APA Eastern Division 2018 Meeting Program

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

APA Eastern Division 2018 Meeting Program The American Philosophical Association EASTERN DIVISION ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH ANNUAL MEETING PROGRAM SAVANNAH CONVENTION CENTER SAVANNAH, GEORGIA JANUARY 3 – 6, 2018 Visit our table at APA Eastern. Offering a 20% pb / 40% hc discount with free shipping to the contiguous U.S. for orders www.sunypress.edu placed at the conference. Lessing and the Enlightenment Failing Desire His Philosophy of Religion Karmen MacKendrick and Its Relation to Eighteenth- Century Thought Unmaking The Making of Americans Henry E. Allison Toward an Aesthetic Ontology E. L. McCallum Satan and Apocalypse And Other Essays in Political The Symbolic Order of the Mother Theology Luisa Muraro Thomas J. J. Altizer Translated by Francesca Novello Edited and with an Introduction Aristotle on God’s Life-Generating by Timothy S. Murphy Power and on Pneuma as Its Vehicle Foreword by Alison Stone Abraham P. Bos Defining Religion Having a Word with Angus Graham Essays in Philosophy of Religion At Twenty-Five Years into His Robert Cummings Neville Immortality The Last Fortress of Metaphysics Carine Defoort and Roger T. Ames, Jacques Derrida and the editors Deconstruction of Architecture March 2018 Francesco Vitale Inheritance in Psychoanalysis Translated by Mauro Senatore Joel Goldbach and James A. Godley, editors Author Meets Critics Session Mystery 101 Friday, January 8th, An Introduction to the 7:00 – 10:00 pm Big Questions and the Limits The Good Is One, of Human Knowledge Its Manifestations Many Richard H. Jones Confucian Essays on Metaphysics, Morals, For Foucault Rituals, Institutions, Against Normative and Genders Political Theory Robert Cummings Neville Mark G. E. Kelly IMPORTANT NOTICES FOR MEETING ATTENDEES SESSION LOCATIONS Please note: this online version of the program does not include session locations. The locations of all individual sessions will be included in the paper program that you will receive when you pick up your registration materials at the meeting (if you opted to receive a paper program) as well as in the meeting app beginning the first day of the meeting. IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT REGISTRATION Please note: it costs $50 less to register in advance than to register at the meeting. Early bird registration at www.apaonline.org is available until December 20 at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time. Online registration will be closed from December 21 until January 2. Beginning on January 3, registration will reopen, and you may register online or at the meeting registration desk. PRONOUN STICKERS Beginning this year, as a show of the APA’s commitment to diversity and inclusion, we are introducing pronoun stickers for your name badge, including blank stickers that will allow you to use a pronoun of your own choosing. Stickers will be available for pickup at registration and can easily be worn as a show of solidarity, and a means of making our annual conference a friendly and safe environment for all. GENDER-NEUTRAL BATHROOMS AND QUIET ROOM Gender-neutral bathrooms and a quiet room will be available at the Convention Center. A key for the quiet room is available at the registration desk. 1 Special Events EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING Wednesday, January 3, 1:00–6:00 p.m. AAPT/APA TEACHING HUB Thursday, January 4, Noon–10:30 p.m. Friday, January 5, 9:00 a.m.–9:00 p.m. DIVERSITY INSTITUTE ALUMNI NETWORKING LUNCHEON Invited participants only. Thursday, January 4, Noon–2:00 p.m. PRIZE RECEPTION Thursday, January 4, 5:00–6:00 p.m. RECEPTION Thursday, January 4, 8:00 p.m.–Midnight BUSINESS MEETING Friday, January 5, 11:15 a.m.–12:15 p.m. RECEPTION Friday, January 5, 9:00 p.m.–Midnight MENTORING THE MENTORS WORKSHOP Invited participants only. Saturday, January 6, 9:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m. 2018 Program Committee Susanne Sreedhar, chair Brian McLaughlin Ted Sider Luvell Anderson Rebecca Kukla Brad Cokelet Neil Feit Max Pensky Valerie Hardcastle Antonia LoLordo 2 AAPT/APA Mini-Conference on Teaching Philosophy: The Teaching Hub The American Association of Philosophy Teachers (AAPT) and the American Philosophical Association Committee on the Teaching of Philosophy (CTP) have co- organized a two-day conference on teaching for the 2018 Eastern Division meeting. We are aiming to bring the collegial and supportive culture of the AAPT to the APA; highlight teaching within the context of an APA meeting; stretch beyond the traditional APA session format to offer sessions that model active learning; and attract a broader range of philosophers to the divisional meetings. THURSDAY, JANUARY 4 Welcome, by Rebecca Scott, Chair, 2018 AAPT/APA Teaching Hub Noon M1 Inclusive Pedagogies Noon–2:00 p.m. Chair: Rebecca Scott (Loyola University Chicago) Presenters: Kevin Jobe (Our Lady of the Lake University (San Antonio)) “Global Philosophy at Hispanic-Serving Institutions: A Data-Driven, Community Cultural Wealth (CCW) Approach” W. John Koolage (Eastern Michigan University) and Danielle Clevenger (Eastern Michigan University) “Who Put the Students in Charge!?! The Sophia Project” Shoshana Brassfield (Frostburg State University) “Plato, DuBois, and the Examined Life” M2 AAPT Workshop: Innovative Methods in Philosophical Pedagogy 2:00–5:00 p.m. Chair: Zachary Barnett (Brown University) Presenters: Ann Cahill (Elon University) “Teaching Discussion Skills: A Metacognitive Approach” 3 AAPT-APA Mini-Conference on Teaching Philosophy Scott Tanona (Kansas State University) and Joshua DiPaolo (Kansas State University) “Behind the Veil: Teaching Rawls through Digital Gaming” Zoë Johnson King (University of Michigan) “Interactive Formative Assessment” Graham Leach-Krouse (Kansas State University) “Introducing Formal Reasoning with Carnap” Coffee and light refreshments will be served. M3 Public School Certification for Philosophy Graduate Students 5:15–7:15 p.m. Co-sponsored by PLATO and the APA Committee on Pre-College Instruction Chair: Alexandra Bradner (Kenyon College) Presenters: George Rainbolt (University of North Florida) Eddy Nahmias (Georgia State University) Ben Lukey (University of Hawaii) Chad Miller (University of Hawaii) Wendy Turgeon (St. Joseph’s College of New York) FRIDAY, JANUARY 5 M4 Designing a New Course: Strategies for Philosophy Teachers 9:00–11:00 a.m. Chair: Alexandra Bradner (Kenyon College) Presenters: Zoë Johnson King (University of Michigan) “Backwards Planning and Differentiated Course Design” Austin Rooney (Temple University) “Designing a New Course: Outcomes and Experience” Steven Hymowech (Fulton-Montgomery Community College) “Something Old, Something New: Creating a Web- Based Introductory Philosophy Course from an Established Traditional One” Daniel Massey (Spring Hill College) “Designing a Service-Learning Course in Philosophy” Continental breakfast will be served. 4 AAPT-APA Mini-Conference on Teaching Philosophy M5 Walk-In Teaching Consultations: One-on-One Sessions with Expert Teachers 11:15 a.m.–1:15 p.m. Sign up or walk in to get help diversifying your syllabus, increasing student participation and engagement, teaching online, starting as a new teacher, or promoting active learning. Consultants: Stephen Bloch-Schulman (Elon University) Alexandra Bradner (Kenyon College) David W. Concepción (Ball State University) Renee Smith (Coastal Carolina University) Wendy Turgeon (St. Joseph’s College of New York) Sarah Vitale (Ball State University) Organizer: David W. Concepción (Ball State University) M6 Using Vocabulary from Non-Western Languages in Teaching Philosophy 1:30–3:30 p.m. Co-Sponsored by the Society for Teaching Comparative Philosophy Chair: Sarah Mattice (University of North Florida) Presenters: Leah Kalmanson (Drake University) “What Does it Mean to ‘Do’ Philosophy? Using Literati (ru 儒) Methodologies in Undergraduate Coursework” Amy Donahue (Kennesaw University) “Using Pāli and Sanskrit to Ease Undergraduates’ Grasp of the Four Noble Truths” Aaron Creller (University of North Florida) “Arabic Vocabulary in Undergraduate Philosophy” M7 Closing Reception and Poster Session 7:00–9:00 p.m. Organizer: Christina Hendricks SoTL Research by Philosophy Teachers Posters: Charles Dalrymple-Fraser (University of Toronto) and Mark Fortney (University of Toronto) “Epistemic Exploitation of Students in Accommodation Policies and Practices” Yesenia Gonzalez (Texas A&M University) “Pre-College Philosophy, Aesthetics, and Social Problem Solving” Megan Malone (Georgia State University) and Peter Nenning (Georgia State University) “Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Flipped Model in a Critical Thinking Classroom” 5 AAPT-APA Mini-Conference on Teaching Philosophy Michael McGowan (Florida Southwestern State College) “How (and When) to Walk the Line: The Pedagogy of Contemporary Controversies” Alexandra Pelaez (Florida State University) “An Inclusive Approach to the Study of Virtues” Ann T. Thebaut (Santa Fe College) “Taking a Moral Journey: Internationalizing an Ethics Curriculum to Improve Students’ Intercultural Knowledge and Competence” Sarah Wieten (Indiana University of Pennsylvania) “Visual Philosophy: Posters as Pedagogy” Andrew M. Winters (Slippery Rock University of Pennsylvania) “Experiential Learning: Its History and Philosophical Applications” Yiran Zhang (Loyola University Chicago) “Learning by Listening in the General Education Philosophy Classroom” Independent Research by Undergraduates in Philosophy Posters: Tez Clark (Harvard University) “Non-Evidential Reasons for Belief” Andrew Bentley Hudgins (Mercer University) “A Bioethical Case Against Queer Erasure” Brett A. Kimmel (Indiana University of Pennsylvania) “Because I Said So” Evan Linn (Yale University)
Recommended publications
  • 1 the Mind-Body-Body Problem Robert
    1 The Mind-Body-Body Problem Robert Hanna and Evan Thompson∗ Theoria et Historia Scientiarum: International Journal for Interdisciplinary Studies 7 (1) (2003): 23-42. From the point of view of Husserl’s ontology, the traditional mind-body problem looks hopelessly simplistic. Not only must we deal with relations between mind— indeed consciousness, soul [psyche], spirit [human personhood]—and body. We must address different aspects of the body itself as living organism and as material thing. This body-body problem is suppressed in a Cartesian ontology that reduces the body to a mechanism in the sense of seventeenth-century physics, as Descartes sought to reduce all of physics to mechanics. —David Woodruff Smith1 It seems to me that post-Kripke, the most promising line of attack on the mind- body problem is to see whether any sense can be made of the idea that mental processes might be physical processes necessarily but not analytically. —Thomas Nagel2 ∗ We gratefully acknowledge the Center for Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona, Tucson, which provided a grant for the support of this work. E.T. is also supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, and the McDonnell Project in Philosophy and the Neurosciences. 1 See David Woodruff Smith, “Mind and Body,” in The Cambridge Companion to Husserl (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), pp. 323-393, at p. 358. 2 Thomas Nagel, “The Psychophysical Nexus,” in Paul Boghossian and Christopher Peacocke (eds.), New Essays on the A Priori (Oxford: Clarendon/Oxford University Press, 2000), pp. 433-471, at p. 434.
    [Show full text]
  • A Synthetic Approach to the Ground of Global Justice
    ISSN 2392-0890, no 8/2017, pp. 54-62, DOI: 10.5604/01.3001.0012.0388 Modern Stoicism and the Responsibility for the Global Polis PIOTR STANKIEWICZ Institute of Philosophy, University of Warsaw, Krakowskie Przedmieście 3, 00-927 Warsaw, Poland, E-mail: [email protected] Abstract This article outlines the premises and promises of a modern comeback of Stoicism, particularly the question of reinterpretation of the original doctrine, the contemporary intricacies of the principle of “following nature,” and the foundations that modern Stoicism establishes for global responsibility. Key words: Stoicism, modern Stoicism, ethics, virtue ethics, political philosophy, cosmopolitanism, responsibility. There is no doubt today that Stoicism is coming back. The ancient philosophical school established by Zeno and Chrysippus, and immortalized by Seneca, Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius’ is enjoying its second youth. As Massimo Pigliucci puts it: The 21st century is seeing yet another revival of virtue ethics in general and of Stoicism in particular. [...] When it comes more specifically to Stoicism, new scholarly works and translations of classics, as well as biographies of prominent Stoics, keep appearing at a sustained rate. [...] In parallel with the above, Stoicism is, in some sense, returning to its roots as practical philosophy, as the ancient Stoics very clearly meant their system to be primarily of guidance for everyday life, not a theoretical exercise.(Pigliucci, Stoicism) Stankiewicz/Studies in Global Ethics and Global Education/ no 8/2017, pp. 54-62 Just as Pigliucci underscores, what is remarkable about the present boom of interest in Stoicism is that it is not confined to the academia.
    [Show full text]
  • Beaneyanalyticphil Historyphil.Pdf
    King’s Research Portal DOI: 10.1007/978-1-137-30487-2 Document Version Peer reviewed version Link to publication record in King's Research Portal Citation for published version (APA): Beaney, M. (2013). Analytic Philosophy and History of Philosophy: The Development of the Idea of Rational Reconstruction . In E. Reck (Ed.), The Historical Turn in Analytic Philosophy (1 ed., pp. 231–260). (History of Analytic Philosophy). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-30487-2 Citing this paper Please note that where the full-text provided on King's Research Portal is the Author Accepted Manuscript or Post-Print version this may differ from the final Published version. If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the Research Portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognize and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. •Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the Research Portal for the purpose of private study or research. •You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain •You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the Research Portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
    [Show full text]
  • Stalnaker on Sleeping Beauty Brian Weatherson
    Stalnaker on Sleeping Beauty Brian Weatherson The Sleeping Beauty puzzle provides a nice illustration of the approach to self-lo- cating belief defended by Robert Stalnaker in Our Knowledge of the Internal World (Stalnaker, 2008), as well as a test of the utility of that method. The setup of the Sleeping Beauty puzzle is by now fairly familiar. On Sunday Sleeping Beauty is told the rules of the game, and a (known to be) fair coin is flipped. On Monday, Sleeping Beauty is woken, and then put back to sleep. If, and only if, the coin landed tails, she is woken again on Tuesday after having her memory of the Monday awakening erased.1 On Wednesday she is woken again and the game ends. There are a few ques- tions we can ask about Beauty’s attitudes as the game progresses. We’d like to know what her credence that the coin landed heads should be (a) Before she goes to sleep Sunday; (b) When she wakes on Monday; (c) When she wakes on Tuesday; and (d) When she wakes on Wednesday? Standard treatments of the Sleeping Beauty puzzle ignore (d), run together (b) and (c) into one (somewhat ill-formed) question, and then divide theorists into ‘halfers’ or ‘thirders’ depending on how they answer it. Following Stalnaker, I’m going to focus on (b) here, though I’ll have a little to say about (c) and (d) as well. I’ll be following 1 orthodoxy in taking 2 to be the clear answer to (a), and in taking the correct answers to (b) and (c) to be independent of how the coin lands, though I’ll briefly question that assumption at the end.
    [Show full text]
  • Semantical Paradox* Tyler Burge
    4 Semantical Paradox* Tyler Burge Frege remarked that the goal of all sciences is truth, but that it falls to logic to discern the laws of truth. Perceiving that the task of determining these laws went beyond Frege’s conception of it, Tarski enlarged the jurisdiction of logic, establishing semantics as truth’s lawyer.1 At the core of Tarski’s theory of truth and validity was a diagnosis of the Liar paradox according to which natural language was hopelessly infected with contradiction. Tarski construed himself as treating the disease by replacing ordinary discourse with a sanitized, artificial construction. But those interested in natural language have been dissatisfied with this medication. The best ground for dis­ satisfaction is that the notion of a natural language’s harboring contradictions is based on an illegitimate assimilation of natural language to a semantical system. According to that assimilation, part of the nature of a “language” is a set of postulates that purport to be true by virtue of their meaning or are at least partially constitutive of that “language”. Tarski thought that he had identified just such postulates in natural language as spawning inconsistency. But postulates are contained in theories that are promoted by people. Natural languages per se do not postulate or Tyler Burge, “Semantical Paradox", reprinted from The Journal of Philosophy 76 (1979), 169-98. Copyright © 1979 The Journal of Philosophy. Reprinted by permission of the Editor of The Journal of Philosophy and the author. * I am grateful to Robert L. Martin for several helpful discussions; to Herbert Enderton for proving the consistency (relative to that of arithmetic) of an extension of Construction C3; to Charles Parsons for stimulating exchanges back in 1973 and 1974; and to the John Simon Guggenheim Foundation for its support.
    [Show full text]
  • Animalism and the Vagueness of Composition
    Organon F 26 (2) 2019: 207–227 ISSN 2585-7150 (online) https://doi.org/10.31577/orgf.2019.26202 ISSN 1335-0668 (print) RESEARCH ARTICLE Animalism and the Vagueness of Composition Radim Bělohrad* Received: 13 June 2018 / Accepted: 2 October 2018 Abstract: Lockean theories of personal identity maintain that we per- sist by virtue of psychological continuity, and most Lockeans say that we are material things coinciding with animals. Some animalists ar- gue that if persons and animals coincide, they must have the same intrinsic properties, including thinking, and, as a result, there are ‘too many thinkers’ associated with each human being. Further, Lockeans have trouble explaining how animals and persons can be numerically different and have different persistence conditions. For these reasons, the idea of a person being numerically distinct but coincident with an animal is rejected and animalists conclude that we simply are animals. However, animalists face a similar problem when confronted with the vagueness of composition. Animals are entities with vague boundaries. According to the linguistic account of vagueness, the vagueness of a term consists in there being a number of candidates for the denotatum of the vague term. It seems to imply that where we see an animal, there are, in fact, a lot of distinct but overlapping entities with basically the same intrinsic properties, including think- ing. As a result, the animalist must also posit ‘too many thinkers’ where we thought there was only one. This seems to imply that the animalist cannot accept the linguistic account of vagueness. In this paper the author argues that the animalist can accept the linguistic account of vagueness and retain her argument against Lockeanism.
    [Show full text]
  • RATES of PASSAGE James Van Cleve That Time Flows Or Passes
    To appear in Analytical Philosophy. RATES OF PASSAGE James Van Cleve That time flows or passes seems to be among the most obvious and inescapable of truths, yet there is an entire camp of philosophers who deny it—upholders of what is variously called the static theory of time, the eternalist theory, the four-dimensional theory, or the B theory.1 There is an initially compelling argument for their position, expressible in a pair of rhetorical questions: If time passes, must there not be a rate at which it passes? Yet what could that rate possibly be? The very idea of such a rate seems nonsensical or absurd. To make sense of it, we would evidently need to posit a hyper-time in which ordinary time passes, but the notion of hyper-time, besides being mystifying by itself, seems to be but the second step in a preposterous infinite series of time dimensions, hyper-hyper-time and so on up.2 My aim in this paper is to defend the man in the street’s dynamic conception of time by answering this simple yet forceful argument. The sections are as follows: 1. Markosian and Prior on the passage of time 2. Markosian’s reply to the rate-of-passage arguments 3. Rates of passage and infinite regress arguments 4. Absolute lengths and absolute rates 5. An hour per hour all over again 6. Prior’s schema and the puzzle of passage 7. Summary and conclusion Appendix: Shoemaker worlds 1 For a run-down of various related “isms” and the various names in play for them, see Sider 2001 or the introduction to Gale 1967.
    [Show full text]
  • Comment Fundamentalism and Science
    SISSA – International School for Advanced Studies Journal of Science Communication ISSN 1824 – 2049 http://jcom.sissa.it/ Comment Fundamentalism and science Massimo Pigliucci The many facets of fundamentalism. There has been much talk about fundamentalism of late. While most people's thought on the topic go to the 9/11 attacks against the United States, or to the ongoing war in Iraq, fundamentalism is affecting science and its relationship to society in a way that may have dire long-term consequences. Of course, religious fundamentalism has always had a history of antagonism with science, and – before the birth of modern science – with philosophy, the age-old vehicle of the human attempt to exercise critical thinking and rationality to solve problems and pursue knowledge. “Fundamentalism” is defined by the Oxford Dictionary of the Social Sciences 1 as “A movement that asserts the primacy of religious values in social and political life and calls for a return to a 'fundamental' or pure form of religion.” In its broadest sense, however, fundamentalism is a form of ideological intransigence which is not limited to religion, but includes political positions as well (for example, in the case of some extreme forms of “environmentalism”). In the United States, the main version of the modern conflict between science and religious fundamentalism is epitomized by the infamous Scopes trial that occurred in 1925 in Tennessee, when the teaching of evolution was challenged for the first time 2,3. That battle is still being fought, for example in Dover, Pennsylvania, where at the time of this writing a court of law is considering the legitimacy of teaching “intelligent design” (a form of creationism) in public schools.
    [Show full text]
  • A Natural Case for Realism: Processes, Structures, and Laws Andrew Michael Winters University of South Florida, [email protected]
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 3-20-2015 A Natural Case for Realism: Processes, Structures, and Laws Andrew Michael Winters University of South Florida, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the Philosophy of Science Commons Scholar Commons Citation Winters, Andrew Michael, "A Natural Case for Realism: Processes, Structures, and Laws" (2015). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/5603 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Natural Case for Realism: Processes, Structures, and Laws by Andrew Michael Winters A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Co-Major Professor: Douglas Jesseph, Ph.D. Co-Major Professor: Alexander Levine, Ph.D. Roger Ariew, Ph.D. Otávio Bueno, Ph.D. John Carroll, Ph.D. Eric Winsberg, Ph.D. Date of Approval: March 20th, 2015 Keywords: Metaphysics, Epistemology, Naturalism, Ontology Copyright © 2015, Andrew Michael Winters DEDICATION For Amie ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thank you to my co-chairs, Doug Jesseph and Alex Levine, for providing amazing support in all aspects of my tenure at USF. I greatly appreciate the numerous conversations with my committee members, Roger Ariew, Otávio Bueno, John Carroll, and Eric Winsberg, which resulted in a (hopefully) more refined and clearer dissertation.
    [Show full text]
  • Dissertation Anthology 2019-20
    DissertatioN ANthology A CollectioN of Philosophy StudeNt DissertatioNs The UNiversity of Liverpool DepartmeNt of Philosophy 2019-20 Authors, Editors aNd Supervisors Authors StepheN Arkley Mia ReNshaw Ashley BoNNell ANNa Ross Joe BoylaNd Sarah Sharp Georgie Campbell JustiNe SolaNo Lucy Chambers Eddie Southcombe ANNa NuNez de Croker George Wood Harry DaymaN Sam WoottoN Marcus Desai Abi HamiltoN Alice GoodwiN Josh Hibbert Josef Grover Jemima HuNt LiNtoN NewtoN Editors Alice GoodwiN Dr Rachael WisemaN Supervisors Chris Bartley JaN JobliNg Rob Booth Ilias Markolefas Barry DaiNtoN RobiN McKeNNa Rebecca DavNall StepheN McLeod Richard GaskiN Thomas Schramme DaNiel Hill Vid SimoNiti PriNtiNg paid for by PhilSoc Table of CoNteNts Editor’s INtroductioN v DissertatioN ANthology vi SelliNg Harm or SelliNg Self: Is harm iNhereNt or coNtiNgeNt to the sex iNdustry? StepheN Arkley 1 BecomiNg EcosyNchroNus: A PromisiNg SolutioN to the CurreNt State of the ENviroNmeNt Ashley BoNNell 4 Self-Respect, Self-Authorship aNd the MeaNs of ProductioN: A Critique of Market Democracy Joe BoylaNd 7 CaN FemiNist EmpaNcipatory Speech be DiscrimiNatory? Georgie Campbell 10 A Critical ANalysis of SimoNe de Beauvoir’s Theory of WomeN’s OtherNess iN The SecoNd Sex Lucy Chambers 13 Why the NoN-ExisteNce of Extra-Terrestrial INtelligeNce is the most CohereNt ANswer to Fermi's Paradox Harry DaymaN 16 Does the Utility of PlaNtiNga’s Free Will DefeNce Need to be recoNsidered iN a way which reflects beliefs about the Diseases of the MiNd? Marcus Desai 19 AN ANswer to the Paradox
    [Show full text]
  • Marcus Aurelius Was a Roman Emperor From
    Marcus Aurelius Roman Emperor and Philosopher Marcus Aurelius was a Roman Emperor from 161-180 A.D, at a time when to be a Roman Emperor really meant being an emperor of almost all of the known world, for Rome’s territory then was at its most expansive. Therefore his job was not a small one. And yet at the same time as ruling the empire, and campaigning against troublesome tribes in what is now central and middle Europe (do you remember him from the start of the Gilm Gladiator?), he was also a philosopher. This did not mean that he just sat around thinking lofty thoughts in his spare time. Rather, the philosophy he chose to study was aimed at helping the individual to live life better, that is with values and a focussed mind. Marcus never wanted any glory – his own writings tell us that the last thing he desired was to be ‘treated like a Caesar’. All he wanted was to perform his duty admirably to his own people, family and, indeed, to himself. It was his favourite philosophy as a way of life, Stoicism, which enabled him to do this. Stoicism was a philosophy practised across the Ancient World for around half a millennium since its foundation by Zeno in the 4th century B.C. Nowadays, of course, we still have the word ‘stoic’ in our own language. It tends to mean someone who ‘ just gets on with things’ and who is rather ‘inGlexible, rigid and even emotionless.’ But, as history obscures so many things from the past, this could not be further from the truth.
    [Show full text]
  • APA Pacific Division Meeting Program 2017
    The American Philosophical Association PACIFIC DIVISION NINETY-FIRST ANNUAL MEETING PROGRAM THE WESTIN SEATTLE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON APRIL 12 – 15, 2017 VIVA VOCE ENTANGLEMENTS Conversations with A System of Philosophy Italian Philosophers Crispin Sartwell Silvia Benso CENTERING NEO-CONFUCIAN AND EXTENDING ECOLOGICAL HUMANISM NEW FORMS An Essay on An Interpretive Engage- OF REVOLT Metaphysical Sense ment with Wang Fuzhi Essays on Kristeva’s Steven G. Smith (1619–1692) Intimate Politics Nicholas S. Brasovan Sarah K. Hansen and Available May 2017 Rebecca Tuvel, editors EDGAR ALLAN POE, Available June 2017 EUREKA, AND GOD AND THE SELF SCIENTIFIC IN HEGEL CONFUCIANISM, A IMAGINATION Beyond Subjectivism HABIT OF THE HEART David N. Stamos Paolo Diego Bubbio Bellah, Civil Religion, Available July 2017 and East Asia SELF-REALIZATION Philip J. Ivanhoe and THROUGH CONFUCIAN ZHUANGZI’S CRITIQUE Sungmoon Kim, editors LEARNING OF THE CONFUCIANS A Contemporary Blinded by the Human ESSAYS ON THE FOUN- Reconstruction of Kim-chong Chong DATIONS OF ETHICS Xunzi’s Ethics Siufu Tang WHITEHEAD’S C. I. Lewis RELIGIOUS THOUGHT John Lange, editor From Mechanism to Available June 2017 POETIC FRAGMENTS Organism, From Force Karoline von Günderrode to Persuasion THE VARIETY OF Translated and with Daniel A. Dombrowski INTEGRAL ECOLOGIES Introductory Essays by Nature, Culture, Anna C. Ezekiel CONFUCIANISM AND and Knowledge AMERICAN PHILOSOPHY in the Planetary Era MOUNTAINS, RIVERS, Mathew A. Foust Sam Mickey, Sean Kelly, AND THE GREAT EARTH and Adam Robbert, Reading
    [Show full text]