WMA Graduate Research Seminar, 2023/2024
In preparation for MindGrad we will dedicate the first 3 sessions to 3 papers by Matt Soteriou and the following 2 session to background reading for Lea Salje's talk.
Week 4: Matt Soteriou, ‘Determining the Future’ [pdf]
Week 5: Matt Soteriou, ‘The past made present: Mental time travel in episodic recollection’ [pdf]
Week 6: Matt Soteriou, ‘Waking Up and Being Conscious' [link]
Week 7: Eli Alshanetsky, Articulating a Thought, Introduction [link] and Chapter 2 'A Puzzle' [link]
Week 9: Alex Byrne, 'Knowing that I'm thinking' [link]
Tue 1 Nov, '22- |
CELPA SeminarS2.77Guest Speaker: Giorgia Brucato (CEU) |
|
Tue 1 Nov, '22- |
Post-Kantian European Philosophy Research Seminar SeriesS0.28The speaker is Tobias Keiling - join us to celebrate Tobias’ inaugural talk at Warwick! Talk: Gadamer on Openness as Epistemic Virtue Abstract: This paper presents the discussion of open-mindedness in recent virtue epistemology to argue that it can be supplemented by a hermeneutical model. After introducing basic distinctions, I sketch the account of open-mindedness found in the work of Jason Baehr (2011) and Wayne Riggs (2010, 2015). I then zoom in on two problems in the recent debate: how to determine when open-mindedness is epistemically beneficial and how to construe its epistemic value. While Adam Carter and Emma Gordon (2014) argue that these problems are insurmountable for Baehr and Riggs, I outline the idea that their account can be modified in such a way as to avoid these problems. Specifically, Gadamer’s discussion of the structure of prejudice and the importance of openness for understanding in Truth and Method (1960) can be developed as an alternative hermeneutical model for understanding open-mindedness. The key idea is that the circular structure Carter and Gordon find at work in Baehr’s attempt to define open-mindedness represents a version of the hermeneutical circle rather than an infinite regress. |
|
Wed 2 Nov, '22- |
UG Philosophy Study SkillsS0.17 |
|
Wed 2 Nov, '22- |
WMA Graduate Research SeminarS0.52 |
|
Wed 2 Nov, '22- |
Philosophy Department ColloquiumS0.17/MS TeamsThe Colloquium will be in-person, with an online option for those who can't be on campus. Please contact Andrew Cooper to receive the Link. Speaker: Dirk Meyer (Oxford) Talk: Dialectics in Chinese Philosophy As Seen From *Mìng xùn Abstract: In this paper I shall look at the structure of dialectical argument in early China by reference to a recently obtained, fourth century manuscript text, titled *Mìng xùn. The text has a close counterpart in the received text Yì Zhōushū (Leftover Documents of Zhou). It is therefore generally understood as belonging the tradition of Shū (Documents), one of the core foundational classics of early China. I analyse the strategies bysq which meaning is produced in *Mìng xùn and suggest that the text develops the argument in a dialectic manner. In it, the philosophical premise seeks to test itself continuously to avoid becoming doctrine, and thus philosophically void. My choice of a Shū (Documents) text as an example of philosophically relevant meaning construction in early China challenges current methodology, which anachronistically considers zǐ-type literature (the Masters) as a disciplinary equivalent to Philosophy in ancient Greece. I argue that since philosophically relevant activities are a non-disciplinary praxis in early China, the articulations of this praxis are also not genre specific but found across the foundational literary texts of China. |
|
Thu 3 Nov, '22- |
Metaethics Reading GroupS2.77Emily Bassett leading on Horgan and Timmons “Gripped by Authority” |
|
Thu 3 Nov, '22- |
PG Work in Progress SeminarS2.77/MS TeamsThis week’s speaker will be Johan Heemskerk (PhD) Title: is "Gloss or Theory? A Worry for Science Based Theories of Content". Abstract: Many philosophers working on mental content pursue a particular methodology. This involves consulting cognitive science literature and attempting to extract a naturalistic theory of mental content. Such a theory should allow us to specify, for any given representation, how its content is determined. There is a sense, as Tyler Burge puts it, that cognitive science has discovered "without being fully aware of its own accomplishment" (Burge, 2010) an implicit theory of content determination. It is the job of the philosopher to make the implicit theory explicit, maybe with some details filled in. In this paper I attempt to motivate a worry for the philosopher inclined to follow such a methodology. Using an argument from Frances Egan, I raise the concern that cognitive scientists do not have an implicit theory of content. Rather, they assign content based on purely heuristic concerns, for instance a concern for communicating the theory to the reader. Content would then be a "gloss", without theoretical underpinnings. I do not attempt to answer this concern, but I do explore some ways we might begin to respond.
|
|
Fri 4 Nov, '22- |
Second Postgraduate Professional Development WorkshopOC1.013.00pm Writing MA or MPhil essays (Tom Crowther) 3.45 Writing a research proposal for a PhD/scholarship application (Johannes Roessler) 4.15 Tea/coffee 4.30 Writing an MPhil or PhD thesis (Johannes Roessler) 5.15 end/Dirty Duck
|
|
Mon 7 Nov, '22 - Fri 11 Nov, '229am - 6pm |
Reading WeekRuns from Monday, November 07 to Friday, November 11. |
|
Mon 7 Nov, '22- |
Phil Soc Event 7th November @ 18:15: Online discussion with Dr Skye ClearyTeams |
|
Wed 9 Nov, '22- |
WMA Graduate Research SeminarS0.52 |
|
Thu 10 Nov, '22- |
PG Work in Progress SeminarS2.77/MS TeamsSpeaker: Bruna Picas-I-Prats (PhD) Title: Title: Architectonic Systematics and Cartographic Systematics: Kant and Hegel on Meta-systematic Accounts Thursday 10 November 2022 5pm in S2.77 and on MS Teams
Abstract: There is an open discussion on whether there is a concern for systematicity in Kantian philosophy and whether Kant intended to build up a system of philosophy. There is an approach in this discussion that highlights that two different possibilities for systematic organization can be found in the Critique of Pure Reason (KrV). On the one hand, an architectonic notion of ordination (AS) corresponds to the notion of systems developed in the Architectonic of Pure Reason. In it, by system, Kant understands the unity of the manifold cognitions under one idea. The type of relationship that the idea provides is a linkage of articulatio, in the function of which each part hangs together in an inner mutual bearing. The metaphor that Kant deploys to illustrate this notion is an analogy of a living organism, whose growth and development do not depend on adding parts according to quantitative criteria, but with a view to improving the functions of its parts in relation to the whole (See, KrV, A832/B61). On the other hand, a cartographic notion of system (CS) can also be found in the First Critique, represented by the image of a map, the function of which is to order a diversity of places and regions of space to allow us to orient ourselves in them. Hence, CS is formed by a horizontal juxtaposition of parts which allows qualitatively differentiated zones (seas, continents, islands, etc.) to be gathered, and at the same time the “heterogeneity” with respect to their possible foundation to be maintained. Taking these two notions of system into account, the aim here is to try to state that they both coexist in Hegel’s systematicity and that this coexistence is structured by dialectical progression and speculative awareness.
|
|
Fri 11 Nov, '22- |
Chinese Philosophy Seminar Series 2022/23MS TeamsRegistrationLink opens in a new windowLink opens in a new window Guest Speaker: Chris Fraser (University of Toronto) Title: The Xunzian Critique of Legalism and its Contemporary Significance |
|
Tue 15 Nov, '22- |
CELPA SeminarOnline SeminarGuest Speaker: Paula Casal (UPF) |
|
Tue 15 Nov, '22- |
Post-Kantian European Philosophy Research Seminar SeriesOnline OnlyGuest Speaker: Maudemarie Clark (University of California, Riverside) Title: 'Does Nietzsche Overcome The Birth of Tragedy's Nihilistic View of Tragedy in His Later Work?'
Abstract: Our topic is the relationship between the account of tragedy we find in Nietzsche’s first book and his later view of that artistic genre. Aaron Ridley has argued powerfully that Nietzsche’s later view does not overcome the problems that afflict his earlier account. We agree completely with Ridley and we [Clark] have previously argued that Nietzsche’s original account of tragedy is a failure, that it fails to do what he was attempting to do. But we will argue contra Ridley that Nietzsche does overcome his early (and nihilistic) view of tragedy in his later work. The plan is to explain what we take to be the aim of The Birth of Tragedy and why we take it to be a failure. We will then look at Ridley’s argument for reading Nietzsche’s later view of tragedy in Twilight of the Idols as exhibiting the same failure, and explain our reasons for rejecting that account. These reasons will then lead us, indeed force us, to say something about Nietzsche’s later view of art more generally. The session will be held online.
|
|
Wed 16 Nov, '22- |
UG Philosophy Study SkillsS0.17 |
|
Wed 16 Nov, '22- |
Equality and Welfare Committee |
|
Wed 16 Nov, '22- |
WMA Graduate Research SeminarS0.52 |
|
Wed 16 Nov, '22- |
Black Voices Network Employability eventS0.21 |
|
Thu 17 Nov, '22- |
Metaethics Reading GroupS2.77Oscar North-Concar leading, paper TBD |
|
Thu 17 Nov, '22- |
PG Work in Progress SeminarS2.77/MS TeamsSpeaker: Toby Tricks (MPhil) Title: Modelling the Mind: A Fictionalist Reading of Nietzsche’s Drive Psychology Abstract: Nietzche’s account of the drives is increasingly being recognised as central to his philosophical psychology; it is a problem, then, that it appears confused. A particularly prominent issue concerns Nietzsche’s characterisation of how the drives interact with one another: he often uses agential language which many take to commit him to the homunculus fallacy. I argue that this view is mistaken, because Nietzsche’s agential characterisations of the drives are fictions: as they aren’t meant to be true, he is able to sidestep fallacious homuncularism. We might worry that if many of the claims in Nietzsche’s drive psychology are fictional, then it can’t teach us much. That need not be the case, however: drawing on Catherine Elgin’s work in the epistemology of science, I argue that despite being fictional, Nietzsche’s account of the drives can still provide epistemic value and facilitate genuine cognitive achievement, in just the same way that scientific models do despite being idealised and distorted representations of reality. Acknowledging the fictional nature of much of Nietzsche’s drive talk I’ll further argue has an added bonus: it allows us to more fully appreciate the subtlety and power of his account of human psychology. |
|
Fri 18 Nov, '22- |
Philosophy Department Industrial Action BriefingMS Teams |
|
Fri 18 Nov, '22- |
CRPLA Workshop: In Celebration of Marcel ProustFAB0.08Talks by Peter Boxall, Joshua Landy, Patrick Bray and Jeremiah Tillman. |
|
Sat 19 Nov, '22 - Sun 20 Nov, '2210am - 5pm |
MindGrad 2022MS.04Runs from Saturday, November 19 to Sunday, November 20. Saturday, 19. November10:00-10:25 Welcome coffee 10:25-10:30 Short Introduction 10:30-11:45 First Session Asia Chatchaya Sakchatchawan (UCL): Towards a Wrong Face Theory of Shame Response by Thomas Crowther 15 min Coffee Break 12:00-13:15 Second Session Lucas Chebib (UCL): Guilt as a Shame Shaped Thing Response by Johannes Roessler 1 h Lunch 14:15-15:30 Third Session (Keynote) Lucy O’Brien (UCL): An Introspective Argument for Others’ Minds Response by Emily Bassett 15 min Coffee Break 15:45-17:00 Fourth Session Simone Nota (Trinity College Dublin): Overcoming the Absolute: A Dialectical Critique of the Absolute Conception Response by Naomi Eilan 17:00-18:00 Reception 18:30 Dinner at Radcliffe Sunday, 20. November09:30-10:45 First Session Christopher Joseph An (Edinburgh): Rational Animals? Mammalian Social Play, Second-personal Knowledge, and the Evolution of Normative Guidance Response by Richard Moore 5 min Short Break 10:50-11:30 Q&A with Mind co-editors Lucy O’Brien and Adrian Moore on submitting papers to journals 15 min Coffee Break 11:45-13:00 Second Session (Keynote) Adrian Moore (Oxford): Armchair Knowledge: Some Kantian Reflections Response by Ben Houlton 1 h Lunch 14:00-15:15 Third Session Zijian Zhu (Oxford): The Modality and Temporality of Anscombean Practical Knowledge Response by Lucy Campbell 15 min Coffee Break 15:30-16:45 Fourth Session Oushinar Nath (UCL): Wisdom and KK Failure Response by Barney Walker End of the conference |
|
Tue 22 Nov, '22- |
CELPA SeminarS2.77Guest Speaker: Zofia Stemplowska (Oxford) |
|
Tue 22 Nov, '22- |
CRPLA - Mead Gallery Roundtable on Radical LandscapesRoundtable discussion of the Radical Landscapes Exhibition at the Mead Gallery (opens 7 October). Commentators: David Bather Woods, Diarmuid Costello, Chris Earley, Nadine Elzein, Nick Lawrence, Danielle Stewart |
|
Wed 23 Nov, '22- |
All Staff Research WiP SeminarWolfson Research Exchange, Room 1 |
|
Wed 23 Nov, '22- |
UG Philosophy Study SkillsS0.17 |
|
Wed 23 Nov, '22- |
Philosophy Department Staff Meeting |
|
Wed 23 Nov, '22- |
Philosophy Department ColloquiumS0.17/MS TeamsGuest Speaker: Béatrice Longuenesse (NYU) Talk: 'Conflicting logics of the mind: Lessons from Kant and Freud.’ Professor Longuenesse is visiting the Department while giving the Isaiah Berlin lectures in Oxford. Her talk at Warwick will be the first lecture from the series.
|