Curriculum Vitae - Peggy Desautels
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Moral Repair: Reconstructing Moral Relations After Wrongdoing Margaret Urban Walker Frontmatter More Information
Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-81088-3 - Moral Repair: Reconstructing Moral Relations after Wrongdoing Margaret Urban Walker Frontmatter More information Moral Repair Reconstructing Moral Relations after Wrongdoing Moral Repair examines the ethics and moral psychology of responses to wrongdoing. Explaining the emotional bonds and normative expectations that keep human beings responsive to moral standards and responsible to each other, Margaret Urban Walker uses realistic examples of both personal betrayal and political violence to analyze how moral bonds are damaged by serious wrongs and what must be done to repair the damage. Focusing on victims of wrong, their right to validation, and their sense of justice, Walker presents a unified and detailed philosophical account of hope, trust, resentment, for- giveness, and making amends – the emotions and practices that sus- tain moral relations. Moral Repair joins a multidisciplinary literature concerned with transitional and restorative justice, reparations, and restoring individual dignity and mutual trust in the wake of serious wrongs. Margaret Urban Walker is Professor of Philosophy and Lincoln Professor of Ethics at Arizona State University. She is the author of Moral Understandings: A Feminist Study in Ethics and Moral Contexts; editor of Mother Time: Women, Aging and Ethics; and co-editor of Moral Psychology: Feminist Ethics and Social Theory with Peggy DesAutels. She has published numerous articles in journals such as Ethics, Journal of Human Rights, Metaphilosophy, and Hypatia. -
CVII: 2 (February 2000), Pp
TAMAR SZABÓ GENDLER July 2014 Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences · Yale University · P.O. Box 208365 · New Haven, CT 06520-8365 E-mail: [email protected] · Office telephone: 203.432.4444 ACADEMIC EMPLOYMENT 2006- Yale University Academic Vincent J. Scully Professor of Philosophy (F2012-present) Professor of Philosophy (F2006-F2012); Professor of Psychology (F2009-present); Professor of Humanities (S2007-present); Professor of Cognitive Science (F2006-present) Administrative Dean, Faculty of Arts and Sciences (Sum2014-present) Deputy Provost, Humanities and Initiatives (F2013-Sum2014) Chair, Department of Philosophy (Sum2010-Sum2013) Chair, Cognitive Science Program (F2006-Sum2010) 2003-2006 Cornell University Academic Associate Professor of Philosophy (with tenure) (F2003-S2006) Administrative Director of Graduate Studies, Department of Philosophy (F2004-S2006) Co-Director, Program in Cognitive Studies (F2004-S2006) 1997-2003 Syracuse University Academic Associate Professor of Philosophy (with tenure) (F2002-S2003) Assistant Professor of Philosophy (tenure-track) (F1999-S2002) Allen and Anita Sutton Distinguished Faculty Fellow (F1997-S1999) Administrative Director of Undergraduate Studies, Department of Philosophy (F2001-S2003) 1996-1997 Yale University Academic Lecturer (F1996-S1997) EDUCATION 1990-1996 Harvard University. PhD (Philosophy), August 1996. Dissertation title: ‘Imaginary Exceptions: On the Powers and Limits of Thought Experiment’ Advisors: Robert Nozick, Derek Parfit, Hilary Putnam 1989-1990 University of California -
Will There Be a Neurolaw Revolution?
Will There Be a Neurolaw Revolution? ∗ ADAM J. KOLBER The central debate in the field of neurolaw has focused on two claims. Joshua Greene and Jonathan Cohen argue that we do not have free will and that advances in neuroscience will eventually lead us to stop blaming people for their actions. Stephen Morse, by contrast, argues that we have free will and that the kind of advances Greene and Cohen envision will not and should not affect the law. I argue that neither side has persuasively made the case for or against a revolution in the way the law treats responsibility. There will, however, be a neurolaw revolution of a different sort. It will not necessarily arise from radical changes in our beliefs about criminal responsibility but from a wave of new brain technologies that will change society and the law in many ways, three of which I describe here: First, as new methods of brain imaging improve our ability to measure distress, the law will ease limitations on recoveries for emotional injuries. Second, as neuroimaging gives us better methods of inferring people’s thoughts, we will have more laws to protect thought privacy but less actual thought privacy. Finally, improvements in artificial intelligence will systematically change how law is written and interpreted. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 808 I. A WEAK CASE FOR A RESPONSIBILITY REVOLUTION.......................................... 809 A. THE FREE WILL IMPASSE ......................................................................... 809 B. GREENE AND COHEN’S NORMATIVE CLAIM ............................................. 810 C. GREENE AND COHEN’S PREDICTION ........................................................ 811 D. WHERE THEIR PREDICTION NEEDS STRENGTHENING .............................. 813 II. A WEAK CASE THAT LAW IS INSULATED FROM REVOLUTION .......................... -
Feminists Doing Ethics Peggy Desautels University of Dayton, [email protected]
University of Dayton eCommons Philosophy Faculty Publications Department of Philosophy 2001 Feminists Doing Ethics Peggy DesAutels University of Dayton, [email protected] Joanne Waugh University of South Florida Follow this and additional works at: http://ecommons.udayton.edu/phl_fac_pub Part of the History of Philosophy Commons, and the Women's Studies Commons eCommons Citation DesAutels, Peggy and Waugh, Joanne, "Feminists Doing Ethics" (2001). Philosophy Faculty Publications. Paper 71. http://ecommons.udayton.edu/phl_fac_pub/71 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Philosophy at eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Introduction Peggy DesAutels and Joanne Waugh We offer this volume as a contribution to the ongoing conversa ti on th at goes under the name of "feminist ethics." This conversati on took an exciting and interesting turn recently at the Feminist Ethi cs Revisited Conference; many of the essays in this volume articulate ideas and analyses first presented there. 1 The term feminist ethics was used broadl y at this conference- as it is again here-to refer to the perspectives on women's experience that come into view at the intersections of ethics, politi cs, philosophy, and li terature. Earlier generati ons of philosophers-both male and female-have fo und that the experiences of women fit neither easily nor neatly into the ca tegori es fa vored by traditional, mainstream philosophy. That the dominant discourse of philosophy still strains to accommodate women's experi ences has prompted feminist philosophers to go beyond the usual boundaries, especiall y in ethics. -
JMP Article FINAL
Value in Very Long Lives Preston Greene Journal of Moral Philosophy 14 (4):416-434 (2017) https://brill.com/view/journals/jmp/14/4/article-p416_416.xml Epigraph We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time. (T. S. Eliot, Little Gidding) Abstract As things currently stand, our deaths are unavoidable and our lifespans short. It might be thought that these qualities leave room for improvement. According to a prominent line of argument in philosophy, however, this thought is mistaken. Against the idea that a longer life would be better, it is claimed that negative psychological states, such as boredom, would be unavoidable if our lives were significantly longer. Against the idea that a deathless life would be better, it is claimed that such a life would be lacking important sources of value, because death is a precondition for many of our valuing attitudes. I argue that these problems are avoided by very long (and potentially infinite) lives that incorporate fading memory, limited ignorance of future events, and temporal scarcity. I conclude that very long lives are, in principle, desirable, and that death does not play an essential role in our valuing attitudes. Keywords bioethics - eternal life - life extension - meaning of life - value theory (1) Introduction If we are lucky, we live for about a hundred years. Our lives progress through stages: infancy, childhood, adolescence, adulthood, and old age. We forget many things, and may be completely ignorant of the details of the early stages of our lives. -
Care Ethics and Politcal Theory
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 23/6/2015, SPi Care Ethics and Political Theory OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 23/6/2015, SPi OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 23/6/2015, SPi Care Ethics and Political Theory Edited by Daniel Engster and Maurice Hamington 1 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 23/6/2015, SPi 3 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries # Oxford University Press 2015 The moral rights of the authors have been asserted First Edition published in 2015 Impression: 1 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Control Number: 2015932776 ISBN 978–0–19–871634–1 Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only. -
Ronald Mallon
Philosophy Department, Washington University in St. Louis, CB 1073, One Brookings Drive, Saint Louis, MO 63130-4899 USA 314-935-7149 [email protected] Ronald Mallon Employment July 1, 2016- Professor, Department of Washington University in Philosophy Saint Louis July 1,2016- Chair, Department of Washington University in Philosophy Saint Louis 2011-2013, 2014-present Director, Philosophy- Washington University in Neuroscience-Psychology Saint Louis Program 2011-2016 Associate Professor Washington University in Saint Louis 2006-2011 Associate Professor University of Utah 2005-2006 Laurence S. Rockefeller Princeton University - Visiting Fellow Center for Human Values 2001-2006 Assistant Professor University of Utah 2001-2003 Research Assistant Hong Kong University Professorship 2000-2001 Visiting Assistant University of Utah Professor Education 1994-2000 Ph.D. Philosophy Rutgers University 1989-1993 B.A. English, Philosophy University of Kansas Research and Teaching Areas Mind, Cognitive Science, Experimental Philosophy, Philosophy of Science and Social Science, Social and Political Theory, Ethics Grants, Awards and Support 2017 Joseph B. Gittler Award from the American Philosophical Association. Awarded for an outstanding scholarly contribution in the field of the philosophy of one or more of the social sciences. 2012 Co-Director, National Endowment for the Humanities Summer Institute, “Experimental Philosophy,” University of Arizona. 2009-2010 American Council of Learned Societies Fellowship 2009-2010 Faculty Fellowship, University Research -
Doris, Nichols to Address 32Nd Philosophy Colloquium
University of Minnesota Morris Digital Well University of Minnesota Morris Digital Well Campus News Archive Campus News, Newsletters, and Events 9-27-2007 Doris, Nichols to address 32nd Philosophy Colloquium University Relations Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.morris.umn.edu/urel_news Recommended Citation University Relations, "Doris, Nichols to address 32nd Philosophy Colloquium" (2007). Campus News Archive. 1048. https://digitalcommons.morris.umn.edu/urel_news/1048 This News Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Campus News, Newsletters, and Events at University of Minnesota Morris Digital Well. It has been accepted for inclusion in Campus News Archive by an authorized administrator of University of Minnesota Morris Digital Well. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Contact Melissa Weber, Director of Communications Phone: 320-589-6414, [email protected] Jenna Ray, Editor/Writer Phone: 320-589-6068, [email protected] Doris, Nichols to address 32nd Philosophy Colloquium Summary: John Doris, associate professor of philosophy at Washington University, and Shaun Nichols, professor of philosophy at University of Arizona, will travel to the University Minnesota, Morris for the 32nd Midwest Philosophy Colloquium. They will speak in room 109 of Imholte Hall, UMM, on the topic “Frontiers of Moral Psychology.” (September 27, 2007)-John Doris, associate professor of philosophy at Washington University, and Shaun Nichols, professor of philosophy at University of Arizona, will travel to the University Minnesota, Morris for the 32nd Midwest Philosophy Colloquium. They will speak in room 109 of Imholte Hall, UMM, on the topic “Frontiers of Moral Psychology.” Doris will present “How to Build a Person” on Thursday, Oct. -
Conversations on Human Action and Practical Rationality
Conversations on Human Action and Practical Rationality Conversations on Human Action and Practical Rationality Edited by Carlos Mauro, Sofia Miguens and Susana Cadilha Conversations on Human Action and Practical Rationality, Edited by Carlos Mauro, Sofia Miguens and Susana Cadilha This book first published 2013 Cambridge Scholars Publishing 12 Back Chapman Street, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2XX, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2013 by Carlos Mauro, Sofia Miguens and Susana Cadilha and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-4788-7, ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-4788-9 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 Sofia Miguens and Susana Cadilha Interviews Alfred R. Mele ........................................................................................... 29 Hugh J. McCann ........................................................................................ 51 Michael Bratman ....................................................................................... 85 George Ainslie ........................................................................................... 95 Daniel Hausman ..................................................................................... -
Moral Psychology: Feminist Ethics and Social Theory Peggy Desautels University of Dayton, [email protected]
University of Dayton eCommons Philosophy Faculty Publications Department of Philosophy 2004 Moral Psychology: Feminist Ethics and Social Theory Peggy DesAutels University of Dayton, [email protected] Margaret Urban Walker Arizona State University Follow this and additional works at: http://ecommons.udayton.edu/phl_fac_pub Part of the History of Philosophy Commons, and the Other Philosophy Commons eCommons Citation DesAutels, Peggy and Walker, Margaret Urban, "Moral Psychology: Feminist Ethics and Social Theory" (2004). Philosophy Faculty Publications. Paper 75. http://ecommons.udayton.edu/phl_fac_pub/75 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Philosophy at eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. 5 Moral Mindfulness Peggy DesAutels Most of us view ourselves as having moral commitments and expect that when given the opportunity, we will follow through on these commitments. But our moral expectati ons may have little to do with how we actually be have. I explore in this chapter some explanati ons for our failures to foll ow through and some possible solutions to bridge the gap between our moral commitments and our behaviors. I draw on recent empirical studies and ar gue that social contextual cues and mindless mental habits play significant roles in inhibiting real-time moral responsiveness. I conclude by identifying mindfu l ways to recognize and resist such obstacles. THE PROBLEM There are many reasons why our day-to-day moral lives may fa il to refl ect our moral commitments. -
Curriculum Vitae MARGARET URBAN WALKER
Curriculum Vitae MARGARET URBAN WALKER Philosophy Department Marquette University Marquette Hall 418 Email: [email protected] P. O. Box 1881 CONTINUING APPOINTMENTS Donald J. Schuenke Chair Emerita, Philosophy Department, Marquette University, 5/21/2017- present. Donald J. Schuenke Chair in Philosophy, Philosophy Department, Marquette University, 1/1/11 - 5/21/2017. Professor of Philosophy and Lincoln Professor of Ethics, Philosophy Faculty, School of Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies, Arizona State University, 2005-2010. Lincoln Professor of Ethics, Justice, and the Public Sphere, School of Justice & Social Inquiry, Arizona State University, with Affiliate appointment, Philosophy Department, Fall, 2002 - Summer, 2005. Professor of Philosophy, Fordham University, 1998-2002; Tenured Associate Professor 1982-98; Assistant Professor, 1975-82; Instructor, 1974-75. EDUCATION B.A., Philosophy, University of Illinois at Chicago, June, 1969 M.A., Philosophy, Northwestern University, August, 1971 Ph.D., Philosophy, Northwestern University, August, 1975 AREAS OF SPECIALIZATION Post-conflict and Reparative Justice, Anglo-American Ethics, Moral Psychology, Feminist Ethics HONORS AND GUEST APPOINTMENTS 75th Annual Aquinas Lecturer, Marquette University, 2/28/2010. Defining Edge Research in the Humanities Award, Arizona State University, 2007. Laurance S. Rockefeller Visiting Fellow, Princeton University Center for Human Values 2003-4. The Cardinal Mercier Chair in Philosophy for 2001-2, Higher Institute of Philosophy, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, celebrated 3/27-3/29/2002. Guest, Research Concentration in Applied Ethics, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia, 5/30-6/7/2001. Invited Speaker and Teaching Faculty for Graduate Summer School on “Ethics and Politics of Care,” organized by Netherlands School for Research in Practical Philosophy, Soesterberg, Netherlands, 8/7-8/12/2000. -
Second Thoughts on Simulation Contents 1. What Is the Theory
This paper was published in In Mental Simulation: Evaluations and Applications, eds. M. Davies and T. Stone. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1995, 87-108. Archived at Website for the Rutgers University Research Group on Evolution and Higher Cognition. Second Thoughts on Simulation Stephen Stich Department of Philosophy and Center for Cognitive Science Rutgers University New Brunswick, NJ 08901 [email protected] and Shaun Nichols Department of Philosophy College of Charleston Charleston, SC 29424 [email protected] Contents 1. What is the Theory Theory? 2. What is the Simulation Theory? 3. Some Responses to Our Critics 4. Conclusion The essays in this volume make it abundantly clear that there is no shortage of disagreement about the plausibility of the simulation theory. As we see it, there are at least three factors contributing to this disagreement. In some instances the issues in dispute are broadly empirical. Different people have different views on which theory is favored by experiments reported in the literature, and different hunches about how future experiments are likely to turn out. In 3.1 and 3.3 we will consider two cases that fall under this heading. With a bit of luck these disputes will be resolved as more experiments are done and more data become available. Faulty arguments are a second source of disagreement. In 3.2 and 3.4 we will set out two dubious arguments advanced by our critics and try to explain exactly why we think they are mistaken. The third source of disagreement is terminological. Terms like "theory-theory," "simulation theory" and a number of others are often not clearly defined, and they are used in different ways by different authors.