BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//Grails iCalendar plugin//NONSGML Grails iCalendar plugin//EN
VERSION:2.0
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260317T170000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261117T170000
SUMMARY:Wittgenstein's Lecture on Ethics: Online Lecture Series
UID:20261027T215812Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
DESCRIPTION:<ul><li>17/3/2026 17:00 CET&nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\;<strong>Reshef Agam-Segal</strong> (VMI): How to Be Morally Resolute: Diamond vs. Conant &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\; &nbsp\;</li>\n<li>28/4/2026 17:00 CEST &nbsp\; &nbsp\;&nbsp\;<strong>Samuel Pedziwiatr </strong>(Hagen): Echoes of Euthyphro. Wittgenstein and Schlick on the (Im-)possibility of Scientific Ethics &nbsp\;&nbsp\;</li>\n<li>18/6/2026 17:00 CEST &nbsp\; &nbsp\;<strong>Duncan Richter </strong>(VMI): Ethics and the Supernatural &nbsp\;&nbsp\;</li>\n<li>17/11/2026 17:00 CET &nbsp\; <strong>Maria Balaska</strong> (&Aring\;bo): Wittgenstein (and Heidegger) on the Wonder at Being</li>\n<li><br>Please note the lectures start at 5pm CET (Central European Time).</li>\n</ul>
ORGANIZER;CN=Nimrod Matan;CN=Gilad Nir;CN=Jonathan Soen:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260901T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261215T170000
SUMMARY:Inquiry Network WIP Talks 
UID:20261027T215813Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
DESCRIPTION:<p>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.<br><br>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.<br><br>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.</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Arianna Falbo;CN=Dennis Whitcomb;CN=David Thorstad:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261005T113000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261130T170000
SUMMARY:Computational Social Philosophy of AI Seminars (CSPAIS 2026)
UID:20261027T215814Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
DESCRIPTION:<p>Computational methods and simulations have become a fruitful methodology for philosophers\, particularly for understanding how social relations\, norms\, and communicative structures could and should shape inquiry. Work in computational social philosophy has illuminated phenomena ranging from the epistemic value of diversity and the dynamics of epistemic belonging to the emergence and erosion of norms and processes of polarization.</p>\n<p>Generative and agentic AI tools stand to profoundly reshape computational social philosophy in at least two ways:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<p>As objects of study for computational social philosophy. Generative and agentic AI are increasingly embedded in epistemic life: as sources of information\, interlocutors\, surrogates for social participants\, gatekeepers within epistemic communities\, and even partially autonomous epistemic actors. This should motivate a broadening of purview in social epistemology\, which has tended to focus primarily on personal\, interpersonal\, and institutional factors that impact inquiry\, but comparatively less on technological factors.&nbsp\;</p>\n</li>\n<li>\n<p>As tools of study for computational social philosophy. These systems can lower the technical barriers to computational work. More interestingly\, they may expand the range of social phenomena philosophers can model\, including richer representations of agents&rsquo\; beliefs and behavior\, more complex interactions and environments\, and even digital-twin-style models of particular communities or institutions.</p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<p>This cluster brings together philosophers working in\, or seriously engaging with\, computational social philosophy. We are eager to gather a cohort who can bring rigor\, clarity\, and intellectual generosity to advancing understanding in relation to the above themes.</p>\n<p>We&rsquo\;re particularly interested in philosophical contributions that engage one or more of the following cross-cutting threads:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Modeling of AI systems as socio-epistemic phenomena</strong>: How might explicitly modeling the effects of AI systems within social epistemic processes challenge\, deepen\, or expand existing understanding in social epistemology and philosophy of science?</p>\n</li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Modeling of socio-epistemic phenomena with AI-based tools</strong>: What new forms of social epistemological phenomena can AI-based tools help us represent and investigate beyond traditional methods\, such as typical agent-based models?</p>\n</li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Understanding aims and tradeoffs</strong>: How should we think about the tradeoffs between promises of AI-based tools (e.g.\, flexibility\, expressive power\, scale) and other desiderata (e.g.\, robustness\, justification\, tractability\, understanding) that have long been central to computational social philosophy? What can we learn about these issues from the use of AI-based tools in other disciplines such as computational social science?</p>\n</li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Methodological standards</strong>: What standards should guide reliable\, reproducible\, and more generally epistemically and ethically responsible philosophical inquiry using AI-based methods in computational social philosophy?</p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Please note that\, while we welcome expressions of interest from all disciplines\, this is not a general workshop about AI or AI-based simulations. It is a workshop about how deeper engagement with AI systems as objects of modeling studies and as a modeling tool can ultimately enrich and expand philosophical inquiry.</p>\n<p><strong>Talks</strong></p>\n<p><strong></strong><strong>Date: September 21\, 2026&nbsp\;</strong></p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Speaker: Sahar Heydari-Fard</strong></li>\n<li><strong>Title:&nbsp\; AI and Scientific Progress&nbsp\;</strong></li>\n<li><strong>Abstract</strong>: How will AI affect science&rsquo\;s capacity for paradigm shifts? Using a variation of Zollman and Heydari Fard&rsquo\;s model of scientific communication\, I show that AI can reshape scientific networks in ways that accelerate convergence and make alternative approaches harder to sustain. This can improve efficiency while undermining the conditions for transformative scientific change. I then examine several ways to mitigate this risk\, including interventions in network structure\, AI design\, and scientific institutions. The broader lesson is that AI&rsquo\;s effect on scientific progress depends not only on what AI can do\, but on how it reorganizes the social structure of inquiry.</li>\n</ul>\n<p><strong>Date: October 5\, 2026</strong></p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Speaker: Leonard Kahn</strong></li>\n<li><strong>Title:&nbsp\; Rule Consequentialism: Toward a Game-Theoretic Interpretation with Monte Carlo Simulations</strong></li>\n<li><strong>Abstract</strong>: According to Rule Consequentialism (RC) the moral status of actions is determined by whether they are required\, permitted\, or prohibited by the rules contained in the code whose acceptance\, under the theory's specified conditions\, would have the best consequences. In this paper\, I explore the game-theoretic and computational groundwork that can be used to improve this theory. I begin with a disputed question among discussants of RC concerning the appropriate acceptance rate for a given code when evaluating it. Advocates of fixed-rate approaches evaluate codes at a specified rate but often disagree about what that rate should be\, with 100% and 90% getting the most attention. In contrast\, advocates of variable-rate approaches evaluate codes across multiple rates\, usually averaging the results at each of the percentage rates from 1% to 100%. This disputed question helps to expose a challenge for RC concerning how candidate rules are to be specified precisely enough for their consequences to be compared. RC theorists typically formulate candidate rules in ordinary\, folk-theoretic terms\, (for example\, in terms of lying or harming). However\, rules formulated in this way are often too vague and too disconnected from outcomes to allow us to compare the consequences of codes especially at different levels of acceptance. My response is two-fold. I suggest that we begin by rethinking codes of rules in terms of game-theoretic strategies because game-theoretic strategies can represent candidate rules with greater precision\, while game-theoretic models make the consequences of their interaction more explicit. I follow up on this suggestion by constructing a simple Monte Carlo simulation in which interactions among these strategies can be evaluated at various rates of acceptance. (For reasons of tractability\, I study competing rules governing one recurrent interaction\, while acknowledging that whole-code evaluation and interactions among rules remain downstream problems to solve.). My test case in this paper is the Stag Hunt. My simulation compares five strategies across ten acceptance rates. It includes two simple strategies (Always Stag and Always Hare)\, one randomized strategy (Two Face)\, and two adaptive strategies (Cooperative Adapter and Empirical Best Responder). My results suggest (1) that a comparatively simple cooperative rule can perform remarkably well against the alternatives tested across a broad range of acceptance rates and (2) that\, under the baseline payoffs and the present method of aggregating results\, high fixed-rate and variable-rate approaches can yield surprisingly similar evaluations of candidate rules. My results illustrate how game theory and computational modeling might begin to clarify questions about rule specification and acceptance rates in RC as well as provide answers to these questions\, though a long road remains ahead of us.</li>\n</ul>\n<p><strong>Date: October 19\, 2026</strong></p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Speaker: Elias Brockman [Joint work with Ted Rubin]</strong></li>\n<li><strong>Title:&nbsp\; Generative AI\, Interpretive Provenance\, and the Modeling of Philosophical Systems</strong></li>\n<li><strong>Abstract:</strong> Can AI-assisted formal modeling produce genuinely philosophical discoveries? Accounts divide between reliabilism\, which permits reliance on opaque but reliable processes\, and skepticism\, which denies that systems without truth-oriented agency can participate in discovery. We argue that these positions conflate hypothesis generation\, interpretive justification\, and epistemic agency. Using fragmentary evidence from early Greek philosophy\, we show how generative AI can expand the space of candidate reconstructions without determining which are historically or philosophically adequate. Researchers evaluate proposals through textual evidence\, source criticism\, competing interpretations\, and judgments about contested standards. Formal modeling then tests consequences of reconstructions\, revealing implications\, equivalences\, unsupported assumptions\, and missing distinctions obscured in prose. These results redirect inquiry toward the evidence\, creating a recursive process of interpretation\, implementation\, diagnosis\, and revision. We call the record of this process "interpretive provenance": documentation connecting evidential assessments\, AI proposals\, human judgments\, formal rules\, consequences\, rejected alternatives\, and conditions for reconsideration. Interpretive provenance does not itself justify a reconstruction\; it makes its generation and justification available for criticism\, comparison\, reproduction\, and revision. AI-assisted philosophical discovery is therefore neither machine knowledge nor reliably generated output\, but accountable inquiry in which computational systems help researchers discover novel\, defensible possibilities they might otherwise have overlooked.</li>\n</ul>\n<p><strong>Date: November 2\, 2026</strong></p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Speaker: Chaoqun Ni</strong></li>\n<li><strong>Title: Broader Science\, Narrower Roles: Scientific Expertise in the Age of AI</strong></li>\n<li><strong>Abstract</strong>: Modern science depends on specialization and teamwork\, with researchers combining complementary expertise through collaboration. Large language models (LLMs) offer a new way to access knowledge and methods across fields\, raising questions about how scientific expertise is now assembled. Drawing on publication histories of over 775\,000 scientists and contributor statements from more than 137\,000 papers\, we examine changes in what scientists work on\, whom they work with\, and how teams divide their work during the period of widespread LLM diffusion. We find that research portfolios broadened\, collaboration networks became more interdisciplinary\, and individual responsibilities within teams became more specialized. These patterns were more pronounced among authors with stronger AI-associated writing signals. Our findings point to a shifting relationship between the breadth of scientists' research and the work they perform.</li>\n</ul>\n<p><strong>Format</strong></p>\n<p>The series will consist of bi-weekly virtual meetings\, in the style of CSPS\, starting in October 2026.The meetings are on Mondays at 11:30am ET.</p>\n<p><strong>Applications</strong></p>\n<p>You can submit your application to join the seminars by using this application form: https://forms.gle/SC2iqbZUBU6iB52v6&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>The application form includes:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<p>Basic details: Your name\, email address\, affiliation\, career stage</p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<p>Extended abstracts of up to 750 words and prepared for anonymous review (no identifying information in the abstract itself).</p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<p>The submission deadline for applications is <strong>July 27th\, 2026 [CLOSED].</strong></p>\n<p><strong>Organizers</strong></p>\n<p>Sina Fazelpour (Northeastern)</p>\n<p>Luca Garzino Demo (UPenn)&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>Please direct inquiries to lgarzino@sas.upenn.edu</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Sina Fazelpour;CN=Luca Garzino Demo:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Prague:20261022T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Prague:20261024T170000
SUMMARY:Rationality and Normativity Conference
UID:20261027T215815Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Prague
LOCATION:nám. Svobody 331/2\, Hradec Králové\, Czech Republic
DESCRIPTION:<p>The conference is on the nature of rationality and its relation to normativity\, especially on how rationality and reasons generate norms for what to believe\, trust or doubt. Rationality provides norms governing our thinking\, not only in general (do not form incoherent beliefs)\, but also in specific cases (do not trust that obvious conman). Which reasons the agent does or does not possess\, and their quality\, is also important. This conference aims at bringing together experts on these topics and shed light on these phenomena.</p>\n<p>Getting a clear picture of what rationality and reasons are and what norms they place on our thinking can aid with applied philosophical issues as well. For example\, is conspiracy thinking\, distrust towards scientific experts or falling for fake news irrational? If so\, which rational norms are violated exactly\, and under which circumstances? What does the rational standing of people who engage in these potentially irrational processes teach us about why they engage in them\, and what if anything we should do to combat these phenomena?</p>\n<p>Organization</p>\n<p>Organization committee:&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>Auke Montessori\, Jaroslav Mal&iacute\;k\, Zuzana Votavov&aacute\;&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>Contact:</p>\n<p>https://ff.uhk.cz/rationalityandnorms/#contact&nbsp\;</p>\n<p><strong><br></strong></p>\n<p>This conference is organized by the Department of Philosophy and Social Sciences\, Faculty of Philosophy\, University of Hradec Kr&aacute\;lov&eacute\;\, as part of the project:</p>\n<p>Knowledge in the Age of Distrust</p>\n<p>Funded by the Ministry of Education\, Youth and Sports (Czech Republic). Co-funded by the European Union.</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Auke Montessori:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20261023T093000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20261025T170000
SUMMARY:9th New England Workshop on Metaphysics: Philosophy in the Age of Technology
UID:20261027T215816Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/New_York
LOCATION:600 Mount Pleasant Ave\, Providence\, United States\, 02908
DESCRIPTION:<p><em>Friday\, October 23</em></p>\n<p>9:30-11: Robert Howell (Rice University):&nbsp\;&ldquo\;Boredom\, Creativity and the Limits of Creative Artificial Intelligence&rdquo\;&nbsp\;-&nbsp\;<em>Comments</em>: Anna Pautz-Bjurman (Rhode Island College)</p>\n<p>11:15-12:45: Julia Netter (Brown University):&nbsp\;&ldquo\;Reconfiguring trust: privacy and our (new) digital relationships&rdquo\;&nbsp\;-&nbsp\;<em>Comments</em>: Justin Caouette (Providence College)</p>\n<p>2-3:30: Andrew Lee (University of Toronto):&nbsp\;&ldquo\;Substrate Independence&rdquo\; -&nbsp\;<em>Comments</em>:&nbsp\;Sharon Casu (University of Fribourg)</p>\n<p>*</p>\n<p><em>Saturday\, October 24</em></p>\n<p>9:30-11: Branden Fitelson (Northeastern University):&nbsp\;&ldquo\;A 2-Dimensional Theory of Argument Strength\, with Applications&rdquo\;&nbsp\;-&nbsp\;<em>Comments</em>:&nbsp\;Katia Vavova (Mount Holyoke College)</p>\n<p>11:15-12:45: Gabrielle Kerbel (University of Michigan\, Ann Arbor):&nbsp\;&ldquo\;LLMs and Weak Belief&rdquo\;&nbsp\;-&nbsp\;<em>Comments</em>: Jack Spencer (MIT)</p>\n<p>2-3:30: Jack Spencer (MIT):&nbsp\;&ldquo\;Inanimate Psychology&rdquo\;</p>\n<p><em>*</em></p>\n<p><em>Sunday\, October 25</em></p>\n<p>9:30-11: Heather Demarest (University of Colorado\, Boulder) &amp\; Zachary Miller (AI Digest):&nbsp\;&ldquo\;Evidence that LLMs aren&rsquo\;t aware of their thoughts&rdquo\;&nbsp\;-&nbsp\;<em>Comments</em>: Brendan Fleig-Goldstein (Brown University)</p>\n<p>11:15-12:45: Louis Gularte (Rhode Island College):&nbsp\;&ldquo\;What would it take for AI to understand emotion?&rdquo\;&nbsp\;-&nbsp\;<em>Comments</em>: Laura Sizer (Mount Holyoke College)</p>\n<p>*</p>\n<p><em>Registration is free but required.</em></p>\n<p><em>Reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities with 72 hours notice.</em></p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Sharon Casu;CN=Matt Duncan:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261025T230000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261025T230000
SUMMARY:Negative Social Action: Silence\, Salience\, and the Politics of Absence
UID:20261027T215817Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Berlin
LOCATION:Gabelsbergerstraße 62\, Munich\, Germany
DESCRIPTION:<p>DEADLINE for Abstract Submission: 25 October 2026</p>\n<p>Language is the specifically human alternative to physical violence. As speaking animals\, human beings are capable of inflicting harm through words alone\, and this capacity has driven scholars across philosophy of language\, linguistics\, and related disciplines to investigate verbal violence and hate speech: if we can do things with our words\, then we can also do harm with them (Austin 1962\; Langton 1993\; Maitra and McGowan 2012\; Kukla 2014\; Bianchi 2018\; Langton 2018).</p>\n<p>Yet what is said is only part of the picture. What happens when harm is produced not by what is said\, but by what is left unsaid\, unanswered\, unnoticed\, or absent? Silence is commonly understood as the mere absence of speech\, a neutral gap in communication\, or simply the failure to act. However\, scholars across different disciplines have increasingly challenged this conception\, arguing that silence and related forms of communicative absence are active\, socially structured\, and consequential phenomena (Maitra 2007\; Langton 2007\; Kurzon 2011\; Schr&ouml\;ter 2013\; Tanesini 2018\; Klieber 2024). Silence can communicate\, subordinate\, exclude\, and harm (Bird 2002\; Langton 2007\; Maitra 2009\; Klieber 2024)\; it can be strategically deployed to maintain ambiguity or plausible deniability (Anthonissen 2008\; Schr&ouml\;ter 2013\, 2019\, 2022)\, or emerge from socially organised patterns of inattention that marginalise certain voices\, perspectives\, and experiences (Fricker 2007\; Dotson 2011\; Pohlhaus 2012\; Medina 2013\; Smith and Archer 2020).</p>\n<p>This workshop takes as its starting point two converging lines of inquiry. The first concerns silence as a communicative act: a socially embedded practice capable of conveying meaning\, performing social functions\, and shaping relations (Langton 2007\; Schr&ouml\;ter 2013\; Tanesini 2018\; Klieber 2024). The second concerns what we call the politics of absence: the socially structured forms of inattention\, non-response\, and selective salience through which collective patterns of noticing and overlooking are produced and maintained (Watzl 2017\; Wu 2024\; Kaeslin 2024\; Caprioglio Panizza 2022).</p>\n<p>By bringing these perspectives into dialogue\, the workshop extends questions traditionally associated with philosophy of language and communication studies towards philosophy of mind\, ethics and moral philosophy\, and philosophy of perception. Taken together\, they point towards a broader theoretical framework centred on negative social action: socially significant actions performed not through explicit speech or overt intervention\, but through absences\, omissions\, silences\, failures of uptake\, and organised forms of non-attention.</p>\n<p>We want to investigate cases in which harm is produced through what remains unsaid\, unacknowledged\, unanswered\, unnoticed\, or excluded from personal and collective awareness. Such harm frequently operates indirectly and diffusely\, with a high degree of deniability (Maitra 2007\; Zerubavel 2006\; Saul 2018). Rather than treating silence and inattention as passive phenomena\, the workshop examines their role in producing social meanings\, epistemic environments\, political realities\, and forms of harm.</p>\n<p>We ask how absences communicate\, how they shape what becomes collectively visible or invisible\, and how responsibility should be understood when harms arise not from what someone does or says\, but from what is omitted\, neglected\, or left unnoticed (Ayala-L&oacute\;pez and Vasilyeva 2016\; Smith and Archer 2020). We also welcome empirical work examining how patterns of silence\, non-response\, and inattention shape collective responses to harmful speech\, including their effects on perceived social norms and the recognition of harm (Zapata et al. 2024).</p>\n<p>More information:</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Irene Lo Faro;CN=Jimena Zapata:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20261026T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20261030T170000
SUMMARY:Paris School on Conditionals
UID:20261027T215818Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Paris
LOCATION:65 rue des Grands Moulins\, Paris\, France
DESCRIPTION:<p><strong>Conditionals &ndash\; Theory\, Typology\, Diachrony and Corpora</strong></p>\n<p>INALCO\, 65 rue des Grands Moulins\, Paris 13\, France</p>\n<p>Ocotbre 26-30\, 2026</p>\n<p>For centuries\, philosophers and logicians have examined conditional constructions&mdash\;statements of the form &ldquo\;if A\, then B&rdquo\;&mdash\;in natural languages\, yielding numerous insights. However\, we still do not have a complete understanding of conditional constructions and their fundamental relationship to reasoning\, specifically the process of inferring B from A. Recently\, scholars from fields such as logic\, linguistics\, cognitive science\, corpora\, and artificial intelligence have begun to shed new light on this area of research.</p>\n<p>We are organizing a thematic school with a strong interdisciplinary focus centered on linguistics\, logic\, the role of diachrony in conditional constructions\, and corpus studies. Following three successful thematic schools in&nbsp\;2019\,&nbsp\;2022\, and&nbsp\;2024\, the upcoming Conditionals school will take place at INALCO in Paris from October 26 to 30\, 2026.</p>\n<p>While the school primarily aims to provide French researchers with the latest developments in the logical\, linguistic\, and cognitive aspects of conditional constructions\, it is also open to researchers from around the globe. All are cordially invited to join us! All participants will have the opportunity to present their research work during the poster sessions.</p>\n<p>The faculty will include prominent academics such as&nbsp\;Hadil Karawani&nbsp\;(Konstanz)\,&nbsp\;Stefan Kaufmann (Connecticut)\,&nbsp\;Dean McHugh&nbsp\;(Edinburgh)\,&nbsp\;Ezra la Roi&nbsp\;(Ghent and Leuven)\, and&nbsp\;Alex Reuneker (Leiden). This comprehensive five-day training program will promote the development and dissemination of research on conditional constructions. The event is financially supported by&nbsp\;CNRS\, InIdex-EFL\,&nbsp\;INALCO&nbsp\;and&nbsp\;PLIDAM.</p>\n<p>Contact person: Ghanshyam Sharma: paris.conditionals@gmail.com&nbsp\;</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Ghanshyam Sharma:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/Mexico_City:20261026T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/Mexico_City:20261027T170000
SUMMARY:Innovation and tradition: intersections\, interactions and disputes in culture
UID:20261027T215819Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/Mexico_City
LOCATION:Cuernavaca\, Mexico
DESCRIPTION:<p>This colloquium emerges from the need to think and propose new epistemological positions to the cultural frame. From an interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary perspective\, our aim is to bring together researchers from fields like sociology\, communication science\, Cultural Studies\, anthropology\, history\, computational sciences\, political science\, and others\, to explore critical&nbsp\;reflections on cultural tradition and cultural innovation.&nbsp\;</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Omar Cerrillo:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20261027T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Moscow:20261030T170000
SUMMARY:Formal Philosophy 2026
UID:20261027T215820Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Moscow
LOCATION:105066\, Moscow\, Staraya Basmannaya\, 21/4\,\, Moscow\, Russia
ORGANIZER;CN=Vitaliy Dolgorukov:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20261027T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20261027T183000
SUMMARY:HICO LECTURE: The Tractatus as a War Book
UID:20261027T215821Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Brussels
LOCATION:Blandijnberg 2\, Gent\, Belgium\, 9000
DESCRIPTION:<p>Lecture by <strong>Marie McGinn</strong> (York University): Wittgenstein's Tractatus as a War Book</p>\n<p>Tuesday 27 October\, 4pm</p>\n<p>Faculty Room\, Blandijn</p>\n<p>Abstract<br>Although Wittgenstein formulated many of the problems that are the focus of his logical reflections in the <em>Tractatus</em> before the war\, the <em>Tractatus</em> is drafted and then written in its final form entirely within the context of the First World War. Not only that\, but the nature of the text was fundamentally changed by experiences and intellectual influences\, particularly his reading of Tolstoy on the Gospels\, that Wittgenstein underwent during the conflict. In the summer of 1916\, immediately after Wittgenstein had been through some of the greatest challenges of the war\, in three weeks of fierce fighting at the front during a major Russian offensive\, the text shifted from the purely logical text of the earliest draft of the <em>Prototractatus</em> to a text which includes reflections on ethics. The change is so profound that Wittgenstein could write of the <em>Tractatus</em>\, in a letter to von Ficker: &ldquo\;The book&rsquo\;s point is an ethical one.&rdquo\; The remarks on ethics that eventually found their way into the <em>Tractatus</em>\, had their origin in remarks in the <em>Notebooks</em> that bear the clear mark both of Tolstoy&rsquo\;s influence and of the profound experiences that Wittgenstein had just been through at the Russian front. My aim in this talk is to see how looking at them in the light of the context in which they were written illuminates them and affects our interpretation of them.</p>\n<p><em>This lecture is organized by the <strong>Centre for the History of Philosophy and Continental Philosophy (HICO) at Ghent University</strong>\, Belgium.&nbsp\;</em></p>\n<p>For more info\, see the link below:&nbsp\;</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Levi Haeck;CN=Wim Vanrie;CN=Levi Haeck:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/Port_of_Spain:20261028T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/Port_of_Spain:20261031T170000
SUMMARY:1st Annual Algorithmacy Conference
UID:20261027T215822Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/Port_of_Spain
LOCATION:Arima\, Trinidad and Tobago
DESCRIPTION:<p>The First Global Algorithmacy Conference<br><br>Acronym<br>ALGOCON 2026<br><br>Web page<br>https://algorithmacy.com<br><br>Location<br>La Brea Pitch Lake\, Trinidad and Tobago<br><br>Submission deadline<br>15 August 2026<br><br>Notification due<br>Rolling (public review on the PR thread\, typically within ~5 business days of submission)\; final decisions by September 1 2026<br><br>Final version due<br>At acceptance &mdash\; accepted papers are published with their full review history on the public repository<br><br>Categories / keywords<br>Algorithmic management\, Platform labor\, Gig economy\, Future of work\, Human-AI interaction\, Computer-mediated communication\, Communication competency\, AI literacy\, Labor studies\, Science and technology studies\, Measurement and scale development\, Global South\, Caribbean studies<br><br>PART 2 &mdash\; Call for Papers (paste into the body field)<br><br>The First Global Algorithmacy Conference<br>La Brea Pitch Lake\, Trinidad and Tobago &middot\; Late October / Early November 2026<br>Hosted by GauntleTT in partnership with a Trinidad institutional partner (TBA)<br>Submission deadline: 15 August 2026 &middot\; Open review &middot\; Open access &middot\; APA 7<br>Submit at https://algorithmacy.com<br><br>The argument the conference convenes around<br><br>Algorithmacy is the communication competency through which a worker coordinates with another human party through an algorithmic third party. The construct names what the platform-work literature has been documenting without naming: a worker-level capacity that explains why equivalently positioned participants on identical algorithmic systems achieve divergent coordination outcomes. The competency vocabulary the field inherited from computer-mediated communication\, human-machine communication\, and AI-mediated communication was built around a worker on one side of a medium\, partner\, or sender-side agent. It does not reach the form in which the algorithm sits between two human parties and acts on inputs from both in pursuit of its own objectives.<br><br>A new coordination form has produced a new competency before\, and the new competency was not a refinement of the prior one. Oracy and literacy are the historical precedents. Oracy was the competency a face-to-face speaker exercised before a listener present in the same place at the same time. Writing introduced a third structural position the speaker had not occupied &mdash\; an author addressing a reader through a document that conveyed without acting &mdash\; and the competency that form required was not more proficient speech but reading\, writing\, citing\, and working through institutions that ran on text. The algorithmic form is not a more sophisticated channel through which writing happens. It is a third party with its own objectives that transforms each input as part of its operation\, and the competency it requires has not yet been named in the field's existing vocabulary.<br><br>Institutions are already building curricula for the new form\, and the vocabulary scholarship hands them will determine what those institutions train. Bootcamps\, certification regimes\, gig-worker advocacy organizations\, platform-cooperative experiments\, AI engineering programs\, and state-level workforce-development efforts converge on what they variously call algorithmic skill\, AI fluency\, or platform literacy &mdash\; each naming something the algorithm does or shows\, and each training workers to read what the algorithm displays rather than to coordinate with another person through it.<br><br>The conference convenes the scholars\, practitioners\, educators\, and worker advocates whose work bears on this question. It asks what algorithmacy is\, how it develops\, how it should be measured\, how it distributes across worker populations\, how it transfers across architectures\, how it aggregates to teams and institutions\, and what training\, certification\, and labor protection look like once the construct is in place.<br><br>Why La Brea<br><br>La Brea Pitch Lake is the world's largest natural deposit of asphalt &mdash\; an opaque substrate that has produced the roads of empires while remaining itself unreadable to those who walked over it. The choice of venue is not metaphor for its own sake. The conference convenes in a Caribbean nation whose talent is being recruited into the global algorithmic economy under terms its workers and institutions did not author. Whether the competency develops uniformly across populations or replicates existing stratification will be answered first in the regions whose workers enter the form last. La Brea grounds the convening in that stake.<br><br>Tracks and suggested topics<br><br>Submissions are invited in the following twelve tracks. Listed topics are suggestive\, not exhaustive. Authors working across two or more tracks should choose the closest fit and note the secondary track in the submission.<br><br>Track 1 &mdash\; Construct and theory<br>The conceptual domain of algorithmacy and construct clarity\; the variance puzzle\; the triadic form as a coordination form distinct from dyadic precedents\; discriminant position relative to CMC competence\, HMC\, AI-MC\, algorithmic literacy\, AI literacy\, algorithm sensemaking\, and algorithmic competency\; jingle and jangle problems in the human-AI construct family\; co-optation as a coordination mechanism alongside hierarchy\, market\, and network\; competency versus literacy/sensemaking/knowledge\; boundary conditions\; levels of analysis\; definitions\, dimensions\, and the nomological network.<br><br>Track 2 &mdash\; Historical and philosophical foundations<br>Oracy &rarr\; literacy &rarr\; algorithmacy as ontological transitions in coordination\; the Ong/Goody/Havelock lineage and the cognitive neuroscience of literacy\; the New Literacy Studies critique and what survives it\; print as a structural transition\; algorithmic culture and cultural-epistemic rupture\; contemporary articulations of the algorithmic epoch\; the intermediary/mediator distinction and its limits in the triadic case\; the irreducibility of triads\; the sociology of paperwork and the bureaucratic file\; the mediated triad as a form distinct from brokerage and tertius traditions.<br><br>Track 3 &mdash\; Measurement and scale development<br>Item generation and content validation\; discriminant validity against algorithmic literacy\, AI literacy\, algorithm sensemaking\, and algorithmic competency\; measurement invariance across cohorts\, populations\, platforms\, and languages\; longitudinal trajectory analysis\; mixed-methods designs for situated competency\; ethnographic methods for real-time platform interaction\; the construct-identity fallacy in human-AI measurement\; frameworks for triadic competency constructs\; convergent validity\; cohort-based replication of confirmatory factor structure.<br><br>Track 4 &mdash\; Empirical settings<br>Rideshare\, food delivery\, and on-demand labor\; freelance platforms and opaque-evaluation cases\; AI engineering and AI-augmented IDEs\; knowledge work with LLMs in legal\, medical\, and consulting contexts\; healthcare diagnostic and triage systems\; customer service under recommendation and routing\; education under AI tutoring and assessment\; content creation and journalism under recommender mediation\; logistics\, warehousing\, and last-mile delivery\; financial services\, lending\, and credit under algorithmic decisioning.<br><br>Track 5 &mdash\; Antecedents<br>Exposure to mediated coordination as the primary engine\; reflective practice and feedback interpretation\; motivational engagement and the partner-versus-constraint framing\; peer social support and cognitive job crafting\; implicit acquisition without curriculum\; prior digital exposure and transfer from other domains\; mentorship\, apprenticeship\, and shadow learning\; folk theorization and adaptive practice on changing platforms\; reflection-in-action under algorithmic conditions\; workplace social ecologies as antecedents.<br><br>Track 6 &mdash\; Outcomes<br>Coordination success on measurable platforms\; earnings and the worker-level economics of mediation\; retention and persistence through algorithmic disruption\; AI burnout as a competency rather than a workload problem\; service behavior and worker-customer interaction\; identification with platform work and work-identity formation\; career trajectories and mobility within and across platforms\; well-being\, autonomy\, anxiety\, and isolation\; resistance\, voice\, and political mobilization\; performance benchmarking and coordination quality.<br><br>Track 7 &mdash\; Distribution and stratification<br>Algorithmic awareness\, knowledge gaps\, and digital divides\; gender\, race\, and class in platform coordination outcomes\; regional and national variation in capacity development\; the coding elite and the cybertariat as political-economy positions\; algorithmacy as human capital versus access to developmental conditions\; algorithmic stratification as a vector of labor-market inequality\; the Global South and the algorithmic frontier\; Indigenous\, diasporic\, and minoritized communities\; generational differences\; disability\, neurodivergence\, and triadic coordination.<br><br>Track 8 &mdash\; Transferability<br>Multi-homing and platform-portable competency\; architecture-specific versus architecture-general capacity\; generalization of algorithmic management features across platforms\; the encoding problem and the abstraction the form imposes\; worker-skill-transfer mechanisms\; cross-architectural learning curves and switching costs\; generalized algorithmacy versus platform-specific repertoires\; relation to broader sociotechnical competencies\; transfer across human and algorithmic interlocutors\; transfer across natural-language and code-based systems.<br><br>Track 9 &mdash\; Aggregation\, institutions\, and curriculum<br>Team-level algorithmacy and collective coordination capacity\; organizational algorithmacy as a firm-level capability\; curriculum design &mdash\; what training should actually teach\; certification and credentialing regimes\; the AI engineering bootcamp as a developmental setting\; higher education and the algorithmic curriculum\; K-12 instruction alongside oracy and literacy\; workforce development under platform displacement\; apprenticeship models\; professional associations and learned societies.<br><br>Track 10 &mdash\; Labor protections\, policy\, and political economy<br>Legal recognition of platform-mediated work\; unions and worker centers\; platform cooperativism and alternative ownership\; state-level regulation of algorithmic management\; international labor law and the cross-border platform\; worker data rights and algorithmic accountability\; wage transparency and information asymmetries\; national AI strategies and worker development\; the sovereignty question for small states\; algorithmacy as a micro-foundation of organizational and national sovereignty.<br><br>Track 11 &mdash\; Caribbean\, Global South\, and frontier perspectives<br>Caribbean labor markets and the platform economy\; AI talent development in small island developing states\; Trinidad and Tobago\, GauntleTT\, and the Caribbean AI engineering pipeline\; diaspora networks and cross-border mediated coordination\; postcolonial frameworks for reading platform capital\; language\, code-switching\, and multilingual interfaces\; Caribbean creative industries under algorithmic distribution\; resource economies and the energy demands of AI\; South-South cooperation on competency development\; the question of an algorithmic equivalent to the New International Economic Order.<br><br>Track 12 &mdash\; Critique\, limits\, and the conference's own commitments<br>The case for refining existing constructs rather than naming a new one\; the case against the literacy-historical analogy\; materialist and labor-process critiques\; critical algorithm studies and whether competency is the right unit\; phenomenological and existential readings of mediation\; the limits of measurement and the case for ethnographic primacy\; decolonial critiques of competency-development frameworks\; the political risks of credentialing\; what algorithmacy cannot reach\; the conference's own complicity in convening under the conditions it studies.<br><br>Submission types<br><br>The conference accepts five submission types:<br>- Full paper &mdash\; 6&ndash\;8 pages. Empirical\, theoretical\, or review work.<br>- Research note &mdash\; 2&ndash\;3 pages. Work-in-progress\, methodological innovations\, single-case studies.<br>- Panel &mdash\; 3&ndash\;4 participants with a unifying argument and a short framing statement.<br>- Poster &mdash\; visual presentation with a one-page extended abstract.<br>- Practitioner report &mdash\; 2&ndash\;4 pages from worker advocates\, organizers\, curriculum designers\, and policy practitioners\; reviewed for relevance and substance rather than academic form.<br><br>How to submit<br><br>Intake is via pull request against the conference's public repository. Drop a 300&ndash\;500-word abstract and outline as submissions/(your-handle).md\, then open a PR titled [Type] [TR.0X] Your title. Full instructions and an AI-assisted submission path are at https://algorithmacy.com. Manuscripts follow APA 7. Submissions are in English\; translation support is available for presenters whose first language is not English.<br><br>Review model &mdash\; open\, signed\, published\, timestamped<br><br>This is open review. Submissions and review threads live on the public repository from the moment of intake\; there is no anonymized stage. Reviewers attach their names to their assessments. Accepted papers ship alongside their full review history &mdash\; reviewer reports\, author responses\, and the revision trail. Your pull request is a public\, dated record: in any future priority dispute\, the conference will support your claim based on the PR timestamp. Review is rolling\, with responses on the PR thread typically within about five business days.<br><br>Awards<br>- Founders' Paper Award &mdash\; best full paper.<br>- Pitch Lake Prize &mdash\; most theoretically generative early-career contribution.<br>- GauntleTT Practitioner Award &mdash\; the practitioner report that most advances the translation of algorithmacy into curriculum\, policy\, or worker advocacy.<br><br>Travel and logistics<br><br>The venue is approximately 90 minutes by road from Piarco International Airport. Limited travel support is available for scholars from low- and middle-income countries\, doctoral students\, and worker representatives\; apply with your abstract. A site visit to the Pitch Lake is built into the program.<br><br>Key dates<br>- Submission deadline: 1 August 2026<br>- Review: rolling\, public on the PR thread (~5 business days)<br>- Final decisions: [CONFIRM &mdash\; suggested mid-September 2026]<br>- Conference: [CONFIRM] Late October / Early November 2026\, La Brea Pitch Lake\, Trinidad and Tobago<br><br>Contact<br>Roger Hunt\, Bentley University &mdash\; rhunt@bentley.edu<br>Web: https://algorithmacy.com</p>\n\n\nContact Information\n\n<p>Roger Hunt</p>\n\n\n\nContact Email\nrhunt@bentley.edu\n\n\nURL\nhttps://www.algorithmacy.com</a>\n
ORGANIZER;CN=Roger Hunt:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/Port_of_Spain:20261028T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/Port_of_Spain:20261031T170000
SUMMARY:1st Annual Algorithmacy Conference
UID:20261027T215823Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/Port_of_Spain
LOCATION:Arima\, Trinidad and Tobago
DESCRIPTION:<p>The First Global Algorithmacy Conference<br><br>Acronym<br>ALGOCON 2026<br><br>Web page<br>https://algorithmacy.com<br><br>Location<br>La Brea Pitch Lake\, Trinidad and Tobago<br><br>Submission deadline<br>15 August 2026<br><br>Notification due<br>Rolling (public review on the PR thread\, typically within ~5 business days of submission)\; final decisions by September 1 2026<br><br>Final version due<br>At acceptance &mdash\; accepted papers are published with their full review history on the public repository<br><br>Categories / keywords<br>Algorithmic management\, Platform labor\, Gig economy\, Future of work\, Human-AI interaction\, Computer-mediated communication\, Communication competency\, AI literacy\, Labor studies\, Science and technology studies\, Measurement and scale development\, Global South\, Caribbean studies<br><br>PART 2 &mdash\; Call for Papers (paste into the body field)<br><br>The First Global Algorithmacy Conference<br>La Brea Pitch Lake\, Trinidad and Tobago &middot\; Late October / Early November 2026<br>Hosted by GauntleTT in partnership with a Trinidad institutional partner (TBA)<br>Submission deadline: 15 August 2026 &middot\; Open review &middot\; Open access &middot\; APA 7<br>Submit at https://algorithmacy.com<br><br>The argument the conference convenes around<br><br>Algorithmacy is the communication competency through which a worker coordinates with another human party through an algorithmic third party. The construct names what the platform-work literature has been documenting without naming: a worker-level capacity that explains why equivalently positioned participants on identical algorithmic systems achieve divergent coordination outcomes. The competency vocabulary the field inherited from computer-mediated communication\, human-machine communication\, and AI-mediated communication was built around a worker on one side of a medium\, partner\, or sender-side agent. It does not reach the form in which the algorithm sits between two human parties and acts on inputs from both in pursuit of its own objectives.<br><br>A new coordination form has produced a new competency before\, and the new competency was not a refinement of the prior one. Oracy and literacy are the historical precedents. Oracy was the competency a face-to-face speaker exercised before a listener present in the same place at the same time. Writing introduced a third structural position the speaker had not occupied &mdash\; an author addressing a reader through a document that conveyed without acting &mdash\; and the competency that form required was not more proficient speech but reading\, writing\, citing\, and working through institutions that ran on text. The algorithmic form is not a more sophisticated channel through which writing happens. It is a third party with its own objectives that transforms each input as part of its operation\, and the competency it requires has not yet been named in the field's existing vocabulary.<br><br>Institutions are already building curricula for the new form\, and the vocabulary scholarship hands them will determine what those institutions train. Bootcamps\, certification regimes\, gig-worker advocacy organizations\, platform-cooperative experiments\, AI engineering programs\, and state-level workforce-development efforts converge on what they variously call algorithmic skill\, AI fluency\, or platform literacy &mdash\; each naming something the algorithm does or shows\, and each training workers to read what the algorithm displays rather than to coordinate with another person through it.<br><br>The conference convenes the scholars\, practitioners\, educators\, and worker advocates whose work bears on this question. It asks what algorithmacy is\, how it develops\, how it should be measured\, how it distributes across worker populations\, how it transfers across architectures\, how it aggregates to teams and institutions\, and what training\, certification\, and labor protection look like once the construct is in place.<br><br>Why La Brea<br><br>La Brea Pitch Lake is the world's largest natural deposit of asphalt &mdash\; an opaque substrate that has produced the roads of empires while remaining itself unreadable to those who walked over it. The choice of venue is not metaphor for its own sake. The conference convenes in a Caribbean nation whose talent is being recruited into the global algorithmic economy under terms its workers and institutions did not author. Whether the competency develops uniformly across populations or replicates existing stratification will be answered first in the regions whose workers enter the form last. La Brea grounds the convening in that stake.<br><br>Tracks and suggested topics<br><br>Submissions are invited in the following twelve tracks. Listed topics are suggestive\, not exhaustive. Authors working across two or more tracks should choose the closest fit and note the secondary track in the submission.<br><br>Track 1 &mdash\; Construct and theory<br>The conceptual domain of algorithmacy and construct clarity\; the variance puzzle\; the triadic form as a coordination form distinct from dyadic precedents\; discriminant position relative to CMC competence\, HMC\, AI-MC\, algorithmic literacy\, AI literacy\, algorithm sensemaking\, and algorithmic competency\; jingle and jangle problems in the human-AI construct family\; co-optation as a coordination mechanism alongside hierarchy\, market\, and network\; competency versus literacy/sensemaking/knowledge\; boundary conditions\; levels of analysis\; definitions\, dimensions\, and the nomological network.<br><br>Track 2 &mdash\; Historical and philosophical foundations<br>Oracy &rarr\; literacy &rarr\; algorithmacy as ontological transitions in coordination\; the Ong/Goody/Havelock lineage and the cognitive neuroscience of literacy\; the New Literacy Studies critique and what survives it\; print as a structural transition\; algorithmic culture and cultural-epistemic rupture\; contemporary articulations of the algorithmic epoch\; the intermediary/mediator distinction and its limits in the triadic case\; the irreducibility of triads\; the sociology of paperwork and the bureaucratic file\; the mediated triad as a form distinct from brokerage and tertius traditions.<br><br>Track 3 &mdash\; Measurement and scale development<br>Item generation and content validation\; discriminant validity against algorithmic literacy\, AI literacy\, algorithm sensemaking\, and algorithmic competency\; measurement invariance across cohorts\, populations\, platforms\, and languages\; longitudinal trajectory analysis\; mixed-methods designs for situated competency\; ethnographic methods for real-time platform interaction\; the construct-identity fallacy in human-AI measurement\; frameworks for triadic competency constructs\; convergent validity\; cohort-based replication of confirmatory factor structure.<br><br>Track 4 &mdash\; Empirical settings<br>Rideshare\, food delivery\, and on-demand labor\; freelance platforms and opaque-evaluation cases\; AI engineering and AI-augmented IDEs\; knowledge work with LLMs in legal\, medical\, and consulting contexts\; healthcare diagnostic and triage systems\; customer service under recommendation and routing\; education under AI tutoring and assessment\; content creation and journalism under recommender mediation\; logistics\, warehousing\, and last-mile delivery\; financial services\, lending\, and credit under algorithmic decisioning.<br><br>Track 5 &mdash\; Antecedents<br>Exposure to mediated coordination as the primary engine\; reflective practice and feedback interpretation\; motivational engagement and the partner-versus-constraint framing\; peer social support and cognitive job crafting\; implicit acquisition without curriculum\; prior digital exposure and transfer from other domains\; mentorship\, apprenticeship\, and shadow learning\; folk theorization and adaptive practice on changing platforms\; reflection-in-action under algorithmic conditions\; workplace social ecologies as antecedents.<br><br>Track 6 &mdash\; Outcomes<br>Coordination success on measurable platforms\; earnings and the worker-level economics of mediation\; retention and persistence through algorithmic disruption\; AI burnout as a competency rather than a workload problem\; service behavior and worker-customer interaction\; identification with platform work and work-identity formation\; career trajectories and mobility within and across platforms\; well-being\, autonomy\, anxiety\, and isolation\; resistance\, voice\, and political mobilization\; performance benchmarking and coordination quality.<br><br>Track 7 &mdash\; Distribution and stratification<br>Algorithmic awareness\, knowledge gaps\, and digital divides\; gender\, race\, and class in platform coordination outcomes\; regional and national variation in capacity development\; the coding elite and the cybertariat as political-economy positions\; algorithmacy as human capital versus access to developmental conditions\; algorithmic stratification as a vector of labor-market inequality\; the Global South and the algorithmic frontier\; Indigenous\, diasporic\, and minoritized communities\; generational differences\; disability\, neurodivergence\, and triadic coordination.<br><br>Track 8 &mdash\; Transferability<br>Multi-homing and platform-portable competency\; architecture-specific versus architecture-general capacity\; generalization of algorithmic management features across platforms\; the encoding problem and the abstraction the form imposes\; worker-skill-transfer mechanisms\; cross-architectural learning curves and switching costs\; generalized algorithmacy versus platform-specific repertoires\; relation to broader sociotechnical competencies\; transfer across human and algorithmic interlocutors\; transfer across natural-language and code-based systems.<br><br>Track 9 &mdash\; Aggregation\, institutions\, and curriculum<br>Team-level algorithmacy and collective coordination capacity\; organizational algorithmacy as a firm-level capability\; curriculum design &mdash\; what training should actually teach\; certification and credentialing regimes\; the AI engineering bootcamp as a developmental setting\; higher education and the algorithmic curriculum\; K-12 instruction alongside oracy and literacy\; workforce development under platform displacement\; apprenticeship models\; professional associations and learned societies.<br><br>Track 10 &mdash\; Labor protections\, policy\, and political economy<br>Legal recognition of platform-mediated work\; unions and worker centers\; platform cooperativism and alternative ownership\; state-level regulation of algorithmic management\; international labor law and the cross-border platform\; worker data rights and algorithmic accountability\; wage transparency and information asymmetries\; national AI strategies and worker development\; the sovereignty question for small states\; algorithmacy as a micro-foundation of organizational and national sovereignty.<br><br>Track 11 &mdash\; Caribbean\, Global South\, and frontier perspectives<br>Caribbean labor markets and the platform economy\; AI talent development in small island developing states\; Trinidad and Tobago\, GauntleTT\, and the Caribbean AI engineering pipeline\; diaspora networks and cross-border mediated coordination\; postcolonial frameworks for reading platform capital\; language\, code-switching\, and multilingual interfaces\; Caribbean creative industries under algorithmic distribution\; resource economies and the energy demands of AI\; South-South cooperation on competency development\; the question of an algorithmic equivalent to the New International Economic Order.<br><br>Track 12 &mdash\; Critique\, limits\, and the conference's own commitments<br>The case for refining existing constructs rather than naming a new one\; the case against the literacy-historical analogy\; materialist and labor-process critiques\; critical algorithm studies and whether competency is the right unit\; phenomenological and existential readings of mediation\; the limits of measurement and the case for ethnographic primacy\; decolonial critiques of competency-development frameworks\; the political risks of credentialing\; what algorithmacy cannot reach\; the conference's own complicity in convening under the conditions it studies.<br><br>Submission types<br><br>The conference accepts five submission types:<br>- Full paper &mdash\; 6&ndash\;8 pages. Empirical\, theoretical\, or review work.<br>- Research note &mdash\; 2&ndash\;3 pages. Work-in-progress\, methodological innovations\, single-case studies.<br>- Panel &mdash\; 3&ndash\;4 participants with a unifying argument and a short framing statement.<br>- Poster &mdash\; visual presentation with a one-page extended abstract.<br>- Practitioner report &mdash\; 2&ndash\;4 pages from worker advocates\, organizers\, curriculum designers\, and policy practitioners\; reviewed for relevance and substance rather than academic form.<br><br>How to submit<br><br>Intake is via pull request against the conference's public repository. Drop a 300&ndash\;500-word abstract and outline as submissions/(your-handle).md\, then open a PR titled [Type] [TR.0X] Your title. Full instructions and an AI-assisted submission path are at https://algorithmacy.com. Manuscripts follow APA 7. Submissions are in English\; translation support is available for presenters whose first language is not English.<br><br>Review model &mdash\; open\, signed\, published\, timestamped<br><br>This is open review. Submissions and review threads live on the public repository from the moment of intake\; there is no anonymized stage. Reviewers attach their names to their assessments. Accepted papers ship alongside their full review history &mdash\; reviewer reports\, author responses\, and the revision trail. Your pull request is a public\, dated record: in any future priority dispute\, the conference will support your claim based on the PR timestamp. Review is rolling\, with responses on the PR thread typically within about five business days.<br><br>Awards<br>- Founders' Paper Award &mdash\; best full paper.<br>- Pitch Lake Prize &mdash\; most theoretically generative early-career contribution.<br>- GauntleTT Practitioner Award &mdash\; the practitioner report that most advances the translation of algorithmacy into curriculum\, policy\, or worker advocacy.<br><br>Travel and logistics<br><br>The venue is approximately 90 minutes by road from Piarco International Airport. Limited travel support is available for scholars from low- and middle-income countries\, doctoral students\, and worker representatives\; apply with your abstract. A site visit to the Pitch Lake is built into the program.<br><br>Key dates<br>- Submission deadline: 1 August 2026<br>- Review: rolling\, public on the PR thread (~5 business days)<br>- Final decisions: [CONFIRM &mdash\; suggested mid-September 2026]<br>- Conference: [CONFIRM] Late October / Early November 2026\, La Brea Pitch Lake\, Trinidad and Tobago<br><br>Contact<br>Roger Hunt\, Bentley University &mdash\; rhunt@bentley.edu<br>Web: https://algorithmacy.com</p>\n\n\nContact Information\n\n<p>Roger Hunt</p>\n\n\n\nContact Email\nrhunt@bentley.edu\n\n\nURL\nhttps://www.algorithmacy.com</a>\n
ORGANIZER;CN=Roger Hunt:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/Port_of_Spain:20261028T130000
DTEND;TZID=America/Port_of_Spain:20261028T130000
SUMMARY:1st Annual Algorithmacy Conference
UID:20261027T215824Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/Port_of_Spain
LOCATION:Arima\, Trinidad and Tobago
DESCRIPTION:<p>The First Global Algorithmacy Conference<br><br>Acronym<br>ALGOCON 2026<br><br>Web page<br>https://algorithmacy.com<br><br>Location<br>La Brea Pitch Lake\, Trinidad and Tobago<br><br>Submission deadline<br>15 August 2026<br><br>Notification due<br>Rolling (public review on the PR thread\, typically within ~5 business days of submission)\; final decisions by September 1 2026<br><br>Final version due<br>At acceptance &mdash\; accepted papers are published with their full review history on the public repository<br><br>Categories / keywords<br>Algorithmic management\, Platform labor\, Gig economy\, Future of work\, Human-AI interaction\, Computer-mediated communication\, Communication competency\, AI literacy\, Labor studies\, Science and technology studies\, Measurement and scale development\, Global South\, Caribbean studies<br><br>PART 2 &mdash\; Call for Papers (paste into the body field)<br><br>The First Global Algorithmacy Conference<br>La Brea Pitch Lake\, Trinidad and Tobago &middot\; Late October / Early November 2026<br>Hosted by GauntleTT in partnership with a Trinidad institutional partner (TBA)<br>Submission deadline: 15 August 2026 &middot\; Open review &middot\; Open access &middot\; APA 7<br>Submit at https://algorithmacy.com<br><br>The argument the conference convenes around<br><br>Algorithmacy is the communication competency through which a worker coordinates with another human party through an algorithmic third party. The construct names what the platform-work literature has been documenting without naming: a worker-level capacity that explains why equivalently positioned participants on identical algorithmic systems achieve divergent coordination outcomes. The competency vocabulary the field inherited from computer-mediated communication\, human-machine communication\, and AI-mediated communication was built around a worker on one side of a medium\, partner\, or sender-side agent. It does not reach the form in which the algorithm sits between two human parties and acts on inputs from both in pursuit of its own objectives.<br><br>A new coordination form has produced a new competency before\, and the new competency was not a refinement of the prior one. Oracy and literacy are the historical precedents. Oracy was the competency a face-to-face speaker exercised before a listener present in the same place at the same time. Writing introduced a third structural position the speaker had not occupied &mdash\; an author addressing a reader through a document that conveyed without acting &mdash\; and the competency that form required was not more proficient speech but reading\, writing\, citing\, and working through institutions that ran on text. The algorithmic form is not a more sophisticated channel through which writing happens. It is a third party with its own objectives that transforms each input as part of its operation\, and the competency it requires has not yet been named in the field's existing vocabulary.<br><br>Institutions are already building curricula for the new form\, and the vocabulary scholarship hands them will determine what those institutions train. Bootcamps\, certification regimes\, gig-worker advocacy organizations\, platform-cooperative experiments\, AI engineering programs\, and state-level workforce-development efforts converge on what they variously call algorithmic skill\, AI fluency\, or platform literacy &mdash\; each naming something the algorithm does or shows\, and each training workers to read what the algorithm displays rather than to coordinate with another person through it.<br><br>The conference convenes the scholars\, practitioners\, educators\, and worker advocates whose work bears on this question. It asks what algorithmacy is\, how it develops\, how it should be measured\, how it distributes across worker populations\, how it transfers across architectures\, how it aggregates to teams and institutions\, and what training\, certification\, and labor protection look like once the construct is in place.<br><br>Why La Brea<br><br>La Brea Pitch Lake is the world's largest natural deposit of asphalt &mdash\; an opaque substrate that has produced the roads of empires while remaining itself unreadable to those who walked over it. The choice of venue is not metaphor for its own sake. The conference convenes in a Caribbean nation whose talent is being recruited into the global algorithmic economy under terms its workers and institutions did not author. Whether the competency develops uniformly across populations or replicates existing stratification will be answered first in the regions whose workers enter the form last. La Brea grounds the convening in that stake.<br><br>Tracks and suggested topics<br><br>Submissions are invited in the following twelve tracks. Listed topics are suggestive\, not exhaustive. Authors working across two or more tracks should choose the closest fit and note the secondary track in the submission.<br><br>Track 1 &mdash\; Construct and theory<br>The conceptual domain of algorithmacy and construct clarity\; the variance puzzle\; the triadic form as a coordination form distinct from dyadic precedents\; discriminant position relative to CMC competence\, HMC\, AI-MC\, algorithmic literacy\, AI literacy\, algorithm sensemaking\, and algorithmic competency\; jingle and jangle problems in the human-AI construct family\; co-optation as a coordination mechanism alongside hierarchy\, market\, and network\; competency versus literacy/sensemaking/knowledge\; boundary conditions\; levels of analysis\; definitions\, dimensions\, and the nomological network.<br><br>Track 2 &mdash\; Historical and philosophical foundations<br>Oracy &rarr\; literacy &rarr\; algorithmacy as ontological transitions in coordination\; the Ong/Goody/Havelock lineage and the cognitive neuroscience of literacy\; the New Literacy Studies critique and what survives it\; print as a structural transition\; algorithmic culture and cultural-epistemic rupture\; contemporary articulations of the algorithmic epoch\; the intermediary/mediator distinction and its limits in the triadic case\; the irreducibility of triads\; the sociology of paperwork and the bureaucratic file\; the mediated triad as a form distinct from brokerage and tertius traditions.<br><br>Track 3 &mdash\; Measurement and scale development<br>Item generation and content validation\; discriminant validity against algorithmic literacy\, AI literacy\, algorithm sensemaking\, and algorithmic competency\; measurement invariance across cohorts\, populations\, platforms\, and languages\; longitudinal trajectory analysis\; mixed-methods designs for situated competency\; ethnographic methods for real-time platform interaction\; the construct-identity fallacy in human-AI measurement\; frameworks for triadic competency constructs\; convergent validity\; cohort-based replication of confirmatory factor structure.<br><br>Track 4 &mdash\; Empirical settings<br>Rideshare\, food delivery\, and on-demand labor\; freelance platforms and opaque-evaluation cases\; AI engineering and AI-augmented IDEs\; knowledge work with LLMs in legal\, medical\, and consulting contexts\; healthcare diagnostic and triage systems\; customer service under recommendation and routing\; education under AI tutoring and assessment\; content creation and journalism under recommender mediation\; logistics\, warehousing\, and last-mile delivery\; financial services\, lending\, and credit under algorithmic decisioning.<br><br>Track 5 &mdash\; Antecedents<br>Exposure to mediated coordination as the primary engine\; reflective practice and feedback interpretation\; motivational engagement and the partner-versus-constraint framing\; peer social support and cognitive job crafting\; implicit acquisition without curriculum\; prior digital exposure and transfer from other domains\; mentorship\, apprenticeship\, and shadow learning\; folk theorization and adaptive practice on changing platforms\; reflection-in-action under algorithmic conditions\; workplace social ecologies as antecedents.<br><br>Track 6 &mdash\; Outcomes<br>Coordination success on measurable platforms\; earnings and the worker-level economics of mediation\; retention and persistence through algorithmic disruption\; AI burnout as a competency rather than a workload problem\; service behavior and worker-customer interaction\; identification with platform work and work-identity formation\; career trajectories and mobility within and across platforms\; well-being\, autonomy\, anxiety\, and isolation\; resistance\, voice\, and political mobilization\; performance benchmarking and coordination quality.<br><br>Track 7 &mdash\; Distribution and stratification<br>Algorithmic awareness\, knowledge gaps\, and digital divides\; gender\, race\, and class in platform coordination outcomes\; regional and national variation in capacity development\; the coding elite and the cybertariat as political-economy positions\; algorithmacy as human capital versus access to developmental conditions\; algorithmic stratification as a vector of labor-market inequality\; the Global South and the algorithmic frontier\; Indigenous\, diasporic\, and minoritized communities\; generational differences\; disability\, neurodivergence\, and triadic coordination.<br><br>Track 8 &mdash\; Transferability<br>Multi-homing and platform-portable competency\; architecture-specific versus architecture-general capacity\; generalization of algorithmic management features across platforms\; the encoding problem and the abstraction the form imposes\; worker-skill-transfer mechanisms\; cross-architectural learning curves and switching costs\; generalized algorithmacy versus platform-specific repertoires\; relation to broader sociotechnical competencies\; transfer across human and algorithmic interlocutors\; transfer across natural-language and code-based systems.<br><br>Track 9 &mdash\; Aggregation\, institutions\, and curriculum<br>Team-level algorithmacy and collective coordination capacity\; organizational algorithmacy as a firm-level capability\; curriculum design &mdash\; what training should actually teach\; certification and credentialing regimes\; the AI engineering bootcamp as a developmental setting\; higher education and the algorithmic curriculum\; K-12 instruction alongside oracy and literacy\; workforce development under platform displacement\; apprenticeship models\; professional associations and learned societies.<br><br>Track 10 &mdash\; Labor protections\, policy\, and political economy<br>Legal recognition of platform-mediated work\; unions and worker centers\; platform cooperativism and alternative ownership\; state-level regulation of algorithmic management\; international labor law and the cross-border platform\; worker data rights and algorithmic accountability\; wage transparency and information asymmetries\; national AI strategies and worker development\; the sovereignty question for small states\; algorithmacy as a micro-foundation of organizational and national sovereignty.<br><br>Track 11 &mdash\; Caribbean\, Global South\, and frontier perspectives<br>Caribbean labor markets and the platform economy\; AI talent development in small island developing states\; Trinidad and Tobago\, GauntleTT\, and the Caribbean AI engineering pipeline\; diaspora networks and cross-border mediated coordination\; postcolonial frameworks for reading platform capital\; language\, code-switching\, and multilingual interfaces\; Caribbean creative industries under algorithmic distribution\; resource economies and the energy demands of AI\; South-South cooperation on competency development\; the question of an algorithmic equivalent to the New International Economic Order.<br><br>Track 12 &mdash\; Critique\, limits\, and the conference's own commitments<br>The case for refining existing constructs rather than naming a new one\; the case against the literacy-historical analogy\; materialist and labor-process critiques\; critical algorithm studies and whether competency is the right unit\; phenomenological and existential readings of mediation\; the limits of measurement and the case for ethnographic primacy\; decolonial critiques of competency-development frameworks\; the political risks of credentialing\; what algorithmacy cannot reach\; the conference's own complicity in convening under the conditions it studies.<br><br>Submission types<br><br>The conference accepts five submission types:<br>- Full paper &mdash\; 6&ndash\;8 pages. Empirical\, theoretical\, or review work.<br>- Research note &mdash\; 2&ndash\;3 pages. Work-in-progress\, methodological innovations\, single-case studies.<br>- Panel &mdash\; 3&ndash\;4 participants with a unifying argument and a short framing statement.<br>- Poster &mdash\; visual presentation with a one-page extended abstract.<br>- Practitioner report &mdash\; 2&ndash\;4 pages from worker advocates\, organizers\, curriculum designers\, and policy practitioners\; reviewed for relevance and substance rather than academic form.<br><br>How to submit<br><br>Intake is via pull request against the conference's public repository. Drop a 300&ndash\;500-word abstract and outline as submissions/(your-handle).md\, then open a PR titled [Type] [TR.0X] Your title. Full instructions and an AI-assisted submission path are at https://algorithmacy.com. Manuscripts follow APA 7. Submissions are in English\; translation support is available for presenters whose first language is not English.<br><br>Review model &mdash\; open\, signed\, published\, timestamped<br><br>This is open review. Submissions and review threads live on the public repository from the moment of intake\; there is no anonymized stage. Reviewers attach their names to their assessments. Accepted papers ship alongside their full review history &mdash\; reviewer reports\, author responses\, and the revision trail. Your pull request is a public\, dated record: in any future priority dispute\, the conference will support your claim based on the PR timestamp. Review is rolling\, with responses on the PR thread typically within about five business days.<br><br>Awards<br>- Founders' Paper Award &mdash\; best full paper.<br>- Pitch Lake Prize &mdash\; most theoretically generative early-career contribution.<br>- GauntleTT Practitioner Award &mdash\; the practitioner report that most advances the translation of algorithmacy into curriculum\, policy\, or worker advocacy.<br><br>Travel and logistics<br><br>The venue is approximately 90 minutes by road from Piarco International Airport. Limited travel support is available for scholars from low- and middle-income countries\, doctoral students\, and worker representatives\; apply with your abstract. A site visit to the Pitch Lake is built into the program.<br><br>Key dates<br>- Submission deadline: 1 August 2026<br>- Review: rolling\, public on the PR thread (~5 business days)<br>- Final decisions: [CONFIRM &mdash\; suggested mid-September 2026]<br>- Conference: [CONFIRM] Late October / Early November 2026\, La Brea Pitch Lake\, Trinidad and Tobago<br><br>Contact<br>Roger Hunt\, Bentley University &mdash\; rhunt@bentley.edu<br>Web: https://algorithmacy.com</p>\n<p>Contact Information</p>\n<p>Roger Hunt</p>\n<p>Contact Email rhunt@bentley.edu URL https://www.algorithmacy.com</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Roger Hunt:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261028T190000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261028T210000
SUMMARY:Peter Rollins: Disenchantment
UID:20261027T215825Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
LOCATION:2 Clunbury Street\, London\, United Kingdom\, N1 6TT
DESCRIPTION:<p>What are the roots of religion? One answer\, put forward in accounts of the recently purported revival of Christianity among younger populations\, narrates investment in faith and ritual as reactions to a profound deficiency in prevalent meaning-making mechanisms. Religion\, in this understanding\, springs from the experience of alienation &mdash\; felt both by individuals and communities &mdash\; and their longing to overcome it.</p>\n<p>Religious theory\, often seen as secondary to materialist explanations\, offers ways to understand this alienation. Religious practice\, taken as a social technology\, proposes potent ways of dissolving it: in prayer\, singing\, fasting\, or sacrament.</p>\n<p>What if the active acknowledgement of this alienation &mdash\; in contrast with &lsquo\;transcendence&rsquo\; or &lsquo\;enchantment&rsquo\; associated with individual religious conversion &mdash\; shaped religion for our world or total alienation? What if the route to salvation not merely involved doubt or anxiety but intentionally focussed on them?&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>The philosopher\, theorist\, and author Peter Rollins proposes a religionless form of Christianity which addresses alienation by moving to inhabit it more deeply. This move involves the recognition that lack &mdash\; the fundamental unfulfillability of the most inalienable desires &mdash\; is not simply a contingent experience in the life of individuals &mdash\; brought about\, in some accounts\, by capitalism &mdash\; but is woven into the very fabric of reality.</p>\n<p>Rollins&rsquo\;s work\, shaped by philosophy\, psychoanalysis\, theology\, and liturgy\, invites people into this experience under the umbrella of <em>pyrotheology</em> &mdash\; a suite of practices that involves aesthetic and ritualistic elements. While contradictory to many of the traditions it stems from\, pyrotheology constructs a profoundly emancipatory event.</p>\n<p>Join Rollins in a discussion on religious experience rooted in disenchantment and the possibility of spiritual fulfilment through lack.&nbsp\;</p>
ORGANIZER:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20261029T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20261030T170000
SUMMARY:Difficult Actions: Definition\, Value\, and Rationality
UID:20261027T215826Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Amsterdam
LOCATION:De Boelelaan 1109\, Amsterdam\, Netherlands\, 1081 HV
DESCRIPTION:<p>The workshop aims to explore the growing research on "difficult actions" &ndash\; actions sometimes described as "against the odds".&nbsp\; Such actions encompass a wide range of human endeavours\, from physically demanding feats to emotionally taxing decisions\, morally challenging dilemmas\, and epistemically uncertain undertakings. This workshop will delve into how these actions are conceived\, what makes them particularly challenging\, and the ethical and epistemic considerations involved in their pursuit.&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>The workshop will address three core themes:&nbsp\; 1) &lrm\;Defining Difficult Actions:&nbsp\;We will&nbsp\;seek&nbsp\;to&nbsp\;establish&nbsp\;a robust definition of "difficult actions\," examining various philosophical accounts and exploring the commonalities and distinctions between different forms of difficulty in action.&nbsp\; 2) Exploring the Value of Difficult Actions:&nbsp\;We will delve into what - if anything - makes difficult actions valuable and under what conditions. 3) Exploring the Rationality of Difficult Actions: We will ask how it can be rational to pursue a difficult action.&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>Call for Abstracts:&nbsp\; We invite submissions by scholars from various philosophical sub-disciplines as well as from psychology and economics (or related fields) to contribute to a deeper understanding of the definition\, value\, and rationality of such actions.&nbsp\; Abstracts should be between 800&ndash\;1\,000 words and address any aspect of difficult actions\, broadly construed.&nbsp\;We&nbsp\;particularly welcome contributions from members of underrepresented demographics in philosophy and early career scholars.&nbsp\; Please submit your abstract by June 07\, 2026 via this form:&nbsp\;https://forms.gle/RyKGAevmQUzkkfeh7</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Lisa Bastian;CN=Annalisa Costella:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261029T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261030T170000
SUMMARY:Rational Action and Belief – Recognising and Responding to Reasons
UID:20261027T215827Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Berlin
LOCATION:Heidelberg\, Germany
DESCRIPTION:<p><strong>Workshop: Rational Action and Belief &ndash\; Recognising and Responding to Reasons</strong></p>\n<p>Do rational actions and beliefs require us to recognise reasons as reasons? If so\, what does such recognition consist in\, and what role does it play in responding rationally to reasons?&nbsp\;</p>\n<p><strong>Key Information<br></strong>Date &amp\; Location: October 29&ndash\;30\, 2026\, Heidelberg University<br>Invited speakers: Carlotta Pavese (Oxford)\, Kurt Sylvan (Southampton)</p>\n<p>There are up to six open contributor slots\, please see the related CFP and submit an abstract.</p>\n<p><strong>Workshop Themes</strong></p>\n<p>Does forming an intention or belief in a rational manner require recognising that the corresponding action or belief enjoys some form of rational support? Many action theorists and epistemologists answer this question affirmatively. For a doctor&rsquo\;s belief that the patient has measles to be rational\, it must be based on a suitable reason. That the patient has Koplik spots is such a reason. But it seems insufficient to rationalise the belief that the patient has measles\, unless the doctor recognises that Koplik spots support that belief. Similar examples for actions abound.</p>\n<p>On this view\, rational belief and rational action respond not only to reasons but also to their being reasons for those beliefs or actions. This idea is often captured by appeals to a&nbsp\;<em>taking condition</em>\, or by the requirement that rational reasons must be&nbsp\;<em>treated as normative reasons</em>. While such views have gained prominence in recent epistemology and action theory\, they raise pressing questions about the nature of responding to normative reasons.&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>We invite contributions (see separate CFP) that explore the role of recognising\, taking\, or appreciating reasons in rational belief and action\, including critical perspectives.</p>\n<p>Topics include (but are not limited to):</p>\n<p>&middot\; Do rational action and belief require the recognition that the action or belief enjoys support\, for example that the evidence supports a particular conclusion?</p>\n<p>&middot\; What does this recognition require? Does it require a doxastic state\, for example\, that the evidence supports p\, or is the recognition condition non-doxastic?</p>\n<p>&middot\; If the recognition condition is non-doxastic\, then how does it operate? Does it involve the exercise of some non-doxastic skill\, is it a form of rule following\, or something else entirely?&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>&middot\; If the recognition condition is doxastic\, then how does it avoid regress problems? Can an appeal to additional non-doxastic factors block such regresses?</p>\n<p>&middot\; Is recognising normative support sufficient for rational action or belief\, or does responding to that recognition introduce additional constraints?</p>\n<p>&middot\; Can the basing of action or belief on reasons be analysed into constituent psychological states\, or does such analysis generate explanatory regresses?&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>&middot\; What is the correct semantic theory for linguistic expressions of acting and believing for reasons\, such as &ldquo\;therefore&rdquo\; and &ldquo\;because&rdquo\;?</p>\n<p>Please direct all queries to the organisers Andreas M&uuml\;ller (andreas.mueller.philosophie@em.uni-frankfurt.de) and Tobias Wilsch (tobias.wilsch@gmail.com).&nbsp\;</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Tobias Wilsch;CN=Andy Mueller:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261029T170000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261029T190000
SUMMARY:Rule-Made Modality is World-Frictioned
UID:20261027T215828Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
DESCRIPTION:<p>The first meeting of the Sign-Language-Reality seminar in the academic year 2026/27 will take place:</p>\n<p>Thursday\, the 29th of October 2026\, 17.00\, Central European Time</p>\n<p>Krzysztof Sękowski</p>\n<p>(University of Warsaw)</p>\n<p>will deliver a talk:</p>\n<p><em>Rule-Made Modality is World-Frictioned</em></p>\n<p>Abstract:</p>\n<p>An important part of the growing deflationary movement to rethink metaphysics as<br>focused on metalinguistic negotiation is modal normativism that explains modal<br>discourse in terms of the expression of semantic rules rather than the tracking<br>of modal facts. Despite its virtues\, the view is often criticized for allegedly<br>leading to anti-realist consequences and failure in explaining how modal<br>knowledge\, and thereby metaphysical theories are constrained by the world. This<br>paper argues that these worries arise from a mismatch of explanatory<br>expectations. I argue that while modal normativism primarily provides a<br>functional and justificatory account of modal discourse\, critics implicitly<br>demand a causal explanation of how semantic rules are acquired. I show that this<br>demand reflects a more general epistemological concern known as the Problem of<br>Modal Epistemic Friction\, namely the challenge of explaining how our modal<br>judgments are constrained so as not to overgenerate possibilities. In response\,<br>I develop a causal account of semantic rule acquisition\, arguing that such rules<br>emerge from pre-normative\, world-involving abilities to reliably and<br>differentially follow patterns of interaction. Making this causal story explicit<br>shows how modal cognition is constrained by the world without invoking modal<br>truthmakers\, but through its anchoring in interaction with the environment.</p>\n<p>About the speaker:</p>\n\n<p><strong>Krzysztof Sękowski</strong> is an Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the University of Warsaw. His research focuses on metaphilosophy\, philosophy of language\, and epistemology\, particularly the role of intuitions in philosophical reasoning\, conceptual engineering\, and cross-cultural differences in thinking. He is the author of numerous articles published in prestigious international journals\, including <em>The Philosophical Quarterly</em>\, <em>Synthese</em>\, <em>Inquiry</em>\, <em>Episteme</em>\, and <em>Review of Philosophy and Psychology</em>. His recent publications include the monograph <em>W laboratorium filozofii języka</em> (2025) and the article <em>Conceptual Engineering is Old News</em> (2026\, co-authored with Ethan Landes).&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>Speaker's webiste: <a  target="_blank"  data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://sekowski.weebly.com/&amp\;source=gmail&amp\;ust=1792742356295000&amp\;usg=AOvVaw3f3aHAKCDGotLuuQgqP89U">https://sekowski.weebly.com/</a></p>\n<p>The seminar will be held online\, to join the meeting\, please use the information below:</p>\n<p>Join Zoom Meeting <a  target="_blank"  data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://uw-edu-pl.zoom.us/j/92716044372?pwd%3D0l7PETAOwqQDBKTMCnheYQN7ag7zx1.1&amp\;source=gmail&amp\;ust=1792742356295000&amp\;usg=AOvVaw1GG2vfY1H1dPdeH0SbRnGe">https://uw-edu-pl.zoom.us/j/92716044372?pwd=0l7PETAOwqQDBKTMCnheYQN7ag7zx1.1</a></p>\n<p>Meeting ID: 927 1604 4372 Passcode: 697648 The meeting opens at 4:45 pm\, the talk starts at 5 pm.</p>\n<p><a  target="_blank"  data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.pts.edu.pl/seminarium&amp\;source=gmail&amp\;ust=1792742356295000&amp\;usg=AOvVaw3tGVsNP9D78SZ0R56Xe7Gr">https://www.pts.edu.pl/seminarium</a></p>\n
ORGANIZER;CN=Tadeusz Ciecierski:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20261030T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Brussels:20261031T170000
SUMMARY:Mary and philosophy as a way of life
UID:20261027T215829Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Brussels
LOCATION:Janseniusstraat 1\, Leuven\, Belgium\, 3000
DESCRIPTION:<p>Inspired by Pierre Hadot's work on (ancient) philosophy as a way of life\, the next Sedes Sapientiae Symposium looks at how both Mary and Marian devotion can be understood as embodying this conception of philosophy as a way of life. Did Mary surpass Zeno and Epicurus\, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius in living the philosophical life from the cradle to the cross?&nbsp\; Is Marian devotion at its heart\, or at least potentially\, a form of 'stoicism for the masses'?&nbsp\;</p>\n
ORGANIZER:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261030T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261030T170000
SUMMARY:Philosophical perspectives on artificial reasoning systems
UID:20261027T215830Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Berlin
LOCATION:Emil-Figge-Straße 50\, Dortmund\, Germany
DESCRIPTION:<p>The philosophy department of TU Dortmund is organising a one-day workshop exploring the philosophical dimensions of (limitations of) reasoning in large language models. Early LLMs were notorious for frequently generating outputs that\, to users\, appeared to contain basic reasoning errors. However\, in recent years\, researchers and AI developers have invested much effort in improving the common-sense and formal reasoning capacities of transformer-based models through reinforcement learning and similar techniques. This has led to a generation of 'large reasoning models&rsquo\; that perform well on various benchmarks of reasoning problems. Still\, questions remain about how we should interpret these capacities. Do large reasoning models really engage in reasoning\, or merely in a statistical approximation of reasoning? What accounts of reasoning are available in the philosophical literature\, and are these accounts applicable to LLMs? Do LLMs fare differently with respect different kinds of reasoning (e.g. common-sense reasoning\, practical reasoning or counterfactual reasoning)? What are the risks of over-attributing reasoning capacities to LLMs? This workshop brings together philosophers who work on these and related questions.</p>\n<p>Speakers:</p>\n<p>Gregor Betz\, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology</p>\n<p>Jaroslav Malik\,&nbsp\;University of Hradec Kr&aacute\;lov&eacute\;</p>\n<p>Mirco Sambrotta\, University of Vienna</p>\n<p>Cordelia Berz\, LMU Munich</p>\n<p>Leonard Dung\, Ruhr-University Bochum</p>\n<p>Thom-Felix Thormann\, Ruhr-University Bochum</p>\n<p>Joris Graff\, TU Dortmund</p>\n<p><br>The schedule and book of abstracts are attached.</p>\n<p><em>Attendance is open to anyone interested\, but we would like to ask attendants to register in&nbsp\;</em><em>advance by sending an email to joris.graff@tu-dortmund.de. Registration is possible until October 26th.&nbsp\;</em></p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Joris Graff:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261030T094500
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261031T170000
SUMMARY:3rd Annual Meeting of the Young Network for Wittgensteinian Philosophy
UID:20261027T215831Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Berlin
LOCATION:Schadowplatz 14\, Düsseldorf\, Germany\, 40212
DESCRIPTION:<p>The Young Network for Wittgensteinian Philosophy (YNWP) is a global community of early-career philosophers\, students\, and enthusiasts dedicated to exploring and advancing the work of Ludwig Wittgenstein. This is not only exegetical work but also the application of Wittgensteinian Philosophy in contemporary questions.</p>\n<p>We are pleased to announce the 2026 Annual Meeting of the Young Network for Wittgensteinian Philosophy\, which will take place on 30 and 31 October 2026 in D&uuml\;sseldorf\, Germany\, at Heinrich Heine University's "Haus der Universit&auml\;t".</p>\n<p>Participation is free\, we will provide snacks and drinks but we cannot cover any travel expenses. The meeting will be held exclusively in person.</p>\n<p><strong>Keynote Speaker</strong></p>\n<ul>\n<li>Martin Kusch (University of Vienna)</li>\n<li>2nd keynote TBC</li>\n</ul>\n<p><strong>Organization</strong></p>\n<p>Jordi Fairhurst Chilton (KU Leuven)\, Paul Hasselku&szlig\; (Heinrich Heine Universit&auml\;t D&uuml\;sseldorf\, chair)\, Jos&eacute\; Antonio P&eacute\;rez-Escobar (UNED)\, Deniz Sarikaya (Universit&auml\;t zu L&uuml\;beck)</p>\n<p><strong>Support</strong></p>\n<p>The meeting is supported by Prof. Dr. Markus Schrenk\, Heinrich Heine University D&uuml\;sseldorf (HHU) and the German Society for Analytic Philosophy (GAP).</p>\n<p>We look forward to welcoming you to D&uuml\;sseldorf for two days of discussion and exchange on Wittgensteinian philosophy.</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Jordi Fairhurst;CN="Paul Hasselkuß";CN="José Antonio Pérez Escobar";CN=Deniz Sarikaya:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261030T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261030T090000
SUMMARY:Locus
UID:20261027T215832Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
DESCRIPTION:<p><strong>Dossier </strong><strong>Walking-with the Past: Embodiment\, Environment\, and Narrative</strong></p>\n<p><strong><em>Locus. Journal of Culture Studies</em></strong></p>\n<p><strong>Call for Papers</strong></p>\n<p><strong>Guest editors: Marieke Borren and Susan Hogervorst</strong></p>\n<p>As an everyday act of embodied locomotion\, walking rarely becomes an explicit object of reflection\, let alone an entry point into questions of history and memory. Yet as we move through streets\, landscapes\, ruins\, and memorial sites\, alone or collectively\, walking can reactivate personal memories\, disclose hidden histories\, and inscribe new narratives into shared spaces. Examples range from commemorative marches and heritage walking tours to psychogeographical drifts that excavate urban and peri-urban spaces as palimpsests\, and the prominent role of walking in first-person biographical accounts of displacement. In literary and cinematic representations\, moreover\, walking often mediates between personal memories and the meaningful environments in which they unfold.</p>\n<p>This dossier of <em>Locus</em> explores walking as an embodied mnemonic\, narrative\, and pedagogical practice. We are particularly interested in the philosophical question of how walking mediates between body\, environment\, memory\, and history. We therefore invite contributions that approach walking from one of three interconnected perspectives: (1) embodiment and bodily memory\, (2) environment and place\, or (3) narrative and representation.</p>\n<p><strong>Walking-with the past: a phenomenological perspective</strong></p>\n<p>Walking may have a particularly strong relation to memory because it is never a purely present activity. From a phenomenological perspective\, the moving body can be understood as a sedimentation of histories and habits: bodily comportment is shaped by past experience\, social norms\, technologies\, infrastructures\, and built environments. Walking is thus not simply an activity performed by a body in space\; it is an embodied way of inhabiting an already meaningful world.</p>\n<p>At the same time\, environments are not neutral backdrops or abstract spaces. They constitute structured fields of affordances that enable and constrain particular forms of movement. Streets\, paths\, ruins\, memorial sites\, and infrastructures invite certain trajectories\, rhythms\, and styles of walking while discouraging others. Historical transformations of built environments may thus become sedimented in bodily habits\, while changes in bodily practices can disclose otherwise unnoticed historical layers of place.</p>\n<p>Walking consequently unfolds in a dynamic relation between historically sedimented bodily habits and environments that themselves bear traces of past events. This raises questions not only about memory and history but also about the phenomenological constitution of bodily subjectivity\, place\, temporality\, and world.</p>\n<p>These questions resonate with phenomenological approaches from Husserl and Merleau-Ponty to more recent work on embodiment\, place\, habit\, and environmental experience\, as well as with approaches in 4E cognition and ecological approaches to perception\, including work on affordances and the embodied and situated character of cognition.</p>\n<p>From a cultural memory perspective\, walking can likewise inscribe collective and personal histories into places and reactivate past experiences in the present. Collaborative walking practices in public history\, commemoration\, heritage education\, and psychogeography can make historical layers experientially available through bodily movement. In this sense\, walking may be understood as a form of embodied historical inquiry: a way of encountering the past not merely as an object of representation\, but through situated\, sensory\, and affective engagement with places and environments.</p>\n<p>The notion of &ldquo\;walking-with the past&rdquo\; therefore points to a relational and co-constitutive understanding of historical experience. The past is not simply something walkers represent or remember\; it may be encountered\, activated\, and partially re-enacted through movement in places where histories have been sedimented.</p>\n<p><strong>Possible questions include:</strong></p>\n<p><strong>Walking and embodied memory</strong></p>\n<ul>\n<li>How might phenomenological approaches to walking deepen our understanding of the relationship between embodiment\, memory\, and historical experience?</li>\n<li>How does walking reveal the historicity of embodied practices and everyday forms of movement?</li>\n<li>How are personal and collective memories sedimented in bodily habits and styles of walking?</li>\n<li>How does embodied movement activate or reorganize autobiographical memory?</li>\n<li>What kinds of memories\, meanings\, or narratives emerge specifically through embodied movement?</li>\n</ul>\n<p><strong>Walking\, environment\, and place</strong></p>\n<ul>\n<li>How do historical transformations of landscapes\, infrastructures\, and built environments shape the affordances of walking and become sedimented in bodily comportment and habit?</li>\n<li>How are temporal\, particularly historical\, dimensions of lived experience involved in ambulatory place-making?</li>\n<li>How does walking disclose historical layers embedded in landscapes and urban environments?</li>\n<li>How can walking disclose or produce memoryscapes\, including traumascapes?</li>\n<li>What does walking reveal about the phenomenological constitution of place?</li>\n<li>How might concepts such as sedimentation\, historicity\, habituality\, affordance\, and bodily schema illuminate walking as a historical practice?</li>\n</ul>\n<p><strong>Walking\, narrative time\, and representation</strong></p>\n<ul>\n<li>How does walking structure narrative or autobiographical time in literary\, cinematic\, or autobiographical works?</li>\n<li>How do representations of walking connect personal memory with broader historical or cultural contexts?</li>\n<li>How can phenomenological perspectives illuminate the relation between walking\, embodiment\, and narrative time?</li>\n</ul>\n<p>We particularly welcome philosophical contributions\, including phenomenological and critical-phenomenological approaches to embodiment\, bodily memory\, temporality\, place\, historicity\, habit\, affordance\, and environmental experience. We also welcome contributions from 4E cognition\, ecological approaches to perception\, cultural memory studies\, history\, heritage studies\, psychogeography\, narrative studies\, and the walking arts\, including work that brings these perspectives into dialogue.</p>\n<p><strong>Types of contributions</strong></p>\n<p>We invite proposals for:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>theoretical contributions on walking\, embodiment\, memory\, place\, historicity\, and habit\, particularly from phenomenology and 4E cognition\;</li>\n<li>philosophical or interdisciplinary analyses of walking as a mode of encountering history and place\;</li>\n<li>empirical or methodological studies of walking in public history\, heritage\, commemoration\, oral history\, or psychogeography\;</li>\n<li>analyses of literary\, cinematic\, or autobiographical representations of walking\;</li>\n<li>artistic and practice-based contributions from walking artists\, psychogeographers\, and practitioners working with locative media or walking-based artistic research.</li>\n</ul>\n<p><strong><em>The full call\, including further information about the dossier and submission guidelines\, is available on the </em></strong><a href="https://platform.openjournals.nl/LOCUS/call-for-papers"><strong><em>Locus Open Journals website</em></strong></a><strong><em>.</em></strong></p>\n<p><strong>About <em>Locus</em></strong><br><em>Locus: Journal of Culture Studies</em> is an interdisciplinary\, diamond Open Access journal published by the Department of Culture Studies at the Open University of the Netherlands. It provides a forum for scholarship across the humanities and culture studies\, including philosophy\, and particularly welcomes interdisciplinary dialogue between academic research and cultural practice. In addition to stand-alone articles\, the journal publishes biannual thematic &lsquo\;dossiers\,&rsquo\; special collections of articles on topical debates. These dossiers cover diverse themes such as <em>the cultural imagination of human and non-human animals\, the coloniality of natural history collections</em>\, <em>performativity</em>\, and <em>embodiment</em>.</p>\n<p>We recently completed the migration of Locus to the <a href="https://platform.openjournals.nl/LOCUS/">Open Journals ecosystem</a>. While our current platform is new\, all back issues and articles remain fully available through our <a href="locus.ou.nl">former platform</a>.&nbsp\;</p>\n<p><strong>Submission information</strong></p>\n<ul>\n<li>Abstracts (300&ndash\;500 words): due 30 October 2026</li>\n<li>Notification of acceptance: 15 November 2026</li>\n<li>Full manuscripts (4\,000&ndash\;5\,000 words): due 3 January 2027</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Submissions are accepted in English and Dutch. All submissions will undergo editorial review.</p>\n<p>For inquiries about the theme\, please contact Marieke Borren: <a href="mailto:marieke.borren@ou.nl">marieke.borren@ou.nl</a>.</p>
ORGANIZER:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261030T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20270507T170000
SUMMARY:Monthly Phenomenology
UID:20261027T215833Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
DESCRIPTION:<p>&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\; <br> We are very pleased to announce the 7th season (2026&ndash\;2027) of:<br><br>MONTHLY PHENOMENOLOGY<br>An online forum of discussion on recent work in phenomenology<br><br>Description: This series of talks gathers together scholars interested in phenomenology and its relation to contemporary issues in philosophy\, especially in the philosophy of mind. It establishes a forum of discussion where people can meet on a regular basis and present their work-in-progress or recent publications. The topics addressed will stretch from the history of early phenomenology to the systematic application of phenomenological insights in recent debates in analytic philosophy.<br><br>Schedule: The talks will take place once a month on a Friday from October to May. Time:&nbsp\;4:15pm CET\, 3:15pm GMT/GMT+1\, 10:15am ET. Talks last 90 minutes\, including a 45 minutes Q&amp\;A.<br><br>Participation: Talks are held on&nbsp\;<a href="http://zoom.us/">zoom</a>. To participate\, please send an email to&nbsp\;<a href="mailto:hamid.taieb@hu-berlin.de">hamid.taieb@hu-berlin.de</a>&nbsp\;with the heading "Registration Monthly Phenomenology". A zoom link will be sent to you the day preceding each talk.&nbsp\; &nbsp\;<br><br>Programme:<br><br><br>Thomas Szanto (Europa-Universit&auml\;t Flensburg)<em><br>The Phenomenology and Affective Politics of Feelings of Belonging<br></em>30 October 2026&nbsp\;<br><br>Andrew Butler (Boston University)&nbsp\;<em><br>Husserl&rsquo\;s Metaphysical Realism: Essence\, Sense\, Experience</em>&nbsp\;<br>13 November 2026&nbsp\;<br><br>Esther Neuhann (Goethe-Universit&auml\;t Frankfurt/Freie Universit&auml\;t Berlin)<br><em>Embodied Integrity</em>&nbsp\;<br>11 December&nbsp\;2026<br><br>Nicolai K. Knudsen (Aarhus University)&nbsp\;<em><br>Shall We? Invitations\, Equality\, and the Routes to Joint Action</em>&nbsp\;<br>29 January 2027<br><br>Laura Gow (University of Liverpool)&nbsp\;<em><br>Cognitive Phenomenology and Belief-discordant Behaviour</em>&nbsp\;<br>12&nbsp\;February 2027<br><br>Alfredo Tomasetta (IUSS Pavia)&nbsp\;<br><em>Is Intentionality Phenomenal? A Debate in Classical Indian Philosophy</em><br>5&nbsp\;March 2027<br><br>Ali Kerem Eroglu (University of Li&egrave\;ge)&nbsp\;<em><br>Intentionalism without Retention: Brentano on Temporal Experience</em>&nbsp\;<br>9 April 2027<br><br>Minna-Kerttu Kekki (University of Helsinki)&nbsp\;<em><br>Phenomenology of the State: From Edith Stein to the Present</em>&nbsp\;<br>7 May 2027<br><br><br>Convenors:&nbsp\;<br>Guillaume Fr&eacute\;chette (University of Geneva)&nbsp\;<br>Marta Jorba (Pompeu Fabra&nbsp\;University)&nbsp\;<br>Alessandro Salice (University College Cork)&nbsp\;<br>Hamid Taieb (Humboldt University Berlin)&nbsp\;<br>&Iacute\;ngrid Vendrell-Ferran (Philipps University Marburg)<br><br>Organized on behalf of the&nbsp\;<a href="https://netw-phenom-research.wixsite.com/nfpr">Network for Phenomenological Research</a>&nbsp\; &nbsp\;<br>&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;&ndash\;<br><br></p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Hamid Taieb:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Rome:20261030T153000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Rome:20261030T183000
SUMMARY:Principle of Sufficient Reason and Explicability Arguments
UID:20261027T215834Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Rome
LOCATION:Strada Massimo D’Azeglio 85\, Parma\, Italy\, 43125
ORGANIZER;CN=Alessandro Torza:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/Vancouver:20261030T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/Vancouver:20261031T170000
SUMMARY:Can social ontology change the world?
UID:20261027T215835Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/Vancouver
LOCATION:Vancouver\, Canada
DESCRIPTION:<p>The International Social Ontology Society workshop "Can Social Ontology Change the World?" will take place October 30-31\, 2026 at the Harbour Centre Campus of Simon Fraser University in downtown Vancouver\, British Columbia.&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>In recent years\, the sub-discipline of social ontology has undergone a decidedly political reorientation. In non-ideal\, emancipatory\, and critical social ontology\, theorists explicitly ask whether our theorizing should have political goals or be relevant for political ends. An uptick in investigations on the metaphysics of race and gender has centered anti-racist\, feminist\, and trans struggles. These projects (e.g.\, Haslanger 2000\; Dembroff 2016\; Jenkins 2023\; Richardson 2023) explicitly theorize with a political purpose\, and so presuppose that social ontology can play a role in the struggle for social justice. But\, taking a step back\, this workshop questions the precise relationship between social ontology and politics. Are social ontologists changing the world\, or merely interpreting it? Given the former\, are there social ontological theories or methods better suited for direct political intervention\, and\, if so\, what makes them better? Given the latter\, what is the relationship\, if any\, between description and political intervention?&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>We invite the submission of abstracts of 500-700 words for 20-minute presentations of papers related to the theme of the conference. Please send anonymized abstracts to&nbsp\;social.ontology.and.the.world@gmail.com. The deadline for submitting is&nbsp\;June 15th\, with notice of acceptance by July 15th.&nbsp\;&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>Some&nbsp\;travel grants and support for accommodations&nbsp\;will be available for graduate students and faculty members who do not have access to research funds\; please indicate in your submission email if you would like to be considered for support.&nbsp\;</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Zara Anwarzai;CN=August Faller:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261030T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261030T180000
SUMMARY:An Acquaintance-Based Solution to Smith's Epistemological Challenge?
UID:20261027T215836Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
DESCRIPTION:<p>ACQUAINTANCE NETWORK ONLINE SEMINAR</p>\n<p><strong>"</strong><strong>An Acquaintance-Based Solution to Smith&rsquo\;s Epistemological Challenge?</strong><strong>"</strong> <strong>Sarah McGrath (Princeton)<br><br></strong> Friday\, October 30 11:00 am - 1:00 pm (Princeton) / 4:00 pm - 6:00 pm (Brussels)<br><br></p>\n<p>The <strong>Acquaintance Network</strong> is an international philosophy research group devoted to the study of acquaintance: the relation of conscious awareness that we bear to the things we experience most directly. The network brings together researchers working on the metaphysics\, epistemology\, value\, and history of acquaintance\, with the aim of supporting current research and promoting future work on the topic.&nbsp\;</p>\n<p><strong>Abstract</strong></p>\n<p>One version of J.L. Mackie&rsquo\;s argument from queerness concerns the queer &ldquo\;because.&rdquo\; We take ourselves to know claims of the form: this act &ldquo\;is wrong because it is a piece of deliberate cruelty.&rdquo\; Mackie asked: &ldquo\;just what in the world is signified by this &lsquo\;because&rsquo\;? And how do we know the relation that it signifies?&rdquo\; Michael Smith sharpened the second question into a dilemma for the non-naturalist: such knowledge is either a posteriori or a priori. The former option is obviously wrong\, and the latter is unavailable to the non-naturalist. But Smith&rsquo\;s dilemma presupposes that\, if non-naturalism is true\, our knowledge of the queer &ldquo\;because&rdquo\; must be inferential. I argue that there are non-inferential routes available to the non-naturalist.</p>\n<p><strong>Registration</strong><br>To receive the Zoom link\, please email: jacopopallagrosi@gmail.com</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Jacopo Pallagrosi;CN=Anna Giustina;CN=Matt Duncan:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20261030T230000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20261030T230000
SUMMARY:Deus et Machina: Technology\, Politics\, and Theology in the Age of AI
UID:20261027T215837Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/New_York
LOCATION:New York\, United States
DESCRIPTION:<p><strong>The 2027 Telos-Paul Piccone Institute Annual Conference</strong><br>March 19&ndash\;20\, 2027<br>The John D. Calandra Italian American Institute\, Queens College/CUNY<br>New York\, NY</p>\n<p><strong>Deus et Machina: Technology\, Politics\, and Theology in the Age of AI</strong></p>\n<p>Co-sponsored by the John D. Calandra Italian American Institute\, Queens College/CUNY</p>\n<p><strong>Conference Description</strong></p>\n<p>OpenAI&rsquo\;s release of ChatGPT in November 2022 ushered in a new era of &ldquo\;artificial intelligence\,&rdquo\; represented by large language models\, the effects of which remain tenebrous and contested. This new technology has been rapidly adopted throughout society\, impacting many areas of everyday life and triggering an investment boom that has come to dominate U.S. economic activity\, yet it remains quite unclear what this portends. Predictions range from optimistic aspirations to free human beings from drudgery (the long-standing promise of new technologies) and bring widespread prosperity\, to serious warnings\, most particularly from inside the AI industry itself\, that AI might intentionally exterminate humanity. In between the two lie dire concerns about the implications for the labor market and perverse aspirations for AI to replace human beings as the dominant form of intelligence in the universe.</p>\n<p>We propose to turn our critical attention to this extraordinary conjuncture and revisit the question of the relationship of technology to politics and theology. What becomes of politics in an age of apparent subordination of humanity? And what becomes of religion in an age when mankind creates a power that threatens to outstrip our own understanding and become a god? Does this represent a moral crisis\, as Pope Leo has suggested? And can anything be done to avert the trajectory we are seemingly on?</p>\n<p>From the point of view of the Telos circle\, technological acceleration poses a significant conundrum for our ongoing attempts to understand our society. If the political can be understood using theological categories\, what does this imply as it mutates due to the eruption of technology within it? Is technology itself amenable to a theological understanding\, as many have suggested? And if it might be understood alternatively as a cold god or apocalyptic event\, might this not place it on the same plane as the state\, envisaged at least since Hobbes as both machine and mortal god?</p>\n<p><strong>Abstract Submissions</strong></p>\n<p>We invite papers dealing with the intersection of technology with politics and theology\, and most particularly of technology with political theology\, as well as contemporary reflections on the relationship of politics to theology more generally.</p>\n<p>Those interested in speaking at the conference should submit a short c.v. and an abstract of up to 250 words by&nbsp\;<strong>October&nbsp\;30\, 2026</strong>\, to&nbsp\;<a href="mailto:telos2027@telosinstitute.net">telos2027@telosinstitute.net</a>with &ldquo\;The 2027 Telos Conference&rdquo\; in the email&rsquo\;s subject line.</p>
ORGANIZER:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261031T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261031T090000
SUMMARY:Special Issue of Análisis Filosófico: “Oppressive Argumentation: Silencing and Oppressive Speech in Argumentation”
UID:20261027T215838Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
DESCRIPTION:<p><strong>Call for Papers</strong></p>\n<p>Special Issue of An&aacute\;lisis Filos&oacute\;fico: &ldquo\;Oppressive Argumentation: Silencing and Oppressive Speech in Argumentation&rdquo\;</p>\n<p>This special issue aims to collect original articles in Spanish and English devoted to the analysis of oppressive discourses within our argumentative practices\, with a particular emphasis on those commonly found in Latin American contexts. Informal logic\, epistemology\, and gender studies will serve as the central&mdash\;though not exclusive&mdash\;perspectives guiding this special issue.</p>\n<p>We may understand &ldquo\;oppressive discourse&rdquo\; as a speech act that harms a person or group\, whose consequences contribute to the perpetuation of their conditions of subordination. One way in which oppression manifests itself is by depriving such individuals or groups of credibility (and\, consequently\, of epistemic authority)\, thereby reproducing discriminatory forms of subordination. This (epistemic) form of oppression typically accounts for the silencing of certain marginalized groups. This special issue will place particular emphasis on analyzing these forms of oppression\, as well as the discursive and argumentative mechanisms that sustain them.</p>\n<p>Language is a powerful force\, deeply intertwined with social practices and ways of life: harmful stereotypes about individuals or groups are forged and reinforced through discursive activities. Thus\, in order to prevent epistemic injustices\, it is necessary to intervene in the discursive domain of power by critically reflecting on its influence on credibility\, epistemic authority\, and the prejudices associated with epistemic agents\, as well as on the fallacies and argumentative errors committed by those who produce oppressive discourses. Informal logic\, epistemology\, and gender studies have much to contribute to this area\, and this issue seeks to highlight contributions from these philosophical fields by examining recurring forms of discussion and argumentation in cases and examples drawn from everyday life. As a final outcome\, this collection aims to show how philosophical argumentation can both help mitigate situations of epistemic injustice and contribute to identifying and dismantling harmful prejudices that promote discrimination.</p>\n<p>Submissions are invited on topics including\, but not limited to:</p>\n<p>●&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; Discursive silencing and epistemic exclusion in argumentative contexts</p>\n<p>●&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; Epistemic injustice in practices of debate and deliberation</p>\n<p>●&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; Epistemic authority in argumentation</p>\n<p>●&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; Fallacies and argumentative errors in oppressive discourses</p>\n<p>●&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; Relations between social power\, language\, and argumentation</p>\n<p>●&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; Philosophical analysis of oppressive speech in Latin American contexts</p>\n<p>Submissions must be made through the An&aacute\;lisis Filos&oacute\;fico website (https://analisisfilosofico.org/index.php/af/about/submissions)\, following the author guidelines (https://analisisfilosofico.org/index.php/af/guia-autores). When submitting the manuscript\, authors should include a note in the &ldquo\;Comments for the Editor&rdquo\; field indicating that the submission is intended for this special issue. All submissions will undergo double-blind peer review by external referees. The deadline for submissions is <strong><u>October 31\, 2026.</u></strong> For inquiries\, please contact:pyrosuarezcaro@gmail.com.</p>\n<p>The guest editorial team is composed of Pyro Suarez (lead editor)\, Pamela Lastres (editorial supervisor)\, and Luz Mu&ntilde\;oz (editorial assistant)\, all members of the research project &ldquo\;Silencing and Discourses of Oppression in Peru: Intersections between Informal Logic\, Epistemology\, and Gender Studies&rdquo\; at the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru.</p>
ORGANIZER:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20261031T234500
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20261031T234500
SUMMARY:Rethinking Agency under Non-Ideal Conditions
UID:20261027T215839Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Vienna
LOCATION:Graz\, Austria\, 8010
DESCRIPTION:<p><strong>CfP:&nbsp\;Rethinking Agency under Non-Ideal Conditions</strong></p>\n<p>Confirmed&nbsp\;speakers: Maria Alvarez\, Havi Carel\, Hanne Jacobs\, Quill Kukla\, Kristina Musholt and&nbsp\;Caleb Ward.</p>\n\n<p>The notion of agency plays a central role across many areas of philosophy\, including philosophy of action\, ethics\, political philosophy\, epistemology\, feminist philosophy\, and phenomenology.&nbsp\;While traditionally conceptualized in terms of intentional action\, rational control\, and autonomy\, our understanding of agency has recently come under intense scrutiny and is now being increasingly transformed.&nbsp\;Feminist and phenomenological approaches\, in particular\, have emphasized the need for a richer and more fine-grained conception of agency&mdash\;one that takes seriously the social\, historical\, and relational contexts in which agents are situated. From this perspective\, agency cannot be adequately understood without acknowledging that agents are not only rational decision-makers\, but also emotional\, embodied\, desiring\, creative\, and affective beings.</p>\n<p>This conference invites new investigations into agency as it is lived and exercised under non-ideal conditions\, such as vulnerability\, dependency\, uncertainty\, coercion\, structural injustice\, affective ambivalence\, or crisis. Rather than presupposing idealized models of action and rational control\, the conference aims to analyze how agency isreconfigured&nbsp\;under such conditions. We also particularly welcome contributions that examine how rational and virtuous agency should be rethought under non-ideal conditions and in times of crisis.</p>\n<p>Possible questions include (but are not limited to):</p>\n<ul>\n<li>How can agency and autonomy be understood from a phenomenological perspective?</li>\n<li>How can accounts of agency be expanded to include non-human forms of agency\, such as animal agency?</li>\n<li>How should we rethink rational and/or virtuous agency in a non-idealized framework?</li>\n<li>What role do affective\, embodied\,&nbsp\;and imaginative capacities play in sustaining rational and virtuous agency?</li>\n<li>What is the relationship between beliefs\, credences\, emotions\, and actions?</li>\n<li>Can ambivalence be compatible with (rational) agency?</li>\n</ul>\n<p>In addition to contemporary approaches\, we explicitly welcome historical-philosophical work\, including contributions engaging with the phenomenological tradition\, as well as those that critically engage with accounts of agency from marginalized figures and traditions in the history of philosophy.</p>\n<p>Contributions from early-career researchers are especially encouraged.</p>\n<p>The conference is planned as an in-person event only.</p>\n<p><strong>&nbsp\;</strong></p>\n<p>We invite you to submit an anonymized abstract of up to 500 words&nbsp\;by&nbsp\;<strong>October 31\, 2026&nbsp\;</strong>to&nbsp\;laurentia.adam@uni-graz.at</p>\n<p>Please include a separate file with your name\, email address\, the title of your talk\, and your affiliation (if any) and put &lsquo\;Rethinking Agency Graz 2027&rsquo\; in the subject line.</p>\n<p><strong>&nbsp\;</strong></p>\n<p>Organizing Team: Emanuela Carta\, Denis Dzanic\, and Daniel Neumann.</p>
ORGANIZER;CN="Denis Džanić";CN=Emanuela Carta;CN=Daniel Neumann:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261031T230000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261031T230000
SUMMARY:The Philosophy of the History of Philosophy (Archivio di Filosofia 1/2027)
UID:20261027T215840Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
DESCRIPTION:<p><strong>The Philosophy of the History of Philosophy: Concepts and Methods of a Philosophical Discipline (Archivio di filosofia 1/2027)</strong></p>\n<p>Since its inception\, the journal Archivio di filosofia has distinguished itself by the attention devoted to the theme of the historical-philosophical method\, as well as to the more general problem of the philosophy of the history of philosophy. With the publication of two monographic issues coordinated by Enrico Castelli twenty years apart (in 1954 and 1974)\, the journal invited Italian and international scholars to engage with the "theory" of the history of philosophy\, paying particular attention to the contents\, methods\, and aims that characterize the specificity of this discipline.</p>\n<p>On both occasions\, contributions centered on several essential theoretical questions: What is\, or what ought to be\, the historical-philosophical discipline? Is it philosophy or is it history? What is its legitimacy as "history" and as "philosophy"? How might it claim a space of autonomy within the broader horizon of philosophy itself\, as metaphilosophy? These are fundamental questions that reverberate through the specialist&rsquo\;s daily work\, guiding its practice. From this arises a series of further questions: Which principles should be adopted? Should one look to the methods of the history of science\, advocating for a history of truth and progress\, or is it preferable to valorize the authors' "lived experience" (biography\, sources\, intellectual context)? Is it more important to proceed through a rigorous philological reading of texts\, or are argumentative "structures"\, or even free variations\, of greater interest? What attention should be reserved for the history and evolution of concepts? Should history be "vertical" or "horizontal"?</p>\n<p>These and other considerations have found worthy defenders and have been sustained by effective\, and often polemical\, arguments. Throughout the twentieth century\, the debate on the theory and practice of historical-philosophical work was animated by discussions of a high speculative level&mdash\;one need only think of the querelle in France between Martial Gueroult and Ferdinand Alqui&eacute\;\, or the debate in Italy between "historians" and "theoreticians."</p>\n<p>The question remains urgent and essential: What is the history of philosophy as an autonomous discipline? And what does the historian of philosophy actually "do" when approaching authors and concepts? Through this monographic volume\, edited by Filippo Domenicali\, Andrea Gentili\, Andrea Le Moli\, and Gaetano Rametta\, Archivio di filosofia proposes to contribute to the debate on the nature and methods of the history of philosophy in light of the current landscape and the new challenges facing the discipline. What perspectives are emerging? What is the meaning of the history of philosophy today? How should we confront the challenges of our time\, from the digital revolution to the breaking down of traditional historical-geographical boundaries (Global Philosophy)? Does the history of philosophy still possess a social and cultural role?</p>\n<p><strong>Themes of the Volume</strong></p>\n<p>The volume aims to address the following:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>The debate on the object of the history of philosophy: authors\, ideas\, concepts\, systems.</li>\n<li>The debate on the nature of the history of philosophy: philosophy or history?</li>\n<li>The philosophy of the history of philosophy in its relationships with other theoretical perspectives: history of concepts\, history of ideas\, hermeneutics\, analytic philosophy.</li>\n<li>The relationship between the history of philosophy and other histories: history of science\, of art\, of ideas\, and so on.</li>\n<li>The problem of the historical-philosophical method: exemplary debates.</li>\n<li>Contemporary dianoematics.</li>\n<li>Which history of philosophy for the 21st century? Confronting the new technologies of the digital era: the treatment of audiovisual material\, archives\, databases\, digitization\, and the role of AI in research and education.</li>\n</ul>\n<p><strong>Submission Guidelines</strong></p>\n<p>Deadline: <strong>October 31st\, 2026</strong></p>\n<p>Length: 40.000 characters (including spaces and notes)</p>\n<p>Languages: English\, Italian\, German\, Spanish\, or French</p>\n<p>Submission Process: All manuscripts will undergo a double-blind peer review. Each contribution must be accompanied by a short abstract in English\, an English version of the title\, and up to five keywords.</p>\n<p>Send Submissions to: dmnfpp@unife.it and andrea.gentili.2@phd.unipd.it</p>\n<p>The selected contributions will be published in the journal's first issue of 2027</p>
ORGANIZER:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261031T234500
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261031T234500
SUMMARY:Lessico di Etica Pubblica - The Divine and the Digital (2/2026)
UID:20261027T215841Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
DESCRIPTION:<p>Lessico di Etica Pubblica&nbsp\;</p>\n<p><strong>Special Issue - The Divine and the Digital</strong></p>\n<p>(XVII\, n. 2\, 2026)</p>\n<p>Edited by <strong>Gemma Serrano</strong> (Coll&egrave\;ge des Bernardins\, Paris).</p>\n<p>The relationship between technology and culture is an increasingly discussed topic in the humanities. The analysis of the consequences of the so-called digital turn\, sometimes regarded as an unprecedented cultural transformation\, has developed within an interdisciplinary field encompassing philosophy\, history\, anthropology\, and sociology\, as well as theology and religious studies. Like any technological transformation\, the social implementation of digital technologies has had an impact on religious and spiritual practices on a global scale. For years\, the study of religions has examined how the spread of digital media has influenced our experience of transcendence\, rituals\, communal life\, and belief. At the same time\, theology and religion can offer cultural and theoretical tools to deepen our understanding of technology and can also provide an original perspective on the meaning of transformations in contemporary society.</p>\n<p>Beyond analysing the fate of theology and religion in the digital age\, it is crucial to recognize that the field of digital technologies opens up horizons of meaning and reflection that are closely intertwined with the domain of spirituality. Our relationship with technology\, more broadly\, is permeated by religion: a wide range of metaphors and notions&mdash\;either explicitly theological or rooted in religious language and practices&mdash\;are pervasively present in public and academic debates on the meaning of technology. In this sense\, many philosophers of technology&mdash\;including\, to name just a few\, G&uuml\;nther Anders\, Walter Benjamin\, Jacques Ellul\, Martin Heidegger\, Ivan Illich\, Emanuele Severino\, and Norbert Wiener&mdash\;have grounded their reflections in terms imbued with a theological resonance\, and have assigned a central role to the sphere of the divine in their interpretations of technology\, even when working from a secular perspective. A critical engagement with our religious tradition can help us develop analytical models for understanding our relationship with technology\, as well as for analysing our desires\, our fears\, and the socio-technical imaginaries that structure the social space.</p>\n<p>This task\, of course\, also entails theoretical and methodological challenges. First\, thinking about the relationship between technology and religion means recognizing the need for an intercultural study of different models for understanding the technical phenomenon. If the European interpretation of technology is rooted in Christian culture\, it becomes crucial to consider other traditions and other frameworks of reference.</p>\n<p>At the same time\, reference to digital technologies requires us to address the problem of technology from a historical perspective. The advent of artificial intelligence has made it even clearer that what we call the &ldquo\;digital turn&rdquo\; is in fact a layered and complex phenomenon\, and that digital technologies already have a long history\, which prevents us from thinking of &ldquo\;the digital&rdquo\; as a unified dimension. What\, then\, are the specific features of the so-called &ldquo\;digital age&rdquo\;? How can the analysis of the imaginaries and narratives associated with digital technologies help us shed light on our present?</p>\n<p>Issue 2/2026 of <em>Lessico di Etica Pubblica</em> will address these themes from an interdisciplinary perspective\, with contributions from philosophy\, theology\, cultural and technological history\, sociology\, and media theory. The following are some of the topics that will be explored:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>The digital turn as a socio-technical imaginary\;</li>\n<li>The religious and theological origins of the vocabulary we use to speak about digital technologies\;</li>\n<li>The relationship between technology and religion in contemporary thought\;</li>\n<li>Ethical and eschatological perspectives related to digital culture\;</li>\n<li>Critical reflections on the history of digital technologies\;</li>\n<li>Digital technologies as an intercultural and interreligious issue\;</li>\n<li>Social imaginaries and Artificial Intelligence.</li>\n</ul>\n<p><strong>Submission Guidelines for Article Proposals</strong></p>\n<p>Papers must be submitted by <strong>October 31\, 2026</strong> to the following address:redazione.eticapubblica@gmail.com.</p>\n<p>Contributions in Italian\, English and French are accepted. Maximum length: 35\,000 characters\, including spaces and notes. Authors are also required to include an abstract of no more than 150 words in both Italian and English. The article file must be prepared in anonymous form to comply with the blind peer review process. In a separate file attached to the same email\, authors should provide their full name\, email address\, the title of the article\, and its abstract.</p>\n<p>Submissions must conform to the editorial guidelines available at the following link:<br>https://www.eticapubblica.it/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/LEP_Norme_redazionali.pdf.<br>Authors are also invited to use the journal&rsquo\;s style sheet available here:<br>https://www.eticapubblica.it/norme-editoriali/.</p>
ORGANIZER:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20261101T234500
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Amsterdam:20261101T234500
SUMMARY:Epistemic Injustice and AI
UID:20261027T215842Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Amsterdam
LOCATION:Nijmegen\, Netherlands
DESCRIPTION:<p>AI systems now play a role in many practices through which people are heard\, interpreted\, assessed\, and trusted. This raises questions that are not just ethical or political\, but also epistemic in nature: whose testimony is treated as credible\, whose experiences are made intelligible\, and who is able to participate in shared practices of knowledge production? The workshop focuses on these questions by bringing work on epistemic injustice into conversation with current debates about AI\, including debates about algorithmic bias\, transparency\, linguistic exclusion\, trust\, institutional decision-making\, and the distribution of epistemic authority. We welcome contributions on the philosophical\, ethical\, social\, and political dimensions of epistemic injustice and AI.&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>Topics include\, but are not limited to:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>Algorithmic bias and values in AI</li>\n<li>Testimonial and hermeneutical injustice</li>\n<li>Epistemic agency and epistemic trust</li>\n<li>Transparency and explainability in AI</li>\n<li>Injustices linked to linguistic exclusion and issues of communication</li>\n<li>Bridges between epistemic and distributive injustice</li>\n<li>Applications to domains such as medicine\, education\, and law</li>\n<li>Applications to policy and institutional contexts</li>\n</ul>\n<p>We welcome abstracts of <u>up to 500 words</u>\, excluding references. Submissions should be anonymised\, argumentative\, and clearly engage with the workshop theme.</p>\n<p>The workshop will feature both oral presentations and a poster session\; all presentations must be in person.</p>\n<p>We encourage submissions from students and early-career researchers.&nbsp\;</p>\n<p><strong>Important dates</strong>:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>Submission deadline: 1 November 2026</li>\n<li>Notification of acceptance: 1 December 2026</li>\n<li>Workshop dates: 23-24 March 2027 &nbsp\;</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Further information and submission details can be found on the workshop website.</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Corien Bary;CN=Eline Ensinck;CN=Harmen Ghijsen;CN=Bob van Tiel;CN=Nina Poth:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261102T000000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Berlin:20261102T000000
SUMMARY:The Significance of Suffering in Theory and Practice
UID:20261027T215843Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Berlin
LOCATION:Universitätsstraße 25\, Bielefeld\, Germany
DESCRIPTION:<p><strong>The Significance of Suffering in Theory and Practice</strong><br>Call for Abstracts/Papers and Registration<br><br><br>This year's annual conference of the German Society for Utilitarian Studies (Gesellschaft f&uuml\;r Utilitarismusstudien) will focus on the significance of suffering in theory and practice. What is suffering\, and which entities can suffer? What is severe or unbearable suffering\, in particular\, and should it take priority over happiness and other prudential\, moral\, or political values or reasons? If so\, what kind of priority and why?<br><br>Our speakers include Roger Crisp (Oxford)\, David Enoch (Oxford)\, Felicia Knaul (UCLA)\, Jennifer Corns (Glasgow)\, Michael Brady (Glasgow)\, Jonas H. Aaron (Zurich)\, Leonard Dung (Bochum)\, Bj&oslash\;rn Morten Hofmann (NTNU)\, Claudia Bozzaro (M&uuml\;nster)\, and Dieter Birnbacher (D&uuml\;sseldorf).<br><br>To participate in person or online\, please email adriano.mannino@hm.edu. Participation is free. The conference will start Thursday afternoon\, November 19\, and end Saturday afternoon\, November 21\, 2026 (schedule TBA). You are welcome to attend only part of the conference.<br><br><strong>Our schedule has room for additional speakers. Please attach your abstract or paper if you would like to give a talk\; we will notify you within a few days of submission. We can fully cover travel costs within Europe\, and at least partly from elsewhere.</strong><br><br>Suitable topic areas include but are not limited to: the concepts and mental phenomena of pain\, suffering\, aversion\, etc.\, and the concepts of severity and unbearability\; pain and suffering as they relate to the theory of illbeing and wellbeing\, value and disvalue\; to intra- and interpersonal (non)aggregation\, nonidentity\, and population-level choices\; to Kantian dignity\, contractualism\, virtue ethics\, and other nonconsequentialist perspectives\; to the concept of illhealth and issues in biomedical ethics or normative health economics more broadly (e.g.\, unbearability and end-of-life care\, the measurement of suffering and the QALY/DALY/WELLBY metrics\, patient prioritization and triage)\; to other areas of applied ethics (e.g.\, research ethics\, animal ethics\, AI ethics\, applied population ethics/future ethics)\; to issues in political philosophy/theory and practice\; and to the history of utilitarian thought and rivaling traditions.<br><br>The German Society for Utilitarian Studies (Gesellschaft f&uuml\;r Utilitarismusstudien) is an association of scholars interested in utilitarian thought. Its aim is to foster engagement with the utilitarian tradition in philosophy and adjacent disciplines. Needless to say\, the association welcomes utilitarians and non-utilitarians alike.<br><br>We are grateful to the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft for supporting our 2026 annual conference.</p>
ORGANIZER:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20261101T230000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20261101T230000
SUMMARY:Rutgers Analytic Theology Symposium 2027
UID:20261027T215844Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/New_York
LOCATION:New Brunswick Theological Seminary\, 21 Seminary Place\, New Brunswick\, United States\, 08901
DESCRIPTION:<p>The Rutgers Analytic Theology Symposium solicits abstracts for papers in analytic theology\, for a conference to be held June 20-22 2027\, at the New Brunswick Theological Seminary and Rutgers University\, New Brunswick. Papers are welcome in all areas of analytic theology\, including analytical historical theology. &nbsp\;RATS is an interfaith conference. &nbsp\;Abstracts should be a maximum of 500 words and&nbsp\;anonymized&nbsp\;for blind review.&nbsp\; Please indicate in your email whether you are submitting for a colloquium or symposium slot. Only one paper will be accepted for the symposium slot\; so\, those who send an abstract for a symposium slot may be offered a colloquium slot instead. &nbsp\;Some whose papers are not accepted may be offered commentator slots. Abstracts are due by Nov. 1 to&nbsp\;j.a.cobon@rutgers.edu. &nbsp\;Decisions will be announced by Dec 1. &nbsp\; Invited keynote and symposium sessions will be read-ahead by everyone and have commentators. These sessions last 90mins to 2 hours.&nbsp\; Colloquium sessions will last 75 mins (approx 30mins presentation\, followed by 45mins Q&amp\;A)</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Brian Leftow:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261104T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261106T170000
SUMMARY:The 4th annual conference of the The International Society for the Philosophy of the Sciences of the Mind
UID:20261027T215845Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
DESCRIPTION:<p>What is the mind\, and how does it work? These questions have led to centuries of philosophical and empirical investigations\, and still lack definitive answers. We thus invite submissions from all disciplines that leverage insights from the use of different techniques\, methodologies\, and research questions to shed light on the nature and functioning of the mind.</p>\n<p>In this fourth web conference\, we seek again to bring together many of these perspectives to build a common ground\, a comprehensive and multi-scale conceptual landscape of the mind. We accept submissions from a broad range of perspectives\, including - but not limited to - philosophy of psychology\, philosophy of psychiatry\, philosophy of neuroscience\, philosophy of cognitive science\, philosophy of mind\, philosophy of artificial intelligence &amp\; robotics\, philosophy of linguistics\, philosophy of ethology\, philosophy of (cognitive) anthropology\, philosophy of biology\, philosophy of the social sciences and consciousness studies.</p>\n<p>We are delighted to already have a number of excellent keynote speakers confirmed for 2026\, including:</p>\n<p>Devon Bailey<br>University of Johannesburg\,&nbsp\;Republic of South Africa</p>\n<p>Louise Barrett<br>University of Lethbridge\,&nbsp\;Canada</p>\n<p>Ali Boyle<br>LSE\,&nbsp\;United Kingdom</p>\n<p>Melina Gastelum Vargas<br>UNAM\, Mexico</p>\n<p>Michael Kirchhoff<br>University of Wollongong\,&nbsp\;Australia</p>\n<p>Yukie Nagai<br>University of Tokyo\, Japan</p>\n<p>Practical Information</p>\n<p>When: 4-6 November 2026<br>Where: Online<br>Fees: The conference is fully online\, and no fee is required<br>Further Inquiries:&nbsp\;ispsmofficial@gmail.com</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Marco Facchin;CN=Valeria Becattini;CN=Liberty Severs;CN=Niccolo Negro;CN="María Jimena Clavel Vázquez";CN=Carlos Barth;CN=Laura Oppi;CN=April Owens:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261104T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261106T170000
SUMMARY:4th ISPSM Online Conference
UID:20261027T215846Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
ORGANIZER;CN=Marco Facchin:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Athens:20261105T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Athens:20261107T170000
SUMMARY:Hegel on Historicity
UID:20261027T215847Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Athens
LOCATION:Athens\, Greece
DESCRIPTION:<p>10th Conference of the International Network Hegel&rsquo\;s Relevance</p>\n<p><strong>Hegel on Historicity</strong></p>\n<p>Athens\, Greece</p>\n<p>5-7 November 2026</p>\n<p>Despite important precedents in Augustine\, Bossuet\, Voltaire\, Kant\, and Herder\, Hegel is widely regarded as the first philosopher of history&mdash\;not only because he subjected history to philosophical inquiry\, but above all because he thematized the historicity of philosophy itself. Alongside his much-debated philosophy of world history\, Hegel repeatedly stressed\, throughout his oeuvre and especially in numerous programmatic and introductory remarks\, that philosophy\, including all metaphysical categories\, and even rationality itself is substantially conditioned by history&mdash\;by world history as well as by the histories of empirical sciences\, art\, religion\, and philosophy. For Hegel\, history articulates the very possibility of the actual spirit (<em>Geist</em>) in all its forms: there is no subjective\, objective\, or absolute spirit without history. This emphasis famously inspired Marx to describe the &ldquo\;science of history&rdquo\; as the &ldquo\;sole science.&rdquo\;</p>\n<p>This conference aims to discuss central aspects of history and historicity in Hegel&rsquo\;s philosophy from a systematic perspective. Possible guiding questions include\, but are not limited to:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>What is history\, and why does it matter philosophically?</li>\n<li>What is the difference between historicity and mere contingency?</li>\n<li>What is Hegel&rsquo\;s notion of &ldquo\;philosophical history\,&rdquo\; if it is neither historicism nor the projection of an external teleology onto historical facts?</li>\n<li>Does Hegel&rsquo\;s emphasis on historicity exclude any genuine possibility of predicting future developments\, thereby restricting philosophy to the role symbolized by the &ldquo\;owl of Minerva&rdquo\;?</li>\n<li>To what extent is the historical development of concepts relevant to the immanent conceptual development within Hegel&rsquo\;s <em>Philosophy of Nature</em>\, <em>Philosophy of Spirit</em>\, and&mdash\;most provocatively&mdash\;the <em>Science of Logic</em>?</li>\n<li>How does historicity apply to seemingly ahistorical notions inherited from the rationalist or Kantian tradition\, such as &ldquo\;truth\,&rdquo\; &ldquo\;science\,&rdquo\; &ldquo\;idea\,&rdquo\; and &ldquo\;reason&rdquo\;?</li>\n<li>Is Hegel&rsquo\;s emphasis on historicity a form of pragmatism <em>avant la lettre</em>?</li>\n<li>Do art\, religion\, philosophy (and their various historical forms)\, or even human life and social institutions (and their own various forms)\, possess a specific intrinsic value beyond what is historically ascribed to them?</li>\n</ul>\n<p>We invite postdoctoral researchers working in the field to submit an abstract (maximum 500 words) addressing one or more of these topics. The conference will include four postdoctoral slots. Coverage of accommodation costs is subject to available funding.</p>\n<p>A collected volume based on the conference papers is planned for publication in the series <em>Critical Studies in German Idealism</em> (BRILL). The publication language will be English.</p>\n<p>Length of papers: 30 minutes presentation\, followed by 15 minutes of discussion</p>\n<p>Deadline for submissions: 15 June 2026</p>\n<p>Email address for abstract submissions: <a href="mailto:HegelOnHistoricity@gmail.com">HegelOnHistoricity@gmail.com</a></p>\n<p>Notification of acceptance: 30 June 2026</p>\n<p>Conference languages: English\, German</p>\n<p>Confirmed speakers: Christophe Bouton\, Paul Cobben\, Maria Daskalaki\, Allegra De Laurentiis\, Georges Faraklas\, Diogo Ferrer\, Guido Frilli\, Antonios Kalatzis\, Jean-Fran&ccedil\;ois Kerv&eacute\;gan\, Jannis Kozatsas\, Christian Krijnen\, Thomas Noutsopoulos\, Tim Rojek\, Panagiotis Thanassas\, Klaus Vieweg</p>\n<p>Organizers: Georges Faraklas (Department of Political Science and History\, Panteion University)\, Jannis Kozatsas (Department of Primary Education\, University of Thessaly)\, Ermylos Plevrakis (Department of History and Philosophy of Science\, University of Athens)</p>\n<p><a href="http://www.hegelsrelevance.org/">www.hegelsrelevance.org</a></p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Ermylos Plevrakis;CN=Georges Faraklas;CN=Jannis Kozatsas:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Belgrade:20261105T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Belgrade:20261107T170000
SUMMARY:Ideal Meanings and Real Contents: The Transcending Ability of Mind and Language
UID:20261027T215848Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Belgrade
LOCATION:Ulica grada Vukovara 54\, Zagreb\, Croatia\, 10000
DESCRIPTION:<p>THE INTERNATIONAL PHILOSOPHICAL CONFERENCE</p>\n<p><em>Ideal Meanings and Real Contents: The Transcending Ability of Mind and Language</em></p>\n<p><em></em>Zagreb\, Institute of Philosophy</p>\n<p>November 5th&ndash\; 7th\, 2026</p>\n<p><strong>CALL FOR PAPERS</strong></p>\n<p><strong></strong>One of the hallmarks of modern philosophy is its treatment of meanings &ndash\; both of thoughts and linguistic (symbolic) expressions &ndash\; as &ldquo\;ideal&rdquo\; or &ldquo\;abstract\,&rdquo\; in contrast to the &ldquo\;real&rdquo\; or &ldquo\;concrete&rdquo\; character of entities that convey them. Although this view emerged already in the early 19th century\, most notably in Bolzano&rsquo\;s work\, it was articulated most clearly by Frege and became central to his &ldquo\;antipsychologistic&rdquo\; stance &ndash\; a programmatic position adopted by many German speaking philosophers around 1900. While enthusiasm for ideal meanings declined in the decades to follow\, both phenomenologically and analytically minded thinkers retained a deep interest in the objectifying capacity of language and consciousness. Following Brentano\, they started to address this capacity by a common label &ndash\; <em>intentionality</em>. Yet the shared term conceals important differences: for instance\, it has become customary to treat linguistic meanings and the meaningfulness of our experiences as distinct phenomena\, each giving rise to specialized fields of inquiry. The conference <em>Ideal Meanings and Real Contents: The Transcending Ability of Mind and Language</em> aims to trace these diverse approaches to their common philosophical roots and to consider the current controversies from a broader perspective. We therefore invite paper proposals addressing both historical interpretations and contemporary debates on intentionality across disciplines such as philosophy of mind\, philosophy of language\, logic\, metaphysics\, epistemology\, and cognitive science.</p>\n<p><strong>Confirmed keynote speakers:</strong> - Johannes Brandl (University of Salzburg) - Katalin Farkas (Central European University\, Vienna) - Srećko Kovač (Institute of Philosophy\, Zagreb) - Alberto Voltolini (University of Turin)</p>\n<p>Official language of the conference is <strong>English</strong>.</p>\n<p><strong>Deadline:</strong> Those interested to present a paper\, should submit their 200 to 400 words abstract in English no later than <strong>August 1\, 2026</strong> to: <u>davor@ifzg.hr</u></p>\n<p>Conference fee is <strong>100 euros</strong>. Those whose abstracts are accepted for the conference presentation should pay the fee no later than September 15\, 2026.</p>\n<p><strong>Organising committee:</strong> Gabriela Ba&scaron\;ić Hanžek (University of Split)\, Du&scaron\;an Dožudić (Institute of Philosophy\, Zagreb)\, Ljudevit Hanžek (University of Split)\, Tomislav Janović (University of Zagreb)\, Davor Pećnjak (Institute of Philosophy\, Zagreb)\, Ivan Restović (Institute of Philosophy\, Zagreb)\, Dario &Scaron\;karica (Institute of Philosophy\, Zagreb/University of Split)</p>
ORGANIZER:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Rome:20261105T100000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Rome:20261107T170000
SUMMARY:Primo Convegno della Società Italiana di Fenomenologia: "Fenomenologia\, logica e psicologia"
UID:20261027T215849Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/Rome
LOCATION:Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici\, Via Porta di Massa 1\, Napoli\, Italy\, 80133
DESCRIPTION:<p>&laquo\;Dal ripudio della psicologia empirica in nome di una logica pura Husserl passer&agrave\;\, attraverso un lungo e tormentato cammino\, alla psicologia pura o trascendentale&raquo\;.</p>\n<p>A partire da queste parole di Aldo Masullo\, scritte nel 1961\, il convegno intende indagare un tema che\, per molta filosofia del Novecento\, ha rappresentato uno dei principali limiti della fenomenologia e che\, negli ultimi anni\, si &egrave\; invece rivelato uno dei suoi aspetti pi&ugrave\; fecondi: il rapporto tra logica e psicologia.</p>\n<p>Costitutivo della formazione filosofica di Husserl e decisivo per l&rsquo\;evoluzione del suo pensiero\, il confronto tra logica e psicologia ha orientato gran parte dello sviluppo del movimento fenomenologico. La fenomenologia\, infatti\, non si &egrave\; limitata alla critica delle diverse forme di psicologismo &ndash\; logico\, gnoseologico ed etico &ndash\; ma ha elaborato una nuova concezione delle relazioni tra validit&agrave\; logica\, intenzionalit&agrave\; e soggettivit&agrave\;.</p>\n<p>Si pu&ograve\; sostenere che\, per comprendere le diverse fasi del pensiero husserliano\, cos&igrave\; come per distinguere le principali stagioni della tradizione fenomenologica\, sia necessario chiarire le differenti concezioni di logica e di psicologia che vi sono implicate. In questa prospettiva\, il rapporto tra questi due ambiti non costituisce soltanto una questione interna alla fenomenologia\, ma rappresenta una chiave interpretativa essenziale per comprendere il suo sviluppo storico e teorico.</p>\n<p>Al di l&agrave\; del perimetro strettamente fenomenologico\, la relazione tra logica e psicologia occupa oggi una posizione centrale nel dibattito filosofico contemporaneo: dalla teoria della conoscenza alla teoria dei concetti\, dall&rsquo\;etica all&rsquo\;antropologia\, dalla filosofia delle scienze cognitive alla filosofia della mente\, dalla filosofia della logica alla psicopatologia.</p>\n<p>In questo quadro\, si invitano studiose e studiosi a presentare contributi di carattere storico o teorico sui seguenti temi:</p>\n<p><strong><br></strong></p>\n<p>1. Fenomenologia e psicologia\;</p>\n<p>2. Fenomenologia e psicopatologia\;</p>\n<p>3. Fenomenologia e logica\;</p>\n<p>4. Etica fenomenologica tra logica e psicologia\;</p>\n<p>5. Fenomenologia\, scienze cognitive ed epistemologia\;</p>\n<p>6. Fenomenologia e teoria delle emozioni\;</p>\n<p>7. Fenomenologia e antropologia\;</p>\n<p>8. Fenomenologia e trascendentale.</p>\n<p>Gli abstract\, di massimo 2500 caratteri pi&ugrave\; 1000 di bibliografia\, andranno inviati a Lorenzo Cavallo (lorenzo.cavallo2@unina.it) e a Claudio Fabbroni (claudio.fabbroni@unina.it)<br><br></p>\n<p>Scadenze</p>\n<p><strong><br></strong></p>\n<p>Invio degli abstract: 15 settembre 2026</p>\n<p>Comunicazione degli esiti: 1&deg\; ottobre 2026</p>\n<p><strong><br></strong></p>\n<p>Comitato scientifico:</p>\n<p>Anna Donise\, Felice Masi\, Anna Pia Ruoppo</p>\n<p><strong><br></strong></p>\n<p>Comitato organizzativo:</p>\n<p>Giovanni Battista Armenio\, Francesco Bevilacqua\, Lorenzo Cavallo\, Claudio Fabbroni\, Francesca Maffettone\, Giulia Salzano</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Anna Donise;CN=Felice Masi;CN=Anna Pia Ruoppo:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20261105T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20261106T170000
SUMMARY:Biological Naturalism about Consciousness
UID:20261027T215850Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/Los_Angeles
LOCATION:390 Portola Plaza\, Los Angeles\, United States
ORGANIZER;CN=Josh Armstrong;CN=Hayley Clatterbuck;CN=Bob Fischer:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20261106T093000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20261106T170000
SUMMARY:Central New York Philosophy of Language Workshop
UID:20261027T215851Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/New_York
LOCATION:University of Rochester\, Humanities Center Conference Room D\, Rochester\, United States
DESCRIPTION:<p>Schedule: <br>9:30 - 10:00am: Coffee and pastries</p>\n<p>10:00 am - 11:15 am: Bernhard Nickel (Harvard University)\, &ldquo\;True Ideological Generics?"</p>\n<p>11:30 am - 12:45 pm: Anni Sun (Cornell University)\, &ldquo\;Inheritance\, Alternative Sensitivity\, and the Semantics of &lsquo\;Ought&rsquo\;"</p>\n<p>12:45 pm - 1:45 pm: Lunch</p>\n<p>1:45 pm - 3:00 pm: Rohan Sud (Virginia Tech)\, &ldquo\;The Erotetic-Expressivist Theory of Vagueness"</p>\n<p>3:15 pm - 4:30 pm: Seth Yalcin (University of California\, Berkeley)\, Keynote Talk&nbsp\;</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Zeynep Soysal;CN=Jens Kipper;CN="Martín Abreu Zavaleta":
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20261106T100000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20261106T113000
SUMMARY:True Ideological Generics?
UID:20261027T215852Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/New_York
LOCATION:Rochester\, United States
ORGANIZER;CN=Zeynep Soysal;CN=Jens Kipper;CN="Martín Abreu Zavaleta":
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20261106T113000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20261106T130000
SUMMARY:Inheritance\, Alternative Sensitivity\, and the Semantics of ‘Ought’
UID:20261027T215853Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/New_York
LOCATION:Rochester\, United States
ORGANIZER;CN=Zeynep Soysal;CN=Jens Kipper;CN="Martín Abreu Zavaleta":
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20261106T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20261107T170000
SUMMARY:Social Categories of the Future
UID:20261027T215854Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/Los_Angeles
LOCATION:1156 High Street\, Santa Cruz\, United States
DESCRIPTION:<p>Recent years have seen an explosion of work on social categories\, including gender\, race\, disability\, and sexual orientation. But little attention has been paid to what these and other categories might look like in the future.&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>For example\, trans philosophy is just beginning to broach the topic of futuristic social categories\, while social metaphysics has just begun to investigate gender abolitionism (the view that gender categories should be abolished in a more just future.) Philosophers of AI have just begun thinking about how artificially intelligent entities will fit into human-constructed social structures\, or whether they will develop their own social hierarchies.</p>\n<p>We plan to bring together researchers from different approaches and viewpoints working on these and related topics. Topics for abstracts include\, but are not limited to:</p>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<p>The existence and nonexistence of gender categories in the future\, and their level of grain</p>\n</li>\n<li>\n<p>Gender abolitionism</p>\n</li>\n<li>\n<p>Changing notions of ability\, disability\, and health given new technologies and scientific breakthroughs</p>\n</li>\n<li>\n<p>Changing notions of biological sex given advances in reproductive technology</p>\n</li>\n<li>\n<p>Racial\, ethnic\, and religious categories of the future</p>\n</li>\n<li>\n<p>Ameliorative construction and destruction of social categories&nbsp\;</p>\n</li>\n<li>\n<p>Social categories and hierarchies of artificial intelligent agents</p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<p>This workshop is generously funded by the International Social Ontology Society and the Department of Philosophy at University of California\, Santa Cruz.</p>\n<p>Organizers: Sara Bernstein and Nico Orlandi</p>\n<p>Please send extended abstracts of no more than 1500 words to socialcategoriesofthefuture@gmail.com. Deadline: August 15\, 2026 (anywhere in the world).</p>\n<p>Small travel bursaries may be available for graduate students and precariously employed attendees. Please email the organizers to find out more.</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Sara Bernstein;CN=Nico Orlandi:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261106T170000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261106T183000
SUMMARY:Analogical Abduction as a Method for Extrapolating Inferences to Consciousness: The Hemispherotomy case
UID:20261027T215855Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
DESCRIPTION:<p>We are pleased to invite you to the next session of the<strong> Empirically Informed Philosophy of Mind online Seminar&nbsp\;</strong></p>\n<p><strong><br></strong></p>\n<p><strong>Who:</strong> Charlotte Gauvry (King&rsquo\;s College London)<br><strong>When:</strong> Friday\, November 6th\, 2026 &mdash\; <strong>5&ndash\;6:30</strong> pm (CET)<br><strong>Where:</strong> Online via Zoom:<br><a target="_blank">https://pantheonsorbonne.zoom.us/j/92782580594?pwd=a5p3WfunQQxJICrjJaUenFJFzmllbx.1</a><br><strong>What:</strong> Analogical Abduction as a Method for Extrapolating Inferences to Consciousness: The Hemispherotomy case</p>\n<p><br></p>\n<p>Advances in ethology\, biotechnology\, and artificial intelligence have revived philosophical debates about whether consciousness can be attributed to entities that differ from humans\, both physiologically and functionally. Beyond its conceptual difficulties\, this extrapolation problem raises a logical one: which forms of reasoning are warranted when the target system diverges radically from the source case? I address it in two steps. First\, following Negro and Mudrick (2025)\, I adopt analogical abduction as a method for inferring consciousness beyond typical cases. Second\, I apply it to the case of hemispherotomy\, a neurosurgical treatment for drug-resistant epilepsy in which one hemisphere is left in place but disconnected from the rest of the brain.<strong></strong></p>\n<p><strong><br></strong></p>\n<p><strong>For any questions\, please contact:</strong><br>Sacha Behrend &mdash\; sachabehrend1991@gmail.com<br>Elodie Boissard &mdash\; elodie.boissard@umpv.fr</p>\n<p><strong><br></strong></p>\n<p><strong>Program</strong></p>\n<p><strong>September 30</strong> &mdash\; Christophe Heintz (Central European University)<br><em>When Do People Trust What They Are Told? </em><em>Studies on Epistemic Vigilance</em></p>\n<p><strong>October 7</strong> &mdash\; St&eacute\;phane Lemaire (Universit&eacute\; de Rennes)<br><em>How Do Moods Represent Future Prospects?</em></p>\n<p><strong>November 6</strong> &mdash\; Charlotte Gauvry (King&rsquo\;s College London)<br><em>Analogical Abduction as a Method for Extrapolating Inferences to Consciousness. </em><em>The Hemispherotomy case</em></p>\n<p><strong>December 17</strong> &mdash\; Fr&eacute\;d&eacute\;rique de Vignemont (Institut Jean Nicod)<br><em>TBA</em></p>\n<p><strong>Organizers:</strong></p>\n<p><strong>Sacha Behrend</strong><br>Postdoctoral Researcher\, University of Hradec Kr&aacute\;lov&eacute\;\, Czech Republic<br>Affiliated Researcher\, Institut d&rsquo\;histoire et de philosophie des sciences et des techniques (IHPST)\, Universit&eacute\; Paris 1 Panth&eacute\;on-Sorbonne</p>\n<p><strong>Elodie Boissard</strong><br>Ma&icirc\;tresse de conf&eacute\;rences en philosophie de la m&eacute\;decine<br>Universit&eacute\; de Montpellier Paul Val&eacute\;ry</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Sacha Behrend;CN=Elodie Boissard:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20261106T134500
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20261106T151500
SUMMARY:The Erotetic-Expressivist Theory of Vagueness
UID:20261027T215856Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/New_York
LOCATION:Rochester\, United States
ORGANIZER;CN=Zeynep Soysal;CN=Jens Kipper;CN="Martín Abreu Zavaleta":
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261107T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261108T170000
SUMMARY:Responsible Trusting without Prejudice Workshop 2
UID:20261027T215857Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
LOCATION:University of Stirling\, Stirling\, United Kingdom
DESCRIPTION:<p>The <em>Responsible Trusting without Prejudice</em> project is jointly hosted by the University of Stirling and the University of Edinburgh\, and is funded by the Royal Society of Edinburgh. Our first in-person workshop will take place on the University of Stirling campus on the 7th and 8th of November 2026.</p>\n<p>In addition to a number of invited speakers (TBA)\, we are pleased to invite the submission of extended abstracts to be considered for presentation at this workshop. Abstracts should include a short bibliography\, should be no longer than 800 words in total\, and should be anonymised for review. Abstracts should be sent to Sharon Coull thoughtmanagingeditor@gmail.com\, by the end of day on <strong>Wednesday</strong> <strong>30th of September</strong>\, 2026. Proposed presentations can be on any aspect of the project\, though we particularly invite abstracts on what is involved in being a responsible epistemic agent\, and whether epistemic responsibility raises any distinctive issues not already raised by responsibility for action in general. Following review\, selected authors will be invited to attend the workshop and give a presentation based on their submissions\, with 2-3 nights of accommodation and the workshop dinner paid for by the project (unfortunately\, we are unable to cover the cost of travel to Stirling).</p>\n<p>Overview</p>\n<p>One lesson of Wittgenstein&rsquo\;s <em>On Certainty</em> is that responsible inquiry requires that we take certain things on trust rather than seeking evidence in their favour\, and yet\, accepting things without evidence can be a manifestation of prejudice. How can we distinguish cases in which accepting something without evidence is demanded of us as responsible epistemic agents from those in which it must be avoided? What steps might we take as an epistemic community to promote responsible inquiry\, given the risks of falling into prejudicial thinking?</p>\n<p>These questions have particular urgency in the present social context\, in which real social harm is caused both by unjustified doubts&mdash\;such as climate change denial\, distrust of experts etc. &mdash\;and unjustified acceptances&mdash\;as seen in the phenomenon of online echo chambers\, the proliferation of conspiracy theories etc. &nbsp\;This project will clarify what it takes to be a responsible inquirer in a world that is so uncooperative\, and where the consequences of lapsing into prejudicial thinking are so harmful.</p>\n<p>Some issues to be explored draw on and evaluate hints and insights from <em>On Certainty</em> and views advanced in the extensive literature of what has come to be known as <em>hinge epistemology</em>. What should be included in the range of presuppositions that inquiring rational agents cannot but &lsquo\;take for granted&rsquo\; as background to the responsible formation of belief&mdash\;for example\, propositions about the effectiveness of their own cognitive capacities and the suitability of the circumstances in which they are deployed for the effective function of those capacities. Some of these propositions will admit of independent investigation\, but that of course will rest upon a further set of propositions.</p>\n<p>More specific questions to be addressed at the workshop include:</p>\n<p>&middot\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; What are the nature and limits of rationally unavoidable epistemic trust?</p>\n<p>&middot\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; What is the nature of epistemic responsibility?</p>\n<p>&middot\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; What are the conditions for the effective transmission of reliable information?</p>\n<p>&middot\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; What is the significance of &lsquo\;inherited&rsquo\; backgrounds and echo chambers.</p>\n<p>&middot\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; Why are people susceptible to disinformation?</p>\n<p>For additional information go tohttps://crispinjwright.com/rtwp_workshop/&nbsp\;</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Aidan McGlynn;CN=Alan Millar:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261107T090000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261108T170000
SUMMARY:Responsible Trusting without Prejudice Workshop 2
UID:20261027T215858Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
LOCATION:University of Stirling\, Stirling\, United Kingdom
DESCRIPTION:<p>The <em>Responsible Trusting without Prejudice</em> project is jointly hosted by the University of Stirling and the University of Edinburgh\, and is funded by the Royal Society of Edinburgh. Our first in-person workshop will take place on the University of Stirling campus on the 7th and 8th of November 2026.</p>\n<p>In addition to a number of invited speakers (TBA)\, we are pleased to invite the submission of extended abstracts to be considered for presentation at this workshop. Abstracts should include a short bibliography\, should be no longer than 800 words in total\, and should be anonymised for review. Abstracts should be sent to Sharon Coull thoughtmanagingeditor@gmail.com\, by the end of day on <strong>Wednesday</strong> <strong>30th of September</strong>\, 2026. Proposed presentations can be on any aspect of the project\, though we particularly invite abstracts on what is involved in being a responsible epistemic agent\, and whether epistemic responsibility raises any distinctive issues not already raised by responsibility for action in general. Following review\, selected authors will be invited to attend the workshop and give a presentation based on their submissions\, with 2-3 nights of accommodation and the workshop dinner paid for by the project (unfortunately\, we are unable to cover the cost of travel to Stirling).</p>\n<p>Overview</p>\n<p>One lesson of Wittgenstein&rsquo\;s <em>On Certainty</em> is that responsible inquiry requires that we take certain things on trust rather than seeking evidence in their favour\, and yet\, accepting things without evidence can be a manifestation of prejudice. How can we distinguish cases in which accepting something without evidence is demanded of us as responsible epistemic agents from those in which it must be avoided? What steps might we take as an epistemic community to promote responsible inquiry\, given the risks of falling into prejudicial thinking?</p>\n<p>These questions have particular urgency in the present social context\, in which real social harm is caused both by unjustified doubts&mdash\;such as climate change denial\, distrust of experts etc. &mdash\;and unjustified acceptances&mdash\;as seen in the phenomenon of online echo chambers\, the proliferation of conspiracy theories etc. &nbsp\;This project will clarify what it takes to be a responsible inquirer in a world that is so uncooperative\, and where the consequences of lapsing into prejudicial thinking are so harmful.</p>\n<p>Some issues to be explored draw on and evaluate hints and insights from <em>On Certainty</em> and views advanced in the extensive literature of what has come to be known as <em>hinge epistemology</em>. What should be included in the range of presuppositions that inquiring rational agents cannot but &lsquo\;take for granted&rsquo\; as background to the responsible formation of belief&mdash\;for example\, propositions about the effectiveness of their own cognitive capacities and the suitability of the circumstances in which they are deployed for the effective function of those capacities. Some of these propositions will admit of independent investigation\, but that of course will rest upon a further set of propositions.</p>\n<p>More specific questions to be addressed at the workshop include:</p>\n<p>&middot\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; What are the nature and limits of rationally unavoidable epistemic trust?</p>\n<p>&middot\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; What is the nature of epistemic responsibility?</p>\n<p>&middot\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; What are the conditions for the effective transmission of reliable information?</p>\n<p>&middot\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; What is the significance of &lsquo\;inherited&rsquo\; backgrounds and echo chambers.</p>\n<p>&middot\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\;&nbsp\; Why are people susceptible to disinformation?</p>\n<p>For additional information go tohttps://crispinjwright.com/rtwp_workshop/&nbsp\;</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Aidan McGlynn;CN=Alan Millar:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20261107T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20261108T170000
SUMMARY:University of Pennsylvania Metaphysics Workshop
UID:20261027T215859Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/New_York
LOCATION:Philadelphia\, United States
DESCRIPTION:<p>The inagural meeting of the Penn Metaphysics Workshop will take place on November 7-8.&nbsp\; Attendance is open\; those wishing to attend are asked to email Sam Elgin (samelgin@upenn.edu) so that we can ensure sufficient catering</p>\n\n<p>This workshop is supported in part by the Andrea Mitchell Center for the Study of Democracy at the University of Pennsylvania.</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Samuel Elgin:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20261108T170000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20261108T170000
SUMMARY:CFP: Feminist Legal Reform and Digital Agency in Global Media Landscapes
UID:20261027T215900Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:Europe/London
DESCRIPTION:<p><strong>Call for Book Chapters</strong></p>\n\n<p><strong>Book Title: Feminist Legal Reform and Digital Agency in Global Media Landscapes</strong></p>\n<p><strong>Publisher: IGI Global Scientific Publishing</strong></p>\n\n<p>Proposal Submission Deadline: <strong>November 8\, 2026</strong></p>\n\n<p>Book Editors:</p>\n<p>- Dr. Jamil Akhtar (University of the Punjab\, Lahore\, Pakistan)</p>\n<p>- Dr. Aulia Rahmawati (Universitas Pembangunan Nasional &ldquo\;Veteran&rdquo\; Jawa Timur\, Indonesia)</p>\n<p>- Dr. Dirk Hartwig (University of M&uuml\;nster\, Germany)</p>\n\n<p><strong>Introduction</strong></p>\n<p>The intersection of feminist legal reform and digital agency represents one of the most dynamic and contested terrains in contemporary global media landscapes. As digital platforms reshape how societies debate\, negotiate\, and implement gender justice\, new possibilities for feminist advocacy emerge alongside novel forms of resistance\, surveillance\, and backlash. From hashtag movements challenging patriarchal legal systems to online campaigns for reproductive rights\, from digital storytelling by marginalized women to algorithmic biases perpetuating gender inequality\, the relationship between feminist legal reform and digital media is complex\, multifaceted\, and urgently in need of scholarly attention.</p>\n<p>This edited collection responds to a critical gap in interdisciplinary scholarship: the need for a comprehensive examination of how digital agency&mdash\;the capacity of individuals and communities to act purposefully through digital technologies&mdash\;intersects with feminist legal reform across diverse global contexts. While existing literature addresses feminist legal theory and digital media separately\, few works systematically explore their convergence. This volume brings together scholars from law\, media studies\, communication\, gender studies\, religious studies\, and digital humanities to examine how digital platforms enable\, constrain\, and transform feminist legal advocacy worldwide.</p>\n<p>The book will critically interrogate questions of power\, representation\, authenticity\, and justice at the nexus of law\, gender\, and digital technology. It recognizes that feminist legal reform is not merely a matter of changing statutes but involves transforming cultural narratives\, challenging embedded patriarchal norms\, and creating new spaces for women's voices and agency. Digital media\, with its affordances for networking\, storytelling\, and mobilization\, has become an indispensable arena for these transformative projects&mdash\;yet it also presents new challenges\, including online harassment\, misinformation\, algorithmic discrimination\, and the digital divide that disproportionately affects women in the Global South.</p>\n\n<p><strong>Submission Procedure</strong></p>\n<p>Researchers and practitioners are invited to submit on or before [<strong>November 8\, 2026</strong>]\, a chapter proposal of 1\,000 to 2\,000 words clearly explaining the mission and concerns of his or her proposed chapter. Authors will be notified by [<strong>November 22\, 2026</strong>] about the status of their proposals and sent chapter guidelines. Full chapters are expected to be submitted by [<strong>January 10\, 2027</strong>]\, and all interested authors must consult the guidelines for manuscript submissions at http://www.igi-global.com/publish/contributor-resources/before-you-write/</a> prior to submission. All submitted chapters will be reviewed on a double-anonymized review basis. Contributors may also be requested to serve as reviewers for this project.</p>\n\n<p><strong>Note:</strong> There are no submission or acceptance fees for manuscripts submitted to this book publication\, Feminist Legal Reform and Digital Agency in Global Media Landscapes. All manuscripts are accepted based on a double-anonymized peer review editorial process.</p>\n\n<p><strong>Important Dates</strong></p>\n<p>November 8\, 2026: Proposal Submission Deadline</p>\n<p>November 22\, 2026: Notification of Acceptance</p>\n<p>January 10\, 2027: Full Chapter Submission</p>\n<p>February 14\, 2027: Review Results Returned</p>\n<p>March 14\, 2027: Final Acceptance Notification</p>\n<p>March 21\, 2027: Final Chapter Submission</p>\n\n<p><strong>Inquiries</strong></p>\n<p>Inquiries can be forwarded to: jamillahori@gmail.com</a></p>\n\n<p>For Chapter Proposal Submission\, please visit the following link:</p>\n<p>https://www.igi-global.com/publish/call-for-papers/call-details/10358</p>\n\n\n\nContact Information\n\n<p>Dr. Jamil Akhtar</p>\n<p>University of the Punjab\, Lahore\, Pakistan</p>\n\n\n\n\nContact Email\njamillahori@gmail.com\n\n\nURL\nhttps://www.igi-global.com/publish/call-for-papers/call-details/10358</a>\n\n\n&nbsp\;\n\n\n\n
ORGANIZER:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20261024T075052Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20261109T140000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20261109T170000
SUMMARY:The Shapes of Scientific Understandig
UID:20261027T215901Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-8d97778f4-j59r7
TZID:America/New_York
LOCATION:Cathedral of Learning\, 4200 Fifth Avenue\, Pittsburgh\, United States\, 15260
DESCRIPTION:<p><strong>Workshop: The Shapes of Scientific Understanding</strong><br><strong>November 9\, 2026 | 14:00&ndash\;18:30</strong><br><strong>Center for Philosophy of Science\, University of Pittsburgh</strong></p>\n<p>Dear colleagues\,</p>\n<p>We are pleased to announce the workshop <strong>&ldquo\;The Shapes of Scientific Understanding\,&rdquo\;</strong> to be held on <strong>Monday\, November 9\, 2026\, from 14:00 to 18:30</strong> at the <strong><em>Center for Philosophy of Science</em></strong><strong>\, University of Pittsburgh</strong>.</p>\n<p>The workshop will bring together philosophers working on the nature\, structure\, and varieties of scientific understanding.</p>\n<p><strong>Speakers &amp\; Commentators:</strong></p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>David Barack</strong> (Carnegie Mellon University): <em>Scientific Understanding and Evidence\;</em></li>\n<li><strong>Alfredo Vernazzani</strong> (TU Dortmund / University of Pittsburgh): <em>Scientifically Unintelligible Phenomena</em>\;</li>\n<li><strong>Daniel Wilkenfeld</strong> (University of Pittsburgh): <em>On the Unity between Quantitative and Qualitative Understanding</em>.</li>\n</ul>\n<p><strong>Discussant:&nbsp\;</strong></p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Kareem Khalifa </strong>(UCLA)</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Commentators:&nbsp\;</p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Kabir S. Bakshi</strong> (University of Pittsburgh)</li>\n<li><strong>Caitlin Mace</strong> (University of Pittsburgh)</li>\n<li><strong>Conny Knieling</strong> (University of Pittsburgh)</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Attendance is <strong>free and open to all</strong>.</p>\n<p>For further information\, please contact <strong>Alfredo Vernazzani</strong> at <strong>alfredo-vernazzani@protonmail.com</strong>.</p>\n<p>We hope you will join us for an afternoon of discussion on the different shapes that scientific understanding can take.</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Alfredo Vernazzani:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR