What is distinctive about \;modern \;moral philosophy\, i.e.\, that written in the 17th \;and 18th \;centuries\, is often considered to be its conception of obligation. G.E.M. Anscombe\, for instance\, famously argued that modern moral philosophers\, and her contemporaries under their influence\, were wrong to try and ground the normativity of morality without reference to a divine lawgiver. Whether they are critical or merely interpretive in nature\, the views of many other influential philosophers such as H.A. Prichard\, Bernard Williams\, and Stephen Darwall have all agreed in this respect. Indeed\, Christine Korsgaard describes what she calls &lsquo\;the normative question\,&rsquo\; that is\, what \;justifies \;the demands that morality makes on us\, as one that was especially pressing for modern moral philosophers from roughly Grotius to Kant. How did modern moral philosophers explain the normativity of morality? How do modern figures use the concept of obligation to account for the normativity of morality? This conference and the planned edited volume will address these and related questions. Collectively\, the participants will engage with the works of a variety of major and minor figures from the modern period to enrich our historical and systematic understanding of the nature of morality&rsquo\;s normativity.
ORGANIZER;CN=Michael Walschots;CN=Stefano Bacin: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20261014T083904Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Rome:20261031T234500 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Rome:20261031T234500 SUMMARY:Moral Demands Towards Animals: British and German Perspectives (1670–1820) UID:20261014T083943Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:e8eb:30ff:feda:226%3 TZID:Europe/Rome LOCATION:Milano\, Italy DESCRIPTION:Keynote speakers: \; John Callanan (King&rsquo\;s College London) and Aaron Garrett (Boston University)
\nThe history of animal ethics in the long eighteenth century remains surprisingly understudied. British and Irish contributions have often been overshadowed by the retrospective dominance of Bentham's famous 1789 footnote\, while the parallel German tradition &mdash\; which has much more to offer than Kant's perspective on non-human animals &mdash\; has been largely neglected. Yet both traditions deserve attention in their own right\, and their juxtaposition raises important comparative questions: under what conditions do similar assumptions about sentience\, soul\, divine justice\, or humanity's place in nature generate similar or radically different ethical conclusions? What travels between these traditions\, what does not\, and why?
\nThis workshop invites contributions on any author\, text\, or debate from Britain\, Ireland\, or the German-speaking world between 1670 and 1820 bearing on the moral demands humans owe to animals: their moral or legal status\, the normative significance of sentience (or soul)\, duties of care\, animal rights\, or their denial.
\nRelevant topics and figures include\, but are not limited to:
\nWhile the workshop focuses primarily on British\, Irish\, and German-speaking authors and traditions\, contributions engaging with other relevant intellectual contexts (e.g. French\, Dutch\, or wider European debates) are also welcome\, particularly where they shed light on questions of influence\, transmission\, comparison\, or reception. Contributions engaging comparatively across traditions are especially welcome.
\nPlease send abstracts of up to 500 words to david.bartha@unimi.it by 31 October 2026. We aim to communicate decisions by mid-November 2026.
\nThere will be no registration fee. We hope to be able to contribute toward accommodation costs for accepted speakers.
\nThe workshop is organised as part of the ERC Advanced Grant '18ETHICS'\, based at the University of Milan. For more details on the project\, see our website: https://18ethics.unimi.it/
ORGANIZER;CN=David Bartha: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20261014T083904Z DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Rome:20270519T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Rome:20270520T170000 SUMMARY:Moral Demands Towards Animals: British and German Perspectives (1670–1820) UID:20261014T083944Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:e8eb:30ff:feda:226%3 TZID:Europe/Rome LOCATION:Milano\, Italy DESCRIPTION:The history of animal ethics in the long eighteenth century remains surprisingly understudied. British and Irish contributions have often been overshadowed by the retrospective dominance of Bentham's famous 1789 footnote\, while the parallel German tradition &mdash\; which has much more to offer than Kant's perspective on non-human animals &mdash\; has been largely neglected. Yet both traditions deserve attention in their own right\, and their juxtaposition raises important comparative questions: under what conditions do similar assumptions about sentience\, soul\, divine justice\, or humanity's place in nature generate similar or radically different ethical conclusions? What travels between these traditions\, what does not\, and why?
\nThis workshop invites contributions on any author\, text\, or debate from Britain\, Ireland\, or the German-speaking world between 1670 and 1820 bearing on the moral demands humans owe to animals: their moral or legal status\, the normative significance of sentience (or soul)\, duties of care\, animal rights\, or their denial.
\nThe workshop is organised as part of the ERC Advanced Grant '18ETHICS'\, based at the University of Milan. For more details on the project\, see our website: https://18ethics.unimi.it/
ORGANIZER;CN=David Bartha: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR