PG Work in Progress Seminar
About the WiPThe Postgraduate Work in Progress (WiP) Seminar is a student-organised session intended to provide all philosophy graduate students, and occasionally graduate students undertaking philosophy projects in other departments, with the platform to present and discuss their ongoing research. All philosophy PGs, whether MA, MPhil, or PhD, are encouraged to attend, and faculty members and visitors to the department are very welcome. No extensive knowledge of the week’s topic is necessary. The seminar offers an invaluable opportunity for graduates to present their work in a friendly, supportive, unassessed setting, and receive vital peer-review feedback and tips, allowing them to improve and practise defence of their work, as well as to get to know and socialise with fellow students and members of the wider department. Seminars normally take place on Thursdays, from 5:00pm until 6:15pm in S2.77, and can also be attended online on via Teams. The title and abstract for each talk along with a Teams link is circulated to all PG students on a Monday.The format will consist of a roughly 30-minute presentation of a paper, followed by a roughly 30-minute open discussion and Q&A. A trip to the pub reliably follows each seminar. Current term scheduleA list of seminars occurring in the current academic term can be found below. Term 1 (2024-2025) Schedule
Thursday 3rd October 5pm - Oscar North-Concar - 'Responding to Metaskepticism and Concept Pluralism: Wiggins’ View is Better Than Wedgwood’s' Thursday 10th October - NO WIP DUE TO WMA SEMINAR Thursday 17th October 5pm - John Hundley - 'No Time As Now: Temporality and Trauma in W.G. Sebald's Austerlitz' Thursday 24th October 4pm S1.50 - CANCELLED Thursday 31st October 4pm S1.50 - Eve Poirier Thursday 7th November - NO WIP DUE TO READING WEEK Thursday 14th November 4pm S1.50 - Emily Boocock Thursday 21st November - Fridolin Neumann Thursday 28th November 4pm S1.50 - Berke Can Thursday 5th December - NO WIP DUE TO PKEP SEMINAR Notes for presentersThere is no strict minimum or maximum limit on paper length, and you may present an entire paper, a chapter of a thesis, an article, or outline the scope of a project, etc. The general recommendation is 3000-5000 words, as your work should be amenable to summation within 30 minutes. Please provide your title and abstract to the WiP organisers by the end of the Sunday on the week you are presenting.Please keep in mind that the seminar is best used to gather valuable suggestions with which to improve to your work, and to gain experience in presenting your work. As such, your work does not need to be a watertight, polished piece, but may be a draft or substantial set of notes. You are welcome to share work at all stages of the writing process. Contact the organisersIf you would like to present at the WiP or have any questions about it, please email Chris Hall (Chris.Hall.1@warwick.ac.uk). |
Next talk: Thursday 31st October 2024, 4pm, S2.77Eve PoirierWiP Organisers 24/25: Chris Hall (Chris.Hall.1@warwick.ac.uk) We're recruiting new WiP Organisers to take over organisation of the seminars. Please contact Chris if you are interested. |
|
|
|
WiP Seminar - Eve Poirier 'Plausible Abstractions: The role of fiction, truth and history in Genealogy and State of Nature Philosophy'
Eve Poirer will present 'Plausible Abstractions: The role of fiction, truth and history in Genealogy and State of Nature Philosophy'. Everyone welcome!
Abstract
What is the place of historical truth in Genealogy? Why appeal to State of Nature stories even when we know they could never have happened? How far can philosophy abstract from reality while still having explanatory relevance? Pulling from Bernard Williams, Nietzsche, Nozick, Foucault and others, I will attempt to tackle some of these questions: exploring broadly the interaction between supposedly true historical happenings and fictional abstractions in Genealogies and State of Nature stories. I will discuss the purposes for which Genealogy is employed, the way in which State of Nature stories attempt to abstract from history, and the importance of 'plausibility' or 'conceivability' in the explanatory relevance or effectiveness of Genealogy. From this, I hope to suggest some conclusions about the appropriate and inappropriate use of Genealogy. That said, this is a work very much in progress on a very broad topic, so I hope that there will be further conclusion to be found in the discussion.
Teams link