aspects of our lives? Why are food memories so often related to important experiences of individuals and societies?
\n\; \; \; \; \; \; We would like to discuss these and many other questions from a broad perspective\, referring to the anthropological\, psychological\, sociological\, historical\, and \; aesthetic research on food and memory. That is why we invite researchers representing various academic fields: anthropology\, history\, psychology\, psychoanalysis\, psychiatry\, sociology\, political studies\, philosophy\, economics\, law\, memory studies\, consciousness studies\, literary studies\, theatre studies\, film studies\, migration studies\, gender studies\, postcolonial studies\, medical sciences\, and cognitive sciences\, to name a few.
\n\; \; \; \; \; \; Different forms of presentations are encouraged\, including case studies\, theoretical inquiries\, personal reflections\, problem-oriented arguments\, and comparative analyses.
\n\; \; \; \; \; \; We will be happy to hear from both experienced scholars and young academics at the beginning of their careers\, as well as doctoral and graduate students. We also invite all persons interested in participating in the conference as listeners\, without giving a presentation.
\nOur repertoire of suggested topics includes but is not restricted to:
\nIndividual experiences:
\nFood memories
\nFood and sensory memory
\nSmell\, taste and remembrance
\nIndividual food preferences
\nFood and identity
\nVeganism and ethical memory
\n&ldquo\;You are what you eat&rdquo\;
\nFood and emotions
\nFood and affect
\nFood and abjection
\nFood and sickness
\nFood and eating disorders
\nFood and aging
\nFood and mental health
\nFood and the materiality of memory
\nFood and nostalgia
\nFood and trauma
\nFood and ecstasy
\nFood as epiphany
\nFood in dreams
\n\; \; \;2. Interpersonal experiences:
\nFood and love
\nFood and sex
\nFood and caregiving
\nFood and poisoning
\nFood as a tool of communication
\nFood and intergenerational memory
\nFood and queer identities
\nRecipes as memory practices
\n\; \;3. Collective experiences:
\nFood\, memory and tradition
\nFood habits
\nFood ceremonies and rituals
\nFood taboos
\nFood and religions
\nFood and language
\nFood symbolism
\nFood and cultural/social identity
\nFood and migration crises
\nDiasporic cuisines and belonging
\nFood and displacement
\nFood and war
\nFood scarcity and survival
\nFood and decolonization
\nColonial histories of food
\nCulinary nationalisms
\nMulticultural dimensions of contemporary cuisines
\nFood and fashion
\nFood and social status
\nFood and inequalities
\nFood and genocide
\nFood waste and memory
\nFood and sustainability
\nFood and climate anxiety
\nPandemic food practices
\nFood during COVID-19F
\nFood and capitalism
\n4. Aesthetic experiences:
\nFood and memory in literature\, film\, theatre and visuals arts
\nFood-related literary and cinematic genres
\nCookbooks as autobiographical narratives
\nFood in the media
\nFood aesthetics in popular culture
\nConcepts of good taste
\nFood photography and memory
\nNostalgia marketing and food
\n5. Contemporary challenges and digital cultures:
\nDigital food cultures
\nFood and digital archives
\nFood and social media
\nFood influencers and online identity
\nFood delivery culture
\nArtificial intelligence and food cultures
\nFood and bioethics
\nPlease submit abstracts (no longer than 300 words) of your proposed 20-minute presentations\, together with a short biographical note\, by 25 July 2026 to:conferencememory@gmail.com
ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Warsaw:20260827T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Warsaw:20260830T170000 SUMMARY:EAJS2026\, the 18th International Conference of the European Association for Japanese Studies ヨーロッパ日本研究協会 (EAJS) UID:20260811T024354Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/Warsaw LOCATION:Poznań\, Poland DESCRIPTION:https://nomadit.co.uk/conference/eajs2026/paper/101689
\nhttps://research.berkeley.edu/surf-fellows/jiaqian-zhu/
\n ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260827T100000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260828T170000 SUMMARY:Just Theorising 2026 UID:20260811T024355Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Leeds\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:Main Event: \;27th \;August 2026
\nOptional \;Additional Session: \;28th \;August 2026
\nCall for participants deadline: \;Sunday 10th \;May \;23:59 GMT*
\nTheme
\nMany of us theorise about groups to which we do not belong\, and about issues which seriously impact groups to which we do not belong. In this workshop we will explore questions around how this theorising should be done\, and whether/when such research should be avoided. \;
\nJust Theorising is a reading workshop on responsible and responsive philosophical research. Participants will discuss the epistemological and methodological issues surrounding theorising across social difference.
\nParticipants will discuss texts from social epistemology\, applied ethics\, and by marginalised people writing outside academia &ndash\; all \;of which suggest ways to approach (or not to approach) \;theorising across social difference. \;
\nOur aim is to improve our \;philosophical \;practice by thinking together. \;By approaching these questions collaboratively and openly\, we hope to improve the philosophical and ethical quality of \;our \;future work. \;
\nFormat
\nThis workshop involves one full day of discussions\, and an optional collaborative session the following morning. \;
\nThe main event \;will involve a series of \;reading-group-style sessions\, where participants discuss existing texts on workshop themes. \; \;
On the second day\, the organiser will be holding an optional session\, where we will design an online resource to aid others who want to investigate these issues themselves or organise similar events.
How to participate
\nBecause this workshop is discussion-based\, we are limited to 20 attendees. This means that if we have more than 20 interested \;applicants \;we will need to say &lsquo\;yes&rsquo\; \;to some applicants and &lsquo\;no&rsquo\; to others. \;We hope that we \;won&rsquo\;t \;have to turn anyone away\, but if we do\, this will be decided \;based on \;who will get the most out of the workshop \;(not \;who is the most successful philosopher!). \;Therefore\, we ask applicants to \;state \;why the workshop is appealing to them\, and how they feel it will be useful to them. \;We are looking for an honest statement of how the workshop might support your work\, we are not looking for \;competitive statements of \;academic credentials. \;
\nAccess Information
\nThis event was made possible by the Leverhulme Trust\, thanks to them for funding \;an \;Early Career Research Fellowship which includes this project. This event \;revives the approach and goals of a 2018 event of the same name\, organised by Nadia Mehdi and Rosa Vince. \;Thank you to Nadia for her hard work in the original workshop.
\nOrganising team: Rosa Vince\, Alethea Choo\, Anne-Marie McCallion\, Leonie Smith
\nIf you have any questions about this workshop\, please contact Dr Rosa Vince at r.vince@leeds.ac.uk
ORGANIZER;CN=Rosa Vince;CN=Leonie Smith;CN=Anne-Marie McCallion: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260827T130000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260828T170000 SUMMARY:Freedom and Authenticity - 8th International Interdisciplinary Conference UID:20260811T024356Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:Conference online (via Zoom)
\nCFP:
\nSince the postmodern movements such as Pop and hyperrealist art or literary genres ̶ New Journalism and creative non-fiction questioned the status of the real and the imitated\, the concept of authenticity has called for a constant reevaluation. Walter Benjamin&rsquo\;s 1935 assumption that &ldquo\;the presence of the original is the prerequisite to the concept of authenticity&rdquo\; has been called into question with the corporate and advertising practice continually rebranding the concept of authenticity to suit mass consumers&rsquo\; needs. Why is it then that within the contemporary culture\, with modes of expressions such as irony\, cynicism and sarcasm strongly present\, the notions of authenticity and freedom are still heavily linked with spiritual awakening and happiness? To what extent do authenticity\, individuality and freedom function as mere commercial products and advertising slogans? Have they over time become shallow romantic ideals or do they still hold the substance to be discovered and implemented into one&rsquo\;s line of thinking and living? What makes freedom and authenticity creatively attractive to artists\, thinkers and spiritual teachers? Can authenticity be defined\, measured\, conceptualized in the contemporary context of relativism? What are the main dynamics between freedom and authenticity?
\n\nDuring the conference\, we strive to discuss the contemporary status of authenticity and freedom\, their interrelationship and their association with concepts such as sincerity\, individuality\, vulnerability\, creativity and many others.
\n\nWe invite researchers representing various academic disciplines: art\, film studies\, literature\, theatre studies\, media studies\, anthropology\, psychology\, sociology\, politics\, cognitive studies\, to name a few.
\n\nDifferent forms of presentations are encouraged\, including case studies\, theoretical inquiries\, personal reflections\, problem-oriented arguments\, comparative analyses and creative expressions.
\n\nWe 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.
\n\nOur repertoire of suggested topics includes but is not restricted to: \;
\n\nI. \;Sociology\, Anthropology\, History
\n\nGlobal and local authenticity
\nQuest for authenticity in the context of social and historical crisis
\nFreedom and coronavirus pandemic
\nII. Psychology and Psychiatry
\n\n\;Authenticity and self-growth
\n\;Authenticity and emotional armory &ndash\; perfectionism\, numbing\, etc.
\n\;Authenticity and shame
\n\;Authenticity and vulnerability
\n\;Authenticity and self-image
\n\;Authenticity and individuality: self-absorption versus self-confrontation \;
\nIII. \;Literature\, Film\, Theatre\, Visual Arts
\n\n\;Realism\, hyperrealism\, naturalism
\nAuthenticity and intertextuality: concepts such as original artwork\, reproduction\, printed representation\, copy\, etc.
\nGhostwriting
\nAuthenticity and autofiction
\nAuthenticity and creativity
\nAuthenticity and adaptation
\nOnline theatre performances during COVID-19
\nIV. \;Media Studies
\n\nFake news
\nSocial media marketing and authenticity
\nFreedom of speech
\nV. \; \;Philosophy and Worldviews
\n\nFreedom and authenticity as philosophical concepts
\nAuthenticity and ethics
\nAuthenticity and freedom as the highest humanistic values
\nExistential\, postmodern and contemporary view on authenticity
\nPlease submit abstracts (no longer than 300 words) of your proposed 20-minute presentation\, together with a short biographical note by 03 August 2026 \;to: conferencefreedom@gmail.com
ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260827T180000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260827T193000 SUMMARY:Federico Carlassara - The Emergence of Psychology as a Human Science of Experience. A Phenomenological Proposal UID:20260811T024357Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:British Society for Phenomenology
\nBSP Research Seminar 2026 \;
\nSession 1: August
\nFederico Carlassara
\nOnline | 27 August | Free
\nThe 2026 season of the BSP Research Seminar runs for five months from August to December\, with one session every month featuring a speaker from the world of phenomenology. \;
\nFederico Carlassara
\nThe Emergence of Psychology as a Human Science of Experience. A Phenomenological Proposal
\nDate and time: Thursday 27 August 2026\, 18:00&ndash\;19:30 UK/Ireland time \;
\nMainstream contemporary psychology usually addresses human experience in an extremely reductionist way. That is\, it reduces the latter to simple and isolated parts\, be it neurons\, neurotransmitters or visible behaviours and quantifiable reactions. And yet\, human experience is an incredibly complex and multifaceted subject-matter that can&rsquo\;t be reduced to its supposed biological correlates or to quantifiable variables. Rather\, it emerges as a complex\, meaningful whole in constant evolution. In this talk\, I suggest that psychology needs a radical inquiry into its nature and its methods if it wants to be a rightful science in its own right. If we don&rsquo\;t develop a solid epistemological foundation of psychology\, the latter is likely to not really grasp its subject-matter according to its nature and risks to fail as a science. Finally\, I will claim that psychology could greatly benefit on a foundational level from Husserl&rsquo\;s late thought: genetic phenomenology. \;
\nFind out more about session 1 - including free online joining instructions - and the remaining sessions of the BSP Research Seminar 2026 at BSP Online.
ORGANIZER;CN=Alessandro Guardascione: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Warsaw:20260828T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Warsaw:20260828T103000 SUMMARY:'Here and There:' Food\, Safety and Community in Contemporary Performance Art 「あちらとこちら」：現代パフォーマンス・アートにおける食、安全、そしてコミュニティ UID:20260811T024358Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/Warsaw LOCATION:Poznań\, Poland DESCRIPTION:https://coolhunting.com/link-about-it/does-this-soup-taste-ambivalent/
\nhttps://dajf.org.uk/event/the-art-of-soup-a-taste-of-fukushima
\nhttps://ocula.com/magazine/conversations/ei-arakawa-frieze-presentation/
\nhttps://nomadit.co.uk/conference/eajs2026/paper/101689
\nhttps://research.berkeley.edu/surf-fellows/jiaqian-zhu/
\nhttps://nomadit.co.uk/conference/eajs2026/pp/101689
\nPaper short abstract In the wake of the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami\, artists attempt to explore ways to present the motif of &ldquo\;3/11&rdquo\; beyond geographic confinement&mdash\;beyond Japan. Given restricted access to the nuclear zone\, how do artists respond to &ldquo\;3/11&rdquo\; without direct physical proximity to Fukushima? Paper long abstract
\nIn the wake of the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami\, artists attempt to explore ways to present the motif of &ldquo\;3/11&rdquo\; beyond geographic confinement&mdash\;beyond Japan. Given restricted access to the nuclear zone\, how do artists respond to &ldquo\;3/11&rdquo\; without direct physical proximity to Fukushima? How do overseas Japanese artists represent what took place back in their homeland? How do people outside Japan gain the access to experience and respond to &ldquo\;3/11&rdquo\;? To grapple with this representational dilemma of &ldquo\;here and there\,&rdquo\; this paper looks at the performance art of the contemporary Japanese artist Ei Arakawa&mdash\;Does This Soup Taste Ambivalent? (2014). In this conceptual project\, he attempted to mediate a geographic gap between New York (where he works) and Fukushima (where he comes from). He also intended to reach a geographical balance between Fukushima and the international audience by bringing his family to Frieze London. In dialogue with Does This Soup Taste Ambivalent?\, this paper brings comparative examples of Rirkrit Tiravanija&rsquo\;s installation Untitled (Free/Still) (2007) and the socially engaged art piece Conflict Kitchen (2010). This paper attempts to extend the metaphor of a geographic boundary to invisible yet crucial boundaries among people\, and to further spatialize what Nicolas Bourriaud regards as relational aesthetics. Visual representations of &ldquo\;here and there&rdquo\; can thus be thematically translated into a rendering of boundaries between artists and spectators/participants\, between social environment and human beings and between different ethnic groups. Moreover\, this paper examines the instrumental role of food in performance art. With the same incorporation of food\, these works take advantage of the taste to unite people from different backgrounds\, and to provide a corporeal medium to raise concerns for nuclear radiation and safety. The remediation of food\, in art practice and social media\, further produces a micro-social and micro-political narrative to think of food safety\, human safety\, and community conflicts.
\nAbstract in Japanese (if needed): 「あちらとこちら」：現代パフォーマンス・アートにおける食、安全、そしてコミュニティ 要旨では、2011年の東日本大震災と津波のあと、アーティストたちが 「3/11」を日本の外でどう表現するか を考える研究だと説明されています。特に、福島に直接近づけない状況で、アーティストはどう反応するのか、海外にいる日本人アーティストは故郷で起きたことをどう表すのか、日本の外にいる人はどうやってその出来事に触れ、応答するのか、という問いが立てられています。中心事例として扱われるのは、Ei Arakawa の Does This Soup Taste Ambivalent? (2014) です。要旨によれば、この作品は ニューヨークと福島の地理的な隔たりを媒介しようとした企画として読まれています。比較される例として、Rirkrit Tiravanija の Untitled (Free/Still) (2007) と、社会参加型アートの Conflict Kitchen (2010) も挙げられています。福島の出来事を、食べ物を使ったアートで世界の人にどう伝えるかを考える発表です。 そして、食べ物は人をつなぐだけでなく、安全や不安、社会の対立について考えさせる力を持つ、というのがポイントです。
\n\nhttps://www.academia.edu/73785101/Xu_Weis_Melon_and_Vine ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Warsaw:20260831T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Warsaw:20260901T170000 SUMMARY:Algorithmic Randomness and Quantum Mechanics UID:20260811T024359Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/Warsaw LOCATION:Grodzka 52\, Kraków\, Poland DESCRIPTION:The term &ldquo\;randomness&rdquo\; often appears in the context of Quantum Mechanics. The behaviour of quantum systems is said to be random\, the outcomes of quantum mechanical experiments are said to be random\, certain devices based on quantum processes are said to operate in a random way&hellip\; However\, the concept of randomness is rarely made precise in these contexts. Meanwhile\, in another branch of science &ndash\; computability theory\, also called recursion theory &ndash\; a fully precise concept of randomness has been developed\, termed &ldquo\;algorithmic randomness&rdquo\;. How are these two uses of the term &ldquo\;randomness&rdquo\; related? Is the concept of algorithmic randomness relevant to Quantum Mechanics? The aim of this workshop is to address various facets of this question in an interdisciplinary gathering. The event will take place at the Jagiellonian University in Krakó\;w on August 31st and September 1st\, 2026. The format of the workshop will be hybrid: it is possible to participate either in person or online (but the organizers strongly encourage in-person participation).
\nOur keynote speakers are:
\nIn addition to talks by our invited speakers\, we plan a few contributed talks. We invite submissions concerning any aspect of the relationship between algorithmic randomness and Quantum Mechanics\, including (but not limited to) the following questions and topics:
\nAbstracts of about 500 words should be sent to joanna.luc@uj.edu.pl by 10.07.2026.
\nTo participate without giving a talk (either in person or online)\, please register by sending an e-mail to joanna.luc@uj.edu.pl.
ORGANIZER;CN=Joanna Luc;CN=Tomasz Placek: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=America/Caracas:20260831T200000 DTEND;TZID=America/Caracas:20260831T200000 SUMMARY:VII Simposio Internacional Ilusión\, Autoengaño y Verdad UID:20260811T024400Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:America/Caracas LOCATION:Caracas\, Venezuela DESCRIPTION:With the theme "Illusion\, Self-Deception\, and Truth\," the USB-USAL-USACH Philosophical Research Group continues\, at its VII International Symposium\, the lines of inquiry initiated in previous editions. This time\, the symposium will examine\, from various philosophical disciplines\, the impact of the interactions or indeterminacies established between illusion\, self-deception\, and truth in contemporary philosophy and the world.
\n\nAmong other topics\, the symposium will address illusion and virtuality\, the mechanisms of the perceptual and discursive constitution of our beliefs about the world and subjectivity\, the problem of truth and falsehood\, biased cognition\, and more\, seeking to examine the limits and paradoxes of truth in the face of self-deception and illusion.
\n\nApproaches and Presentation Blocks:
\n\n1. Ontological and Phenomenological Conceptions
\n\n2. Cultural\, Ethical\, and Sociopolitical Conceptions
\n\n3. Epistemological Conceptions
\n\n4. Aesthetic\, Artistic\, and Social Conceptions
ORGANIZER;CN=Miguel Cabrera Machado: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=America/Sao_Paulo:20260831T234500 DTEND;TZID=America/Sao_Paulo:20260831T234500 SUMMARY:Kant Colloquium UFABC — Prefaces and Introductions UID:20260811T024401Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:America/Sao_Paulo LOCATION:University Avenue\, s/n\, Anchieta / Avenida da Universidade\, s/n\, Bairro Anchieta\, São Bernardo do Campo\, Brazil\, 09606-045 DESCRIPTION:Call for Abstracts
\nKant Colloquium UFABC &mdash\; Prefaces and Introductions
\nWe invite all interested scholars to submit abstracts for the Kant Colloquium UFABC\, whose theme for this edition is Prefaces and Introductions. This edition welcomes novel and varied approaches that examine how these inaugural texts not only introduce\, but also generate tensions within\, expand upon\, and\, in certain cases\, displace the very trajectory of Kantian thought.
\nAbstracts must be between 200 and 500 words.
\nThe submission deadline is 31 August 2026.
\nDates: 10&ndash\;11 December 2026.
\nVenue: Universidade Federal do ABC\, Sã\;o Bernardo do Campo campus\, Bloco Zeta\, Room 212.
Format: Hybrid event.
Truth\, Democracy\, and Misinformation | AAPAE Workshop 17 Nov 2026
\nWhat are the ethical dimensions of misinformation and its implications for democracy\, public trust\, governance\, and social cohesion across diverse sectors and industries?
\nIn an era shaped by accelerating technological change\, social fragmentation\, political polarisation\, and growing distrust in institutions\, questions surrounding truth\, misinformation\, and democratic legitimacy have become some of the defining ethical challenges of our time. From artificial intelligence and algorithmic influence to climate communication\, public health\, energy transitions\, media ecosystems\, and governance\, misinformation (unknowingly shared untruths) and disinformation (deliberate lies) increasingly shape how societies understand reality\, negotiate difference\, and make collective decisions.
\nThe AAPAE is a meeting point for practitioners from various fields together with academics with specialist expertise. We welcome submissions from not only academics but also \; practitioners\, policymakers\, industry leaders\, activists\, educators\, artists\, and community organisations to critically examine these questions. \;
\nThe workshop seeks to explore not only the harms associated with misinformation\, disinformation\, and epistemic manipulation\, but also the broader ethical questions surrounding truth\, knowledge\, communication\, responsibility\, and democratic participation in increasingly complex and contested social environments. A public panel discussing misinformation and ethics will precede the workshop.
\nWe welcome interdisciplinary contributions from philosophy\, ethics\, law\, political science\, media and communication\, environmental humanities\, psychology\, sociology\, education\, science and technology studies\, Indigenous studies\, governance\, business\, and related fields
\nPossible themes include:
\n● \; \; \; \; \; \; \; AI\, algorithms\, and social media\, including questions regarding digital ethics\, censorship\, and platform responsibility
\n● \; \; \; \; \; \; \; Democracy\, governance\, and institutional trust\, including questions of political polarisation\, democratic resilience\, education\, civic responsibility\, and legitimacy
\n● \; \; \; \; \; \; \; Misinformation and conspiracy in critical domains\, including climate\, public health\, science and energy
\n● \; \; \; \; \; \; \; The contested roles and responsibilities of gatekeepers\, guardians\, experts and knowledge brokers\, including journalists\, professionals and scholars
\n● \; \; \; \; \; \; \; Ethics of persuasion\, influence\, epistemic justice\, and public discourse
\n● \; \; \; \; \; \; \; Indigenous knowledges\, storytelling\, and truth-telling
\nAt a time when misinformation can undermine democratic processes\, social trust\, and collective action\, this workshop aims to foster thoughtful dialogue about how ethical frameworks\, institutions\, and communities might respond constructively to the challenges of our rapidly changing informational landscapes.
\nWe invite papers\, panels\, roundtables\, workshops\, creative practice contributions\, and interdisciplinary conversations that engage critically and constructively with these urgent issues.
\nWorkshop proceedings and contributors will be invited to publish in our series: Research in Ethical Issues in Organizations (REIO).
\nSubmission: Abstracts (500 words) should be submitted to Dr Hugh Breakey (h.breakey@griffith.edu.au) and Dr Jacqueline Boaks (jacqueline.boaks@curtin.edu.au) \;by 1 September 2026.
ORGANIZER;CN=Larelle Bossi;CN=Hugh Breakey;CN=Jacqueline Boaks: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260901T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260901T090000 SUMMARY:17th INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE – WORLD PHILOSOPHY DAY UID:20260811T024403Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Fakulteti Filozofik\, Priština\, Kosovo\, 10000 DESCRIPTION:Confirmed keynote/distinguished speakers:
\nPhilip Kitcher &ndash\; John Dewey Professor of Philosophy\, Emeritus\, Columbia University
Bjø\;rn Torgrim Ramberg &ndash\; \; \;Professor at Department of Philosophy\, Classics\, History of Art and Ideas (IFIKK)\, University of Oslo
Lee Braver &ndash\; Professor at Department of Philosophy\, University of South Florida
Magnus Schlette &ndash\; Professor at Heidelberg University
Sarin Marchetti &ndash\; Dipartimento di Filosofia Department of Philosophy\, The Sapienza University of Rome \;
Honorary lecture:
\nAstrit Salihu &ndash\; Professor at Department of Philosophy\, University of Pristina
\nOrganized by: Department of Philosophy @ University of Pristina\; Kosovo Philosophical Association\; European Pragmatism Association\; Fé\;dé\;ration Internationale des Socié\;té\;s de Philosophie
\nCall for Papers
\nModernity is characterized by the discovery of the &lsquo\;New Continent&rsquo\;\, which in the philosophical discourse of different periods has not been conceived merely as a geographical expansion\, but as a potential space for the development of a new mode of practical and contemplative thinking. Alexis de Tocqueville evaluated the American Revolution in contrast to the French one\, interpreting it as a more authentic expression of democracy\, while Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel argued that the future of philosophical and historical development would shift toward the New Continent. Similarly\, Jean Baudrillard conceptualized America as a form of transatlantic utopia of late modernity.
\nHowever\, these interpretations do not reduce America to a passive space of European projections\, nor do they define it as an entity devoid of self-reflection. On the contrary\, American philosophy\, drawing upon the European intellectual heritage&mdash\;its crè\;me de la crè\;me&mdash\;articulates a distinct and authentic tradition of philosophical thought. This tradition begins with the transcendentalism of Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau\, where Emerson may be read as a proto-pragmatic figure\, and then develops toward the consolidation of classical pragmatism. It culminates in the work of Charles Sanders Peirce\, William James\, and John Dewey\, who reconfigure the map of Western philosophy through a post-metaphysical paradigm of thought.
\nWithin this framework\, elements such as radical empiricism\, eco-ethics\, pluralism\, Hegelian Darwinism\, and ethical democracy contribute to shaping what is known as American philosophy\, articulated under the conceptual framework of pragmatism. In this paradigm\, freedom\, pluralism\, and democracy are not treated as fortuitous categories\, but as constitutive conditions of philosophical practice itself. In this sense\, pragmatism marks a shift from the primacy of theory to practice\, from practice to theoretical reformulation\, and from a theory of truth to a theory about truth (Rorty).
\nAfter the Second World War\, American philosophy became dominated by the Anglo-Saxon tradition of analytic philosophy\, which marginalized classical pragmatism. It was not until the 1970s that this tradition re-emerged in the form of neo-pragmatism or linguistic pragmatism. The key figures of this reconfiguration are Richard Rorty and Hilary Putnam\, later supported by Richard Bernstein with a more political orientation\, and Robert Brandom within a more epistemological and inferentialist line.
\nIn addition to pragmatism as the central tradition of American philosophy\, eco-ethics developed in parallel in the post-war years through Aldo Leopold\, which can be situated within the broader framework of bioethics as articulated by Van Rensselaer Potter. At the same time\, the philosophy of technology initially developed from European premises with Martin Heidegger and Jacques Ellul\, and was further elaborated through the Society for Philosophy and Technology\, established in the United States. One of the key directions within this approach is post-phenomenology\, representing one of the most significant approaches of the empirical turn in the study of technology.
\nAnother central dimension is the philosophy of law and political theory\, where John Rawls and Ronald Dworkin represent two paradigmatic figures of contemporary normative thought. Likewise\, the tradition of philosophy of art and literary criticism developed\, with Harold Bloom\, Arthur Danto\, and George Dickie reformulating debates on the canon\, the artworld\, and the &ldquo\;end of art.&rdquo\;
\nIn general\, pragmatism has functioned as a space of dialogue and plural-perspectivism. As William James emphasizes\, it can be understood as a &ldquo\;house with many rooms\,&rdquo\; where different philosophical traditions coexist in continuous dialogue. In this sense\, American philosophy appears as an open and unfinished reflective process\, articulated through dialogue with various traditions such as phenomenology\, analytic philosophy\, structuralism/post-structuralism\, the Frankfurt School\, and hermeneutics. This methodological and pluralistic openness makes pragmatism one of the most enduring and inclusive traditions of contemporary philosophy. In this sense\, American philosophy cannot be reduced to a single doctrine\, but should be understood as a shared horizon where freedom\, pluralism\, and endless dialogue are respected.
\nMain Topics of the Conference
\nGuidelines and General Information about the Confernce
\nIMPORTANT DATES:
\nAbstract submission deadline: September 1
\nNotification of acceptance: September 10
\nConference dates: November 19-20 \; 2026
\nThe conference will be held in hybrid format: both in-person and online participation will be possible.
ORGANIZER;CN=Labinot Kelmendi: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260901T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260903T170000 SUMMARY:Fourth Austrian Summer School in Phenomenology UID:20260811T024404Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London DESCRIPTION:The Austrian Society for Phenomenology launches its fouth international summer school. Our objective is to promote the research of young scholars (bachelor\, master\, and doctoral students) that sheds new phenomenological light on current debates in epistemology\, metaethics\, and metaphysics. The descriptive analysis of lived experience\, the eidetic study of the various modes of intentionality\, and the epistemic role and normative dimensions ascribed to experience constitute the cornerstones of phenomenological research. In particular\, Husserl&rsquo\;s conceptions of originary givenness\, evaluative experience\, and eidetic intuition are among the various seminal contributions we find in the phenomenological tradition. Currently\, promising research is done that utilizes such conceptions in order to develop phenomenological perspectives on experiential justification\, the debate between epistemic internalism and externalism\, the theory of value\, (moral) emotions\, moral epistemology\, issues surrounding metaphysical realism and anti-realism\, as well as the epistemology and metaphysics of essence\, modality\, and metaphysical dependence relations. We would like to encourage students to develop phenomenological insights and teachings systematically and in view of contemporary debates in philosophy. Our ambition is to promote such phenomenological research by providing a platform to connect with\, discuss with\, and receive feedback from peers and experts. Each conference day is devoted to one of the subtopics of the event.
\nThe conference will be an \;online event. \;If you wish to participate in the summer school but not to give a talk\, please provide a short statement of motivation (not more than 150 words) and specify your name\, affiliation\, and research interests.
\nCall for Papers
\nIf you wish to participate in the summer school and give a talk\, please apply with an (extended) abstract of the paper you wish to present. Submissions should not exceed 500 words\, must be written in English (conference language)\, and should be prepared for blind review.
\nThe submission deadline is July 15\, 2026.
\nPlease send your applications/submissions and general inquiries to: laurentia[dot]adam[at]uni-graz[dot]at
\nWomen and members of other traditionally underrepresented groups are especially encouraged to apply.
\nPreliminary schedule
\nSeptember 1
\nPhenomenological Approaches to Metaethics
\nNicolas de Warren (Penn State University): TBA
\n3 student presentations commented on by Sonja Rinofner-Kreidl (University of Graz)
\nSeptember 2
\nPhenomenological Approaches to Epistemology
\nMirja Hartimo (University of Helsinki): TBA
\n3 student presentations commented on by Philipp Berghofer (University of Graz)
\nSeptember 3
\nPhenomenological Approaches to Metaphysics
\nKit Fine (New York University): TBA
\n3 student presentations commented on by Michael Wallner (University of Graz)
ORGANIZER;CN=Philipp Berghofer;CN=Sonja Rinofner-Kreidl;CN=Michael Wallner: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260901T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261215T170000 SUMMARY:Inquiry Network WIP Talks UID:20260811T024405Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 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.
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/ \;
There 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.
\nFor example\, the past fifteen years have been marked by the dedicated theorizing about territorial rights in contemporary Anglo-American moral and political philosophy (see for example: Miller\, 2012\; Moore\, 2014\, 2015\, 2019\; Nine\, 2012\; Ochoa-Espejo\, 2020\; Simmons\, 2016\; Stilz\, 2019). While the first wave 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: 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)? 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)?
\nConcurrently\, 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).
\nBeyond 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 crisis. Consequently\, this workshop welcomes submissions that investigate conceptual\, normative\, and applied questions at the intersection of land\, territory\, and justice\, 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.
ORGANIZER;CN=Kaitie Jourdeuil;CN=Michael Luoma: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260902T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260904T170000 SUMMARY:IRCA 2026 - Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Aphantasia UID:20260811T024408Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Glasgow G12 8QQ\, United Kingdom\, Glasgow\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:Aphantasia\, characterised as a reduction or absent vividness in voluntary visual imagery\, has emerged over the past decade as a rapidly developing area of interdisciplinary research.
\nIRCA &ndash\; the Interdisciplinary Reading Club on Aphantasia &ndash\; is now hosting the first interdisciplinary conference on aphantasia in collaboration with University of Glasgow&rsquo\;s Centre for the Study of Perceptual Experience. The conference will be held over three days and aims to bring together international researchers from psychology\, neuroscience\, philosophy\, and related disciplines. The conference seeks to foster discussion on aphantasia\, consolidate current empirical and theoretical knowledge\, and promote collaboration on future research directions.
\nThe program will include five keynote speakers\, as well as contributed talks and poster presentations selected from submitted abstracts.
\nKeynote speakers: \;
\nWilma Bainbridge
\nAndrea Blomkvist
\nJorge Morales
\nLars Muckli
\nAdam Zeman
\n\n**** ABSTRACT SUBMISSION OPEN ****
\nCALL FOR ABSTRACTS
\nAbstract submission link: \;https://sites.google.com/view/irca-conference-2026/call-for-abstracts?authuser=0
\nAbstracts should be no longer than 1000 words (excluding references) and submitted as a Word or PDF file.
\n\nDeadline for abstract submission: \;17/04/2026 (23:59\, BST)
\nNotification of acceptance for \;talk or poster: End of April 2026
\nConference registration open: Early May 2026
\n\nTopics of interest include\, but are not limited to:
\nCognitive and Perceptual Processes
\nMental imagery
\nPerception
\nSpatial cognition
\nMemory
\nAttention
\nInteroception
\nUnconscious mental imagery
\nInner speech
\nRepresentational and Metacognitive Approaches
\nRepresentational formats and computational mechanisms
\nMetacognition and introspective access
\nPhenomenology of imagery
\nNeural and Methodological Approaches
\nPsychophysics
\nNeuroimaging
\nDevelopmental\, Clinical\, and Mental Health Perspectives
\nNeurodevelopmental aspects of aphantasia
\nClinical and mental health perspectives
\nPhilosophical and theoretical questions
\nHow to define aphantasia
\nTheories of aphantasia
\nHistorical perspectives on aphantasia
\nWe hope to see you in Glasgow!
\nORGANISERS \;
\nAndrea Blomkvist
\nJianghao Liu
\nChristian O. Scholz \;
ORGANIZER;CN=Andrea Blomkvist;CN=Christian O. Scholz: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260902T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260904T170000 SUMMARY:Mancept Workshop - Epistemic Democracy and the Lure of Epistocracy: Questions in Metaethics and Political Normativity UID:20260811T024409Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Manchester\, United Kingdom ORGANIZER;CN=Roger Ventura Cossin: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260902T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260904T170000 SUMMARY:MANCEPT Workshops 2026 UID:20260811T024410Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:MANCEPT Workshops 2026: Call for Convenors
\nConference Dates: \;2nd-4th September 2026
\nCall for Convenors Deadline: \;9th February 2026 \;
\nThe MANCEPTWorkshops \;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. \;
\nWe are now accepting applications for workshop convenors. Convenors coordinate and chair individual panels at the Workshops. The Workshops are distinctive in creating a space for both small group discussions focused on tightly defined topics\, while simultaneously providing opportunities for engaging with theorists working on the widest possible range of areas in Political and Moral Philosophy. \;
\nPlease note that the MANCEPT Workshops is \;fully in-person\, with no hybrid or online-only component. This decision has been made with a view to facilitating engaging and lively discussion\, with less time taken up with troubleshooting tech issues. Bursaries are available to speakers and will be awarded on the basis of need. Further details and instructions on how to apply for a bursary will be released in due course. \;
\nTo apply to convene a panel\, please submit a short abstract (maximum 500 words) through the \;Application Form \;
\n\nAccepted panels will then be advertised on our website. \; For more information about the MANCEPT Workshops\, please visit our new website (link below). \;
\nIf you have any questions\, please e-mail the Workshops organisers Maurits Bekkers\, Timothy Siew\, and Anthony McMullin at: \; mancept-workshops@manchester.ac.uk
ORGANIZER;CN=Maurits Bekkers;CN=Anthony McMullin;CN=Tim Siew: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260902T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260904T170000 SUMMARY:MANCEPT Workshop on Theories of Public Reason UID:20260811T024411Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:Theories of Public Reason
\nPanel at the 2026 MANCEPT Workshops in Political Theory\, 2-4 September 2026 \;
\nThis panel seeks to bring together those working on issues related to public reason\, broadly conceived. Public reason is an influential framework for understanding how liberal democracies can make fair decisions for diverse citizenries. There is now an extensive literature around public reason: alongside John Rawls&rsquo\;s well-known account\, variants of the idea have been developed in the work of Gerald Gaus\, Jonathan Quong\, Andrew Lister\, Kevin Vallier\, Christie Hartley\, Lori Watson\, and others.
\nWe intend for this panel to have a broad remit within this topic. So\, we invite submissions contributing to any of the classic debates internal to public reason liberalism\, including\, e.g.\, the correct foundations of public reason requirements and the appropriate level of idealisation for public reason&rsquo\;s &lsquo\;justificatory constituency&rsquo\;. Papers on the application of the idea of public reason to the international domain also are welcome. Relatedly\, we are interested in the clash between competing approaches to public reason\, as exemplified by the debates between &lsquo\;consensus&rsquo\; and &lsquo\;convergence&rsquo\; public reason liberals. In addition\, we are open to submissions that are critical of the public reason framework\, for instance\, from liberal perfectionist\, realist\, or agonist perspectives. Moreover\, we would be interested in discussing key issues related to political liberalism\, Rawlsian or otherwise\, that go beyond the role of public reason within it. Possible examples include the nature of legitimacy\, the debate between advocates of &lsquo\;egalitarian&rsquo\; and &lsquo\;neo-classical liberal&rsquo\; political conceptions of justice\, and questions concerning the organisation of families within pluralist societies.
\nLike all other MANCEPT workshops this year\, this event will take place in person.
\nhttps://sites.manchester.ac.uk/mancept/mancept-workshops/
ORGANIZER;CN=Gabriele Badano;CN=Blain Neufeld;CN=Collis Tahzib: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260902T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260904T170000 SUMMARY:MANCEPT Workshop on Intimate (In)Justices UID:20260811T024412Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 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 will 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.
We are particularly interested in \;exploring \;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).
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.
Registration opens in April
\nFurther details about the MANCEPT workshops can be found here: https://research.manchester.ac.uk/en/activities/mancept-workshops-2026/ \;
ORGANIZER;CN=Isobel Logan;CN="Kristin Käuper";CN=Charlotte Curran: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260902T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260904T170000 SUMMARY:MANCEPT Workshop on Republican Political Economy UID:20260811T024413Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 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 republican 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/
As 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:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260902T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260904T170000 SUMMARY:MANCEPT Workshop on Ethics of Academia UID:20260811T024415Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:University of Manchester\, Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:We are inviting submissions for this workshop to be held as part of this year&rsquo\;s MANCEPT workshops. \;The Workshops will take place at the University of Manchester\, from 2nd to 4th September 2026.
\nRecent resurgence of interest in the ethics of academia has sparked debates about the ideals and ongoing practices within academic institutions. These debates often highlight the tension between the aspirational goals of academia &ndash\; such as promoting systemic equity\, inclusion\, and access &ndash\; and the constraints imposed by socio-political realities\, including discrimination\, bias and lack of diversity\, institutional backlash against specific disciplines\, and budgetary and financial pressures. Our panel contributes to these debates by focusing on challenges that academics face specifically in their role as academics. \;These include\, but are not limited to\, the following areas:
\nWe are interested in these or any other topic related to the ethics of academia. By engaging with these issues\, the panel aims to deepen ongoing discussions about what academia is\, what it ought to be\, and how we might reimagine academic life in more just and sustainable ways.
Submissions should \;be suitable for 30 minutes of presentation + 30 minutes of Q&\;A.
Please submit your anonymized abstract (300-500 words) by \;20th April 2026 \;using \;this form: \;https://forms.gle/UVP6ctu9uAVmko7W6
Participants must pay fees for registration and dinner\; further information about costs will be provided soon.
For any questions\, please contact Kritika Maheshwari (k.maheshwari@tudelft.nl)
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) \;
Liberal and democratic institutions are facing unprecedented challenges. The recent rise of radical right‑wing populist movements and their transnational networks and the access to government in several European countries of radical-right populist parties is testified by restrictive norms on migration\, equality rights\, and welfare.
Scholarly attention has focused on far-right stances concerning anti-migration and EU scepticism. The panel aims to explore and deepen the intersecting role that reproductive rights\, environmental and wider health policies play in shaping the political offer of the European and American far right.
Furthermore\, building on existing studies\, this panel examines the existence of common underlying ideologies of conservative\, libertarian\, and radical right‑wing populist actors enabling them to collaborate across borders to reshape policy agendas at national and EU‑level. It also investigates the transnational role of conservative think tanks in the broader dynamic of far-right discourses and their interplay in domestic policy outcomes.
We invite paper proposals on all aspects of rethinking the relationship between conservative and reactionary thinking\, politics and discursive struggles\, the development of social conservative policies that curb gender equality\, reproductive rights\, universal welfare model\, and environmental justice. Possible topics may be:
-Historical Reconstruction and Philosophical Analysis of Reactionary and Conservative Thoughts on Healthy Society\, Traditional Family\, Health and Social Welfare\, Environmentalism\;
-Discursive Strategies and Ideological Reframing: How do conservative and populist actors appropriate progressive language (e.g.\, &ldquo\;equal rights\,&rdquo\; &ldquo\;free speech\,&rdquo\; &ldquo\;protecting families&rdquo\;) to advance discriminatory or anti‑rights agendas? How do these movements collaborate or reinforce each other&rsquo\;s narratives and policy goals?
-Policy Content and Ideological Convergence: How do stances on public health\, sexual and reproductive rights\, climate policy\, environmental regulation\, and gender equality interlink or align across conservative and libertarian actors? Is there a common ideology or political agenda that unites various far-right parties in Europe and the United States?
-Can we identify a coherent European radical right agenda\, or do national contexts produce divergent models?
-Think tanks\, metapolitics\, and hegemony in the public discursive sphere\;
-Public Health\, Pandemic Measures\, and Antivax Movements\;
-Reproductive health policy\; broader ideological alignments linking opposition to reproductive rights with other policy domains which impact health and social policies.
This panel aims to foster interdisciplinary dialogue across political science\, global health\, gender studies\, environmental policy\, and critical theory. We welcome theoretical and empirical contributions. We invite scholars at all career stages\, especially young scholars\, to submit abstracts that engage with these themes.
To submit a paper\, please send an anonymized abstract of no more than 500 words\, suitable for a 30 minute presentation (followed by 30 minutes of Q&\;A)\, to Corrado Piroddi (corrado.piroddi@tuni.fi) or Valentine Berthet (valentine.berthet@tuni.fi)\, by Monday 18 May.
Successful applicants will be notified shortly afterwards.
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?
The proposed MANCEPT panel will bring together scholars working on these and related issues. Contributions from a range of philosophical perspectives are welcome\, including historically informed work.
Possible topics include:
&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.
\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: OUP.
\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:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260902T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260904T170000 SUMMARY:MANCEPT 2026: New Directions for Cosmopolitanism and Global Democracy UID:20260811T024420Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:The political optimism of the post-Cold War period was accompanied by sustained scholarly attention to questions of global justice and democratic global governance (Caney\, 2005\; Held\, 1995\; Archibugi\, 2008). Yet the past decade and a half has seen a 'globalisation backlash' that has called into question the feasibility and\, for some\, the desirability of cosmopolitan aspirations\, and of the strong global institutions sometimes associated with them (Walter\, 2021). Alongside these political developments\, growing scholarly interest in the subaltern has prompted accusations that cosmopolitan and global democratic thought\, particularly where it emerges from the liberal tradition\, is guilty of a 'false universalism' that masks parochial moral views (Chakrabarty\, 2000).
\nThese developments raise numerous questions for cosmopolitanism and global democracy alike\, which share a common concern with extending moral and political principles beyond the state\, and face parallel challenges regarding feasibility\, legitimacy\, and the accommodation of diversity. Is democratic global governance compatible with cultural and national diversity? Is it possible to construct a truly inclusive cosmopolitan theory\, or is the tradition irredeemably particular? What institutional forms might a legitimate global order take? And what methodological approaches are best suited to theorising such questions?
\nRecent scholarship has sought to address these challenges from a variety of angles. Some scholars have engaged with non-Western philosophical traditions\, or the methods of comparative political theory\, to diffuse charges of Western-centrism (Graness\, 2018\; Xu\, 2018\; Shapcott\, 2020). Others have turned to 'grounded normative theory'\, using empirical research into lived experience to inform normative theory (Cabrera\, 2020). Scholars have also examined the relationship between cosmopolitan commitments and pluralist visions of global political order (Ulaş\, 2025). A further strand of literature has brought insights from empirical political science into conversation with normative political theory\, testing assumptions about the feasibility of global democratic institutions (Koenig-Archibugi\, 2024\; Agné\;\, 2022). Meanwhile\, scholars continue to debate the relative merits of polycentric approaches to global governance against proposals for more centralised supranational authority (Smith\, 2018\; Scholte\, 2014).
\nThis panel invites papers that engage with these debates. It welcomes contributions focused on cosmopolitanism\, on global democracy\, or on both\, including (but not limited to) their relationship to questions of diversity. It aims to bring together scholars working across different theoretical traditions and methodological approaches to reflect on substantive questions of global political order\, and the methods by which such questions are best addressed.
\nPapers are welcome on topics including\, but not limited to:
\nThe workshop will take place as part of the MANCEPT Workshops in Political Theory at the University of Manchester (September 2-4\, 2026). Bursaries are available to help cover the conference registration fee\, and participants are encouraged to apply if needed.
\n\nTo submit a paper\, please send an anonymised abstract of no more than \;500 words\, suitable for a 30 minute presentation (followed by 30 minutes of Q&\;A)\, to Maximillian Afnan at \;m.a.afnan@lse.ac.uk\, by \;Monday 11 May. Successful applicants will be notified shortly afterwards. \;
ORGANIZER: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260811T024332Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260902T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260904T170000 SUMMARY:Techno-(E)utopias of Abundance\, Sustainability and Sufficiency - MANCEPT 2026 conference panel UID:20260811T024421Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:f41f:ccff:feb3:6a6%3 TZID:Europe/London LOCATION:University of Manchester\, Manchester\, United Kingdom DESCRIPTION:CALL FOR ABSTRACTs
\nTechno-(E)utopias of Abundance\, Sustainability and Sufficiency
\nMANCEPT Workshops 2026 \; | \; University of Manchester \; | \; 2&ndash\;4 September 2026
\nManchester Centre for Political Theory
\nAbout the Panel
\nThis interdisciplinary conference panel aims to re-examine the political philosophy concept of utopia through the competing yet intertwined and probably complementary focal lenses of abundance and sufficiency\, under conditions of increasing technological acceleration and deepening ecological constraints. Political and technological utopias have often relied on assumptions of material or productive abundance. Today\, however\, such assumptions collide with the realities of planetary boundaries\, sharp increasing energy demands\, critical element dependency\, and fragile socio-technological systems.
\nThe purpose of this interdisciplinary panel is to create a focused forum in which political theorist\; ethicists\; philosophers\; technology\, sustainability as well as Sci-Fi and Cli-Fi researchers critically interrogate whether emerging technological developments &mdash\; such as artificial intelligence (AI\, ASI AGI)\, quantum computation\, blockchain infrastructures\, and digital finance &mdash\; revive\, reconfigure\, or undermine particular eutopian ideals\, and whether sufficiency-based eutopias could also contribute viable alternative normative horizons.
\nA central guiding question is which aspects of emerging technological systems plausibly support (e)utopias of abundance\, and which rather intensify the case for socio-political imaginaries grounded in sufficiency\, sustainability\, and ecological interrelatedness. There could be a risk that certain contemporary &ldquo\;techno-utopian&rdquo\; narratives &mdash\; especially those associated with AGI\, ASI\, singularity\, and centralized or decentralized digital infrastructures &mdash\; mask potential\, yet underappreciated\, forms of &ldquo\;scarcity&rdquo\;\, digital dependency\, and asymmetrical power concentration\, particularly in relation to progressive energy consumption\, data center expansion\, and the extraction\, utilization and recycling of critical elements.
\nThe panel adopts an explicitly pluralistic methodological inter- and transdisciplinary approach. Contributions are expected to engage in political theory\; ethics\; philosophy\; technology\, sustainability as well as Sci-Fi and Cli-Fi research while remaining empirically literate about both emerging technological systems and eco-environmental constraints.
\nSubmission Guidelines
\nAbstract length: 300 words
\nFormat: Abstracts must be anonymised. Please include your name\, affiliation\, and contact details in the body of the submission email.
\nSubmission email: techno.utopias.mancept26.uom@gmail.com
\nSubmission deadline: 17 July 2026
\nNotification of acceptance: 19 July 2026
\nConference Information
\nDate: 2&ndash\;4 September 2026
\nFormat: In-person only (no hybrid or online component)
\nLocation: University of Manchester\, Manchester\, United Kingdom
\nConference website: https://research.manchester.ac.uk/en/activities/mancept-workshops-2026/
\nRegistration &\; costs: Please visit the conference website for information on registration fees and bursary applications.
\nPanel Convenor
\n&bull\; \; \; \; \; \; \; \; Roman Meinhold &mdash\; Mahidol University\, International College\, Thailand
\nPanel Co-Convenors
\n&bull\; \; \; \; \; \; \; \; Peter Adjei-Bamfo &mdash\; Charles Sturt University\, Australia
\n&bull\; \; \; \; \; \; \; \; Michael Clark &mdash\; Vin University\, Vietnam
\n&bull\; \; \; \; \; \; \; \; Alain Neher &mdash\; Charles Sturt University\, Australia
\n&bull\; \; \; \; \; \; \; \; Nynke van Uffelen &mdash\; TU Delft\, Netherlands
\n&bull\; \; \; \; \; \; \; \; Christoph Wagner &mdash\; University of Hohenheim\, Germany
\nThe MANCEPT Workshops are organised under the auspices of the Manchester Centre for Political Theory and represent a leading international forum for political theory research.
ORGANIZER;CN=Roman Meinhold: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR