FC Talks

Bringing Knowledge to Market: The evolution and broader significance of Israeli economic and scientific policies spanning the civilian and military sectors

Tues., 2/19 - 12:30 to 13:45

Location: Kendrick Room

Abstract: One constant in Israeli history is the reliance on the production and exploitation of scientific knowledge for both economic growth and military superiority. Beneath this constant, however, lie profound shifts in government policies, especially those facilitating increasingly porous flows of people and ideas between the civilian and military sectors. Today, where high-tech companies are often founded by former members of the once most-hidden agencies of the defense establishment, the global market saturates virtually all walks of Israeli life. Positive and negative consequences of such developments are examined with a view to their relevance well beyond Israel.  

We welcome faculty, students, and staff of the Philosophy and Moral Science Departments as well as members of the wider University community. RSVP to Lucy Schwarz at luciaschwarz@email.arizona.edu.

When

12:30 p.m. Feb. 19, 2019

Academic year

2018-2019

Semester

Spring

Reflective sentimentalism in Aesthetics: Hume’s Question and Kant’s Answer

Thu, 3/28 - 12:30 to 13:45

Location: Social Sciences 128

Abstract: ‘Beauty’ is an evaluative predicate; the evaluation of an object as beautiful or not is constituted by an aesthetic sentiment. But not all the sentiments that people have in response to a particular object of perception can support an aesthetic judgment all other people have reason to agree with. Only proper aesthetic sentiments can do so. Aesthetic judgments which are well-grounded are based on proper aesthetic sentiments – and vice versa. The challenge for the philosopher is to explain in virtue of what a sentiment is aesthetically proper without merely moving in a circle. Both Hume and Kant tried to meet this challenge, but they did so in different ways. And my claim is that only Kant did so successfully.

We welcome faculty, students, and staff of the Philosophy and Moral Science Departments as well as members of the wider University community. RSVP to Lucy Schwarz at luciaschwarz@email.arizona.edu.

When

12:30 p.m. March 28, 2019

Academic year

2018-2019

Semester

Spring

Where

Soc. Sci. 128

An Institutional Investigation of the Farm-Supply Chain Interface

Thu, 2/7 - 12:30 to 13:45

Location: Social Sciences 128

Abstract: The beginning of the supply chain is increasingly in the forefront of today’s headlines on topics such as social responsibility, environmental sustainability, traceability, and food safety.  Indeed, decisions made by actors in the raw materials echelon, particularly farmers, have lasting and amplified impacts that promulgate the entire supply chain. Yet little is known about the factors that shape farmers’ decisions and willingness to engage with the supply chain. Our study begins to fill this important gap by delving into the minds of farmers to explicate the individual and institutional factors operating in the farm-supply chain interface. Using an interpretive research approach, we elaborate middle-range theory to identify micro-, meso-, and macro-level institutional mechanisms that are specific to the farm context and explain how these mechanisms interact to shape farmers’ willingness to engage with the supply chain. The middle-range theory elaborated in our study offers important implications for theory, supply chain practice, and public policy amidst increased consumer demands for a farm-to-fork experience.  

We welcome faculty, students, and staff of the Philosophy and Moral Science Departments as well as members of the wider University community. RSVP to Lucy Schwarz at luciaschwarz@email.arizona.edu.

When

12:30 p.m. Feb. 7, 2019

Academic year

2018-2019

Semester

Spring

Where

Soc. Sci. 128

Devaluing Importance

Thu, 1/31 - 12:30 to 13:45

Location: Social Sciences 128

Abstract: It is widely thought that we have good reasons to do important things with our lives, or to become important people.  These reasons go beyond impersonal considerations, such as the moral obligation one might have to cure a terrible illness, for example.  Being important is also thought to be something worth striving for out of self-interest; an especially significant life is something worth wanting for oneself.  Although this kind of judgment is widespread, and although it often makes brief appearances in philosophy, it has not received sustained, systematic examination.  And I will argue that it is mistaken: from the perspective of what's in our self-interest, we have no good reason to be important. In fact, being unimportant (while still mattering to a degree) comes with a valuable kind of liberation.

We welcome faculty, students, and staff of the Philosophy and Moral Science Departments as well as members of the wider University community.

When

12:30 p.m. Jan. 31, 2019

Academic year

2018-2019

Semester

Spring

Where

Soc. Sci. 128

Veganism and Making a Difference

Thu, 1/24 - 12:30 to 13:45

Location: Social Sciences 128

Abstract: Veganism, the practice of eschewing the consumption of all animal products, is often championed as a way of reducing the amount of animal suffering in the world. But many philosophers (e.g. Budolfson 2015; McPherson 2015, 2018) have put pressure on the claim that individual food choices can have such an impact. These philosophers then go on to build a moral case for veganism and vegetarianism in terms of complicity with wrongdoing (McPherson 2015, 2018) and the essentiality of harm (Budolfson 2015). In this paper, I'd like to grant that individual food choices cannot directly affect the number of animals raised and killed within the factory farming system, but that it can play an important role in making a difference to the amount of animal suffering in the world in other ways. But as we'll see, the ways in which veganism can contribute to the reduction of animal suffering is a highly contingent matter. One can contribute to the reduction of animal suffering without adopting veganism and one can be vegan without contributing to the reduction of animal suffering. By reflecting on how precisely veganism relates to the reduction of animal suffering, I hope to get clear on the better (and worse) ways to be vegan. 

We welcome faculty, students, and staff of the Philosophy and Moral Science Departments as well as members of the wider University community.

When

12:30 p.m. Jan. 24, 2019

Academic year

2018-2019

Semester

Spring

Where

Soc. Sci. 128

Aristotelian Statecraft

Thu, 10/18/2018 - 12:30 to 13:45

Location: Social Scienes 128

Abstract:
Is Aristotle’s theory of statecraft relevant to modern politics?  It would seem not, since Aristotle contends that the proper aim of government is the promotion of virtue (as he understands it) and his own “best constitution” involves many features that appear highly illiberal to moderns (including slavery, political disenfranchisement of women, and various restrictions on individual freedom).  Miller argues, however, that Aristotle’s political theory includes a general theory of statecraft which can be separated from his own view of the purpose of government.  This Aristotelian statecraft represents a “middle way” between Platonic utopianism and Machieavellian Realpolitik.  Aristotle’s theory can offer practical guidance even to those who espouse political ideals very different from his own, including even an advocate of the libertarian minimal state.
 

We welcome faculty, students, and staff of the Philosophy and Moral Science Departments as well as members of the wider University community.

When

12:30 p.m. Oct. 18, 2018

Academic year

2018-2019

Semester

Fall

Plato and the Ship of State

Tues., 10/16/2018 - 12:30 to 13:45

Location: Social Sciences 128

Abstract:
Plato introduces the famous Ship of State simile (Rep. VI.488a7-489a6) to explain why true philosophers are not honored in cities. He claims that a true philosopher in a polis like Athens is like a skilled but disrespected steersman aboard a ship that has been high-jacked by its unruly crew and whose helm has been placed in the hands of a sailor who knows nothing about steering. If Plato regards a ship with an unruly crew and an incompetent steersman as a good image of Athenian democracy, then by extension he must regard a ship with an orderly crew and a competent steersman as a good image of a well-governed polis. These two parts of the simile, the high-jacked ship and the orderly ship, relate to each other as do the two parts of the more famous Cave simile, a fire-lit region inside a cave and a sun-lit region outside. In both similes the unusual or abnormal symbolizes the normal, and the normal in turn symbolizes the ideal. As a fire-lit region inside a cave symbolizes the sensible realm of ordinary objects (and their images), a high-jacked ship symbolizes Athenian democracy; and as a sunlit region outside a cave symbolizes the intelligible realm of Platonic Forms, a competently managed ship symbolizes Plato’s ideal polis. Just as the one simile encapsulates Plato’s metaphysics, the other encapsulates his political philosophy. The Ship of State simile differs from the Cave simile, however, in being not only an analogy, but an argument from analogy. So it is worth considering the important disanalogies between a competently managed ship and Plato’s ideal polis, of which there are at least two. The selection of a steersman and, once selected, the basis of his authority differ importantly from the selection of a true philosopher-king and the basis of his authority.

We welcome faculty, students, and staff of the Philosophy and Moral Science Departments as well as members of the wider University community.

When

12:30 p.m. Oct. 16, 2018

Academic year

2018-2019

Semester

Fall

When Do Unhealthy States Harm the One Who is Unhealthy?

Thu, 11/15/2018 - 12:30 to 13:45

Location: Social Sciences 128

Abstract:
What is the relation between health and well-being? While healthy states may possess intrinsic and instrumental value for the subject in such states, the relation between health and well-being also appears to be a contingent one. If that is correct, then the following question arises: when do unhealthy states harm the one in that state? This talk introduces a new counter-factual account of the harmfulness of unhealthy states.

We welcome faculty, students, and staff of the Philosophy and Moral Science Departments as well as members of the wider University community.

When

12:30 p.m. Nov. 15, 2018

Academic year

2018-2019

Semester

Fall

Topic: The Four Faces of Misogyny

Thu, 09/13/2018 - 12:30 to 13:45

Location: Social Sciences 128 (Kendrick Room)

Abstract:

Misogyny is often mistaken for a psychological condition, specifically, as the “undifferentiated hatred towards all women.” Rejecting this definition, Kate Manne (2017) has recently argued that misogyny is “the law enforcement branch of a patriarchal order." In other words, misogyny is better understood as a system of constraints that sanction non-compliant women. For Manne, misogyny regulates and produces gender inequalities primarily through punishments. 

In this paper, I argue for an alternative way of identifying and evaluating misogyny, using what I call the four faces of misogyny. The four faces of misogyny are silencing, gender stereotypes, devaluation, and objectification.   

This argument draws on Iris Marion Young’s classic work “The Five Faces of Oppression.” Young recommends understanding oppression (and thereby injustice) by identifying its five faces (violence, marginalization, cultural imperialism, exploitation, and powerlessness). Having experienced any one of these faces of oppression is sufficient for being oppressed.

While Young’s work is an invaluable starting point for naming and identifying oppression, it is also important to update her categories in light of contemporary configurations of injustices as well as certain advancements in political theory.  More specifically, an important insight from the literature on intersectionality is that privileges and disadvantages can be produced simultaneously. In other words, a person can be both advanced and constrained by his or her group membership. As a result, it is important to recognize misogyny not only as a system of punishment but also as a system of rewards to compliant women. Misogyny incentivizes compliance. To help illuminate the connections between complicity and misogyny, I recommend recognizing the four faces of misogyny: silencing, gender stereotypes, devaluation, and objectification. 

We welcome faculty, students, and staff of the Philosophy and Moral Science Departments as well as members of the wider University community.

 

When

12:30 p.m. Sept. 13, 2018

Academic year

2018-2019

Semester

Fall

Social Rules and Personal Plans in Libertarian Thought

Thu, 10/11/2018 - 12:30 to 13:45

Location: Social Sciences 128

Abstract:
Libertarian political philosophy is often associated with a concern for pure principles, particularly those of natural law or a “non-aggression axiom,” as well as with a radicalism exemplified by anarchism. Not all libertarian philosophers are this way, however. This work looks at two prominent libertarian political philosophers, Eric Mack and Loren Lomasky, and the alternative path they took. Despite significant differences in their accounts, Mack and Lomasky each take as foundational conceptions of people as pursuing their own plans in life. Moreover, they recognize that social rules facilitate mutual respect among planners. This mutual respect is compatible with significant variation in possible social rules, leading these authors to accept a range of legitimate possible specifications of rights rather than deriving a priori a unique specification. This, in turn, creates space for states to be one source of legitimate social rules that allow moral agents to plan and let plan.

We welcome faculty, students, and staff of the Philosophy and Moral Science Departments as well as members of the wider University community.

 

When

12:30 p.m. Oct. 11, 2018

Academic year

2018-2019

Semester

Fall
Subscribe to RSS - FC Talks