Middlebury College Dissertation Fellowship

As part of Middlebury’s commitment to promote faculty and student diversity, this one-year fellowship, which may be extended to a second year, provides support to doctoral candidates to complete dissertations in any discipline, to cultivate effective teaching practices, and to become familiar with the academic community offered by a liberal arts college. The college seeks graduate students with a clear commitment and ability to advance educational diversity, either through the nature of their scholarly work, or through their ability to model success in fields where their own backgrounds and experiences may be underrepresented. The College especially welcomes teacher-scholars from underrepresented groups whose work also engages with issues of diversity.

The program offers affiliation with Middlebury College from September through August. As members of the Middlebury community, fellows will receive teaching and research mentorship from faculty committed to excellence in undergraduate education.

Eligibility:

This one-to-two-year long fellowship will be awarded to applicants who are promising scholars in areas that may not be well represented in Middlebury’s current curriculum, and who have a strong interest in issues of diversity.

Applicants will be selected on the basis of some or all of the following criteria: scholarly work that reflects innovative research; clear commitment and ability to advance educational diversity, either through the nature of scholarly work, or through the ability to model success in fields where personal backgrounds and experiences may be underrepresented; potential for serving as an advocate and mentor for undergraduate students.

Applicants must be U.S. citizens or permanent residents who intend to pursue a professorial career in the U.S.  Ph.D. candidates must have completed all doctoral work except the dissertation by the end of the current academic year.  MFA candidates must be recent recipients of the degree; only those with degrees granted in 2010, or to be granted in 2011, are eligible to apply.

Fellows will be appointed by the Dean of the Faculty upon the recommendation of a faculty selection committee in consultation with appropriate departments.

Terms:

The annual stipend for the position is $30,000. The College will also provide health and dental benefits, academic support including office space and computer and library privileges, and an allowance of up to $4,000 for research-related expenses. As part of the compensation, the College will provide housing near the campus.

During their residence at Middlebury, the Fellows will be hosted by an appropriate department or program, and will be expected to teach one one-semester course, normally in the fall semester. One or more Middlebury faculty members will serve as formal mentors to the Fellow. The Fellow also will give at least one campus-wide presentation, formal or informal, during each term. Fellows will be expected to participate in the broader the intellectual life of Middlebury, which includes regular attendance at events that can be determined in collaboration with department colleagues and mentors. Fellows may apply to extend their fellowships to a second year.

For further information and application details, please visit http://www.middlebury.edu/academics/administration/employment/diss_fellows.   

Applications are due by January 21, 2011.  Inquiries should be sent to Susan Burch at dfp@middlebury.edu.

Middlebury College is an Equal Opportunity Employer committed to recruiting a diverse faculty to complement its increasingly diverse student body.

Notre Dame: 13-15 October 2011| CFP: 15 February 2011

The Association for Political Theory (APT) invites proposals for its ninth annual conference, October 13-15, 2011, at the University of Notre Dame.  To learn more about the Association and its annual conference, please visit the APT website.  The Association for Political Theory welcomes proposals from all approaches and on all topics in political theory, political philosophy, and the history of political thought.  Faculty, advanced PhD candidates, and independent scholars are eligible to participate.  We also encourage faculty to volunteer to serve as chairs and/or discussants.

How to Apply:  To apply online, click here. Proposals are due by midnight on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 (PST).  Please review the proposal guidelines described below before completing a proposal form.  Each participant may submit one paper and one co-authored paper proposal.  To propose a paper, each participant must submit an abstract of 300-400 words and a recent copy of his/her vita.  If a copy of the CV can be found online, the applicant can provide the web address in the relevant box on the proposal form.  Otherwise, the applicant must email a copy of the CV to aptproposals [at] gmail.com with his or her name as the subject line.  Each participant is required to submit a proposal form, even if the proposal is part of a co-authored paper.  Please note:  you must both submit the proposal form and email your CV in order for your proposal to be considered by the Program Committee.

Read the rest of this entry »

I’m currently writing papers involving the idea of political incompetence, i.e., lacking competence to exercise political power properly.I’d like to start this thread just to collect intuitions, or, if you’re up for it, conclusions of short arguments.  Question: If you accept that there is a distinction between competent and incompetent exercises of power, or if you accept that there are distinctions between people being competent and incompetent to exercise power, how would you best characterize the distinction? What makes someone competent or incompetent?  Etc.  I realize this is a broad question, but I’m looking for a wide range of answers.Here’s an example of something I’d consider political incompetence.  Suppose a jury made up of normal people with normal mental abilities has been charged with deciding whether some defendant is guilty of a crime.  The evidence strongly suggests that the defendant is not guilty.  However, due to certain cognitive/epistemic biases, they reason badly and find the defendant guilty.  Though the jurors are overall competent, they acted incompetently in this instance.Thanks!

(le français suit)

THE ANNUAL MONTREAL POLITICAL THEORY MANUSCRIPT WORKSHOP AWARD

Call for applications: The Groupe de recherche interuniversitaire en philosophie politique de Montréal (GRIPP), spanning the departments of political science and philosophy at McGill University, l’Université de Montréal, Concordia University, and l’Université du Québec à Montréal, invites applications for its 2011 manuscript workshop award. The recipient of the award will be invited to Montreal for a day-long workshop in April 2011 dedicated to his or her book manuscript. This “author meets critics” workshop will comprise four to five sessions dedicated to critical discussion of the manuscript; each session will begin with a critical commentary on a section of the manuscript by a political theorist or philosopher who is part of Montreal’s GRIPP community. The format is designed to maximize feedback for a book-in-progress. The award covers the costs of travel, accommodation, and meals.

Eligibility:

A. Topic: The manuscript topic is open within political theory and political philosophy, but we are especially interested in manuscripts related to at least one of these GRIPP research themes: 1) the history of liberal and democratic thought, especially early modern thought; 2) moral psychology and political agency, or politics and affect or emotions or rhetoric; 3) democracy, diversity, and pluralism. 4) democracy, justice, and transnational institutions.

B. Manuscript: Book manuscripts in English or French, not yet in a version accepted for publication, by applicants with PhD in hand by 1 August 2010, are eligible. Applicants must have a complete or nearly complete draft (at least 4/5 of final draft) ready to present at the workshop. In the case of co-authored manuscripts, only one of the co-authors is eligible to apply. (Only works in progress by the workshop date are eligible; authors with a preliminary book contract are eligible only if no version has been already accepted for publication).

C. Application: Please submit the following materials electronically, compiled as a single PDF file: 1) a curriculum vitae; 2) a table of contents; 3) a short abstract of the book project, up to 200 words; 4) a longer book abstract up to 2500 words; and, in the case of applicants with previous book publication(s), (5) three reviews, from established journals in the field, of the applicant’s most recently published monograph. Candidates are not required to, but may if they wish, submit two letters of recommendation speaking to the merits of the book project. Please do not send writing samples. Send materials by email, with the subject heading “2011 GRIPP Manuscript Workshop Award” to Arash Abizadeh, arash.abizadeh [at] mcgill.ca . Review of applications begins 10 January 2011. Contact Arash Abizadeh with questions.

Previous GRIPP Manuscript Workshops:

• April 2010: Hélène Landemore (Yale), Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many.
• April 2009: Alan Patten (Princeton), Equal Recognition: The Moral Foundations of Minority Cultural Rights.
• March 2009: Kinch Hoekstra (UC Berkeley), Thomas Hobbes and the Creation of Order

Read the rest of this entry »

Passions and Emotions

Annual Meeting of the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy (to be held in conjunction with the annual meeting of the APA, Eastern Division) December 29, 2010, St. Botolph Room (Second Floor), Boston Marriott Copley Place

I. Passion & Impartiality: Passions & Emotions in Moral Judgment: 9:00 a.m.-11:00 a.m.

• Principal paper (philosophy): Jesse Prinz, City University of New York Graduate Center, “Constructive Sentimentalism: Legal and Political Implications”
• Commentator (law): Carol Sanger, Columbia University
• Commentator (political science): Michael Frazer, Harvard University
• Chair: Allen Buchanan, Duke University

II. Passion & Motivation: Passions & Emotions in Democratic Politics: 11:15 a.m.-1:15 p.m.

• Principal paper (political science): George Marcus, Williams College, “Reason, Passion, and Democratic Politics: Old Conceptions - New Understandings - New Possibilities”
• Commentator (law): Susan Bandes, DePaul University
• Commentator (philosophy): Cheshire Calhoun, Arizona State University
• Chair: Nancy Rosenblum, Harvard University

Annual Business Meeting: 2:15 p.m.-2:30 p.m.

III. Passion & Dispassion: Passions & Emotions in Legal Interpretation: 2:30 p.m.-4:30 p.m.

• Principal paper (law): Robin West, Georgetown University, “The Anti-Empathic Turn”
• Commentator (political science): Kenneth Kersch, Boston College
• Commentator (philosophy): Benjamin Zipursky, Fordham University
• Chair: James Fleming, Boston University

Reception: 6:30 p.m.-8:30 p.m., also in St. Botolph Room (Second Floor)

Northwestern SETPP: 19-21 May 2011 | CFP: 15 February 2011

The Northwestern University Society for Ethical Theory and Political Philosophy will hold their fifth annual conference on 19-21 May 2011. The keynote speakers are Philip Pettit and R. Jay Wallace.  Submissions from faculty and graduate students are welcome, as some sessions will be reserved for student presentations. Please submit an essay of approximately 4000 words and an abstract of at most 150 words. Essay topics in all areas of ethical theory and political philosophy will be considered, although some priority will be given to essays that take up themes from the works of Philip Pettit and R. Jay Wallace, such as responsibility, practical reasoning, freedom, democratic theory, constructivism, contractualism, individual agency, and collective agency. Essays and abstracts should be prepared for blind review in word, rtf, or pdf format. Graduate submissions should be sent by email to leegoldsmith2012 [at] u.northwestern.edu; faculty submissions should be sent by e-mail to garthoff [at] northwestern.edu. Notices of acceptance will be sent by 31 March 2011. For more information, please contact Jon Garthoff at the e-mail address above or visit our website.

Call for Applications:
Political Theory Track of CEU Doctoral Program in Political Science,
CENTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY

DOCTORAL SCHOOL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, PUBLIC POLICY, AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

We invite applications for the Political Theory Track of CEU Doctoral Program in Political Science for the Academic Year 2011-2012. The Political Theory track is designed to prepare students for a career in academia and institutions of applied research. It is highly competitive and welcomes applications from graduates of Political Science, Philosophy, Law, Sociology, Economics, and related disciplines.

About the Program

The Political Theory track of the CEU Doctoral Program is one of five specialized tracks in CEU’s political science PhD program. It focuses on theoretical and applied perspectives in normative political theory. Major topics include justice, political obligation, democratic theory, applied political theory, philosophy of the social sciences and its application to normative problems, transitional justice among others.

While being operated by the Doctoral School of Political Science, Public Policy and International Relations, the Political Theory track is at the same time jointly announced by the Departments of Political Science and Philosophy. This provides students engaged in this track with relatively easy access to courses offered by Philosophy and an opportunity to share seminars with philosophy students.

Read the rest of this entry »

Panel at the ECPR General Conference, Reykjavik, 25-27 August 2011. Abstract below. Paper proposals to be submitted online through the ECPR website by 1st February 2011. Please contact Avia Pasternak, University of Essex (aviap@essex.ac.uk) or Rob Jubb, University College London (r.jubb@ucl.ac.uk), or see the ECPR website ()http://www.ecprnet.eu/conferences/general_conference/Reykjavik/) for further details.

This panel invites normatively-focused papers on the nature of participation and complicity in global injustices. Almost all global injustices that concern scholars of international political theory today - from the environment crisis, to unfair international trade conventions, exploitative global labour chains, and global economic injustice more generally - are of a collective nature: they are wrongs that are created and maintained by the coordinated and uncoordinated actions and omissions of individual and collective agents across the globe. Indeed, according to tne common line of argument, the way to identify the agents who are most responsible and liable for these and other global injustices is by focusing on patterns of participation in them: e.g. the participation of individuals and states in an unjust global basic structure, or the contributions of corporations and individual consumers in developed countries to exploitative labour conditions in developing countries. It may well be the case that patterns of participation in global injustices should play a central role in determining which agents are responsible to resolve these injustices, as well as the scope of their responsibility. However, patterns of participation in global injustices are extremely varied and complex. Individuals and collectives may be participating in activities which indirectly lead to unjust outcomes without their knowledge; they may end up being involved in injustices committed by others simply by virtue of sharing certain institutions with them. Their participation is often coerced or at least unavoidable. These empirical facts raise questions about the nature of participation in global injustices, and about the responsibilities and liabilities that different types of participation generate. For example, are citizens of developed states equally responsible and liable for all of their governments’ unjust acts towards developing states? Can collectives other than states be agents of global injustice? Which ones, and in what different ways? And how do responsibility and liability get assigned to their members? We invite papers that address these and related questions on the nature of participation and complicity in global injustices.

Princeton: 8-9 April 2011 | CFP: 10 January 2011

The Committee for the Graduate Conference in Political Theory at Princeton University welcomes papers concerning any period, methodological approach or topic in political theory, political philosophy, or the history of political thought.  Approximately eight papers will be accepted.

Each session, led by a discussant from Princeton, will be focused exclusively on one paper and will feature an extensive question and answer period with Princeton faculty and students.  Papers will be pre-circulated among conference participants.

The keynote address will be given by Professor Patchen Markell of the University of Chicago.

Read the rest of this entry »

NO WAR: 3-5 Nov 2011 | CFP: 1 March 2011

Dave Shoemaker is sending out a call for abstracts for the first biennial New Orleans Workshop on Agency and Responsibility (NO WAR), to be held in New Orleans, LA at the Intercontinental Hotel on November 3-5, 2011.

Abstracts are welcome in any area or on any topic having to do with agency and/or responsibility.  Perspectives beyond just those from moral philosophy (e.g., psychology, legal theory, neuroscience, economics, metaphysics, and more) are welcome.  (To see more about the workshop’s general aims and other details, follow this link.)

Abstracts should be 2-3 double-spaced pages and are due no later than March 1, 2011.  Please send abstracts by e-mail to David Shoemaker, dshoemak [at] tulane.edu.  A program committee will evaluate submissions and make decisions by early May.

NO WAR is a biennial workshop featuring the presentation of sophisticated original research on issues roughly captured under the label “agency and responsibility.”  This general area involves investigation of such questions as: What does it mean to be an agent?  How (if at all) does the nature of personhood and personal identity across time bear on questions of agency?  What is the nature of, and relation between, moral and criminal responsibility?  What is the relation between responsibility and the metaphysical issues of determinism and free will?  What do various psychological disorders (autism, psychopathy, cognitive disabilities) tell us about agency and responsibility?  What is involved in the development of moral agency?  What is the will, willpower, and weakness (or strength) of will?  What do the results from neuroscience imply (if anything) for our questions about agency and responsibility?  What is the nature of autonomy and how is it related to agency and responsibility?

Read the rest of this entry »

[Stanford also have postdocs in the Program on Global Justice and the Ethics in Society program]

Spencer Foundation Post-Doctoral Fellowships in Equality of Opportunity and Education at Stanford University (two positions)

The McCoy Family Center for Ethics in Society is seeking two post doctoral scholars for a project focused on issues of equality of opportunity and the public provision of education. These fellowships have been created with funding by the Spencer Foundation. The fellows will join the community of post doctoral fellows at the Center but will be selected on the basis of their fit with a new multi-year project on Equality of Opportunity and the Public Provision of Education. We seek scholars with a PhD (from disciplines such as philosophy, education or one of the social sciences) or a JD with research interests related to (any of) the following questions:

1. What ideal of equality should govern the public provision of education?
2. What are the implications of this ideal for concrete decisions about school financing, admissions practices, and the national, state, and local distribution of educational responsibility?
3. What are the practical obstacles to achieving this ideal in education?

Fellows will receive training and mentorship; work closely with distinguished faculty related to the project; participate in multi-disciplinary seminars and conferences and meet with leading scholars and policy makers in the field. Fellows may be assigned some teaching responsibilities (at most one course per year), and will be asked to participate in faculty-graduate student workshops, interact with undergraduates in the School of Education and Ethics in Society program and help in developing an inter-disciplinary ethics community across the campus.

Read the rest of this entry »

CALL FOR PAPERS

The fifth annual meeting of the Felician Ethics Conference will be held at the Rutherford Campus of

Felician College
223 Montross Ave
Rutherford, NJ 07070
on Saturday, April 30, 2011, 9 am - 6 pm

Plenary Speaker: John E. Hare
Noah Porter Professor of Philosophical Theology
Yale Divinity School, Yale University
Author of The Moral Gap (Oxford, 1996)
will present “Can We Be Good without God?”

Submissions on any topic in moral philosophy (broadly construed) are welcome, not exceeding 25 minutes’ presentation time (approximately 3,000 words). Please send submissions via email in format suitable for blind review by Feb. 15, 2011 to: felicianethicsconference@gmail.com..
Undergraduate submissions are invited for a proposed session consisting of undergraduate papers.

Alternatively, send surface mail to:
Irfan Khawaja, Conference Coordinator
Dept. of Philosophy
Felician College
262 S. Main St.
Lodi, NJ 07644

If you have any questions, please contact Irfan Khawaja, (201) 559-6000 (x6288), or felicianethicsconference@gmail.com.

*CALL FOR PAPERS*

“The Power to Imagine Better”: The Philosophy of Harry Potter

This interdisciplinary conference will be held at the campus of

Marymount Manhattan College

221 East 71^st Street

New York, New York 10021

Saturday, October 29, 2011, 10 a.m. - 6 p.m. (Regina Peruggi Room)

“We do not need magic to change the world, we carry all the power we need inside ourselves already: we have the power to imagine better.”   -J. K. Rowling

Literary Scholar John Granger maintains that the Harry Potter corpus has become the “shared text” of the 21^st century.  Our attraction to this series, however, goes beyond its narrative appeal: the Harry Potter books contain a wide variety of philosophical themes that invite our study and discussion.

Submissions are welcome on any philosophical theme or issue arising in the Harry Potter corpus that intersects with metaphysics, ethics, religion, literature, and/or politics, not exceeding 20-25 minutes’ presentation time (approximately 2,500 words). Please send full essay submissions with a 150-word abstract via email (in Word, rtf, or pdf) in a format suitable for blind review by April 1, 2011 to: cbiondi@mmm.edu.  Notification of acceptance will be made by June 1, 2011, and a binder of the papers accepted for presentation will be made available to all of the presenters by the end of Summer 2011.  (Conference registration fee will be $25.)

If you have any questions, please contact the Conference Coordinator, Carrie-Ann Biondi (Assistant Prof. of Philosophy, Dept. of Philosophy & Religious Studies), at (212) 517-0637 or cbiondi@mmm.edu.

Public Reasoners,

We are trying to produce an electronic publication with articles written for and by undergraduates interested in political philosophy.  Our student board has sent out a Call for Papers for undergraduate scholarship that promotes in interesting read in political philosophy and/or serves as exemplary research work at the undergraduate level.  While the journal is produced by students in the Twin Cities area of Minneapolis/Saint Paul, submissions are open to all.  If you have any interested undergraduates, or you happen to be one who is reading this, please consider contributing.  The papers selected for publication will be selected by the student board, and undergraduates will work with the student board in producing a finished draft of their submission for publication this summer. Below is the CFP our students wrote.  Thanks for your attention.

Read the rest of this entry »

IVR–the International Society for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy–is meeting in Frankfurt, Germany, August 15-20, 2011.  Here’s the web site:  http://www.ivr2011.org/   There is a very generous prize for the best paper submitted by a junior scholar; information about this and other submissions can be found on the site.  I’m organizing panels on privacy and new developments in information technology–if you have any interest in this, or in IVR, please contact me.  Best, Leslie Francis, francisl@law.utah.edu

Discussing differential treatment

A symposium on occasion of the publication of the book
Diversity in Europe. Dilemmas of differential treatment in theory and practice (Routledge 2010, http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415580823/)

edited by Gideon Calder and Emanuela Ceva

10 January 2011

University of Pavia, Faculty of Political Science, Aula Grande

9:00 Welcome
Fabio Rugge, Dean of the Faculty of Political Science, University of Pavia
Roberto Schmid, Director of the Institute for Advanced Study, Pavia
Emanuela Ceva, Institute for Advanced Study - University of Pavia
Gideon Calder, University of Wales, Newport

9:30
Robert Vischer (University of St. Thomas), Beyond the Individual and State: Will the Relational Dimension of Conscience Find Fertile Ground in Europe?

Discussant: Emanuela Ceva (Institute for Advanced Study - University of Pavia)

11 - 11:30 Coffee break

11:30 - 13
Kimberley Brownlee (University of Manchester), Demands of Conscience

Discussant: Federico Zuolo (Institute for Advanced Study, Pavia)

13 - 14:30 Buffet lunch

14:30 - 16:00
Peter Cave (The Open University), Morality, mini-skirts and the niqab: muddling through

Discussant: Sune Lægaard (Roskilde University)

16 - 16:30 Coffee break

16:30 - 18
Andrew Shorten (University of Limerick), Groups, Institutions and the Rule-and-Exemption Approach

Discussant: Gideon Calder (University of Wales, Newport)

Participation is not restricted, but all participants are asked to register beforehand with the conference organizers. Registration is free of charge and includes lunch and refreshments. Papers will be pre-circulated to registered participants only. To register, please contact Rade Bjelan (bjelan[at]gmail.com) by 15 December 2010.

Symposium on Amartya Sen’s The Idea of Justice

Friday, April 15th and Saturday, April 16th, 2011

Rutgers University School of Law-Camden

The Institute for Law and Philosophy will host a two-day symposium on Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen’s The Idea of Justice (Harvard 2009) on Friday April, 15th and Saturday, April 16th 2011. The conference will feature six presentations on Sen’s recent book and its themes by leading figures in political philosophy: David Estlund (Brown), Samuel Freeman (Penn), Gerald Gaus (Arizona), Erin Kelly (Tufts), Henry Richardson (Georgetown), and Debra Satz (Stanford). Professor Sen will also attend. The symposium¹s proceedings will be published in a special issue of the Rutgers Law Journal.

Attendees must register, and the fee is $25 ($10 for non-Rutgers students).

To register, please send a check payable to Rutgers University to:

Prof. John Oberdiek

Institute for Law and Philosophy

Rutgers School of Law-?Camden

217 N. 5th St.

Camden, NJ 08102

For more information, please contact John Oberdiek at lawandphil@camlaw.rutgers.edu.

Conference: The Margins of Citizenship

Citizenship is a central concept in normative political philosophy, law, and public policy. It marks out those to whom we owe special attention, those who have the right to determine their society’s shape, and those who can command the full set of entitlements made available by the state. Full citizenship is a highly prized position. Many members of society, however lack the full status of citizenship, because they do not possess the full set of citizenship rights (resident aliens, children, prisoners), and/or because, even if they do, economic forces and social norms tend to push them to the margins. Equal citizenship continues to be the site of social struggle. The object of this conference is to reflect upon the margins of citizenship, to investigate the nature of partial citizenship and whether it can be justified, and to consider what marginal citizenship implies for the concept of citizenship itself, as well as allied ideas such as social justice and rights.

Speakers:

David Owen (Southampton): Citizenship and the Marginalities of Migrants]
Respondent:  Jonathan Seglow (Royal Holloway)

Peter Ramsay (LSE): Can Prisoners have the Rights of Citizens in a Democracy?
Respondent: Alfonso Donoso (York)

Philip Cook (Leicester): Child-Citizenship, Fairness, and Marginalisation
Respondent: Sarah Hannan (Oxford)

Kimberley Brownlee (Manchester): A Human Right against Social Deprivation
Respondent: Virginia Mantouvalou (Leicester)

Supported by the Contemporary Political Theory Research Group, Royal Holloway, University of London and the Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Leicester.

10 am  - 5 pm

Friday 12 November 2010

Royal Holloway, University of London, Central London Campus, 2 Gower Street (entrance on Montague Place), London, WC1E 6DP

Attendance is free but spaces are limited so if you would like to come please register in advance with Lisa Dacunha, (Lisa.Dacunha@rhul.ac.uk).

For more details please email the conference organisers: Jonathan Seglow (j.seglow@rhul.ac.uk) or Philip Cook (pac20@le.ac.uk)

 Published on-line at: http://ept.sagepub.com/content/current

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL THEORY 9.4 (2010)

SPECIAL ISSUE: REALISM AND POLITICAL THEORY

Contributors:

Richard North

Political realism: Introduction

William A Galston

Realism in political theory

Richard Bellamy

Dirty hands and clean gloves: Liberal ideals and real politics

John Horton

Realism, liberal moralism and a political theory of modus vivendi

Glen Newey

Two dogmas of liberalism

Mark Philp

What is to be done? Political theory and political realism

Matt Sleat

Bernard Williams and the possibility of a realist political theory

Enzo Rossi

Reality and imagination in political theory and practice: On Raymond Geuss’s realism

Published on-line at: http://ept.sagepub.com/content/current

Readers may be familiar with my “Publishing Advice for Graduate Students” which addressed issues from publishing book reviews and conference proceedings to replies, full length articles, and submitting book contracts successfully. I have been genuinely thrilled by its reception as it struck me that there was a real dearth of helpful advice on the subject available. Students only had to hope for an insighful supervisor to teach them the ropes previously.

I am now beginning work on “How to Peer Review” which will address substantive, practical advice on how to best conduct reviews of journal articles and book proposals. This seems to be the new area where good information is lacking.

A question then for readers: what advice should be offered? All comments will be gratefully acknowledged in the final piece.

Please post all comments here so that they may all be in one place, as this announcent will be posted widely (as I think the issue is highly important and I am keen to canvass opinions from as many as possible).

I am delighted to announce a new book series in moral philosophy:

Studies in Moral Philosophy is a new book series affiliated with the Journal of Moral Philosophy. This new series will publish books in all areas of normative philosophy, including applied ethics and metaethics, as well as moral, legal, and political theory. Research book proposals exploring non-Western traditions are also welcome. The series seeks to promote lively discussions and debates among the wider philosophical community by publishing work that avoids unnecessary jargon without sacrificing academic rigour.

Prospective authors interested in contributing to this series should contact the Series Editor, Thom Brooks, in the first instance.

PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD!

Call for Papers:

International Conference

Challenging Citizenship

Organization: Centre for Social Studies (CES), University of Coimbra, Portugal

When? June 3–4, 2011

Where? Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra

Language: English, with simultaneous translation into Portuguese

Conference website: http://www.ces.uc.pt/challengingcitizenship

Confirmed invited speakers:

·        James Tully, University of Victoria, Victoria, Canada – Keynote

·        Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Centre for Social Studies, Coimbra, Portugal

·        Duncan Ivison, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

·        João Cardoso Rosas, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal

·        Makau Mutua, SUNY, Buffalo, USA

·        Rainer Bauböck, European University Institute, Florence, Italy

·        Rajeev Bhargava, Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, Delhi, India

·        Roberto Gargarella, University Torcuato Di Tella, Buenos Aires, Argentina

·        Simone Chambers, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

Format

The conference includes, first, plenary sessions where invited speakers will address issues regarding the foundation, justification, scope, and practice of citizenship. Secondly, we invite abstract submissions for a number of panels on the more specific themes outlined below. The invited speakers will serve as discussants for the papers presented in the panels. Contributions from both social scientists and practitioners are welcome.

Summary

All democracies – old and new – are undergoing continuous, unforeseen transformations that strain the institutions’ capacity to represent the demos. Forced and voluntary movements across borders, minority recognition claims, historical injustices, economic inequalities, and gendered inequities constitute solid grounds for contesting traditional conceptions of citizenship. Given the fact of pluralism in contemporary societies, a question naturally arises: how can we re–think practices of citizenship in a way that does justice to the increasingly complex circumstances of democratic politics? The conference seeks to reflect on this question by bringing together participants from both the North and the South. Through these dialogical, interdisciplinary encounters, we hope to shed light on the non–ideal conditions for effectively exercising citizenship today. More specifically, we invite papers that fall within one or more of the following three themes:

(1)     Struggles for recognition and justice

First, we invite reflections on struggles for recognition and justice by previously disenfranchised groups. While the resistance of indigenous peoples to dispossession and usurpation naturally invites academic inquiry, this conference extends the scope of attention to other groups excluded from full political membership. Ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities all over the world face systemic forms of discrimination that leave them politically disenfranchised. In this context, we have to ask ourselves: How should we understand citizenship if the ultimate goal is to critically engage patterns of institutional misrecognition? And how can we reform norms and processes of constitution–making so that they allow for a continuous rectification of recalcitrant injustices? The inclusion of a variety of counter-hegemonic positions is necessary for a meaningful debate around democratic citizenship. Research on actual instances of legal pluralism and on alternative modes of constitution-making can open the path for institutional innovation.

(2)     New dimensions of political freedom

A second set of questions has to do with new dimensions of political freedom. Nowadays, we are witnessing the return of imperialism in various manifestations. When the sovereignty of the state is contested, political freedom comes under threat. At the same time, opportunities for radical transformation and emancipation emerge. Under these circumstances, how can we conceive of political freedom such that it furthers the cause of those excluded from full membership? And in what novel ways can citizens make use of it so as to challenge ingrained legal, political and social norms? Attention to participatory and deliberative practices in the real world, and particularly in the global South, can enrich the mainstream liberal account of democratic citizenship. Participatory budgeting and citizens’ deliberations over health-care provision are just two examples that show how theory needs to remain attuned to the plurality of existing practices.

(3)     Non-ideal theory for non-ideal circumstances?

Last but not least, the position of the political theorist as citizen and expert needs to be scrutinized. Given the complexity of citizenship today, what should be the tasks of the political theorist in the public sphere? How can he/she legitimately fulfil a critical mission without undermining the egalitarianism of democratic citizenship? First, we propose that bridging the gap between abstract theorizing and empirical research is imperative for responsible interventions in deliberative processes. Yet, how this imperative can be achieved remains a matter of contention. Therefore, the conference welcomes contributions addressing the proper balance between description, explanation and prescription in political theory. Second, we argue that epistemic justice is a precondition for political justice. Involving alternative ecologies of knowledge is normatively required by the commitment to equality.

Guidelines for abstract submission

Abstract proposals should be between 300 and 500 words in length. Preferred format for all submissions is RTF or Microsoft Word (doc). Please send your proposals – including your contact information – as attachments to challengingcitizenship@ces.uc.pt and insert “Challenging Citizenship 2011 Submission” as the subject line of the message. The deadline for abstracts is December 31, 2010. All proposals will undergo peer review and notifications of acceptance will be sent out by January 31, 2011.

The 19th Century Philosophically is full of exciting developments that changed our world and that changed philosophy.  The problem that I’ve been having as I work to put together a syllabus for a seminar on it in the spring is that I am tired of a 19th Century course that either just shows the development of German Idealism or that is a hodgepodge of stuff from the aforesaid idealists, utilitarians, darwinians, pragmatists, and positivists (though I think the latter approach better represents the century).  I want to make my course both coherent and interesting, while being faithful to the diversity of approaches found in the anglo-american and european traditions during this time.  My solution follows.  I would love comments that would help me to flesh out this idea (maybe suggesting primary texts that I might use) or to firm the idea up a bit and to focus it. Basically, what I want to do is look at the relationship between scientific knowledge and political power in the 19th Century.  I am thinking of using Rabinow’s French Modern to give some context and to look particularly at theory of and for colonization.  In addition to this anchor text, I plan on looking at Fichte’s Foundations of Natural Right, Bentham on laws, the panopticon and some of his plans for housing of the poor, Saint-Simon, Comte (of course), Marx and Engels, Mill on philosophy of science, and Herbert Spencer.  I would love some other figures to check out, especially women philosophers as this list is unfortunately bereft of them.  Will the idea fly?  Am I not really doing 19th Century Philosophy if I follow through with this plan?  Will I have harmed my students’ philosophical education if I don’t teach Hegel and Nietzsche?

Hello everyone.  I’ve been working on this paper for a few years now and I could really use some feedback.  Here’s a brief abstract:

This paper systematically extends John Rawls’ original position to nonideal theory, showing how it is both reasonable and rational for the parties to a nonideal-theoretic stage of the original position to prioritize a class of “nonideal-theoretic primary goods” over the satisfaction of Rawls’ principles and priority relations (contrary to Rawlsian orthodoxy). I show that there are at least three nonideal-theoretic primary goods, and that the parties to the original position have sufficient reason to agree to certain priority relations among them. Next, I show that the parties rationally ought to agree to a general principle for distributing these goods, and by extension, to three lexically ordered corollary principles for distributing each of the three specific goods discussed.  Finally, I argue that these principles fare well in reflective equilibrium.

Many thanks in advance to anyone who takes the time to read it.  This has been a difficult project, for obvious reasons.  Any helpful feedback is graciously appreciated.  (Note: to anyone who might have read my earlier paper, “Outline of a Nonideal Theory of Justice” on SSRN, this is a much longer, more involved defense of ideas developed there). 

Here’s a link to the paper: foundations.pdf

The Annual Conference of the Canadian Political Science Association takes place in Waterloo, Ontario from May 16-18, 2011.

Loren King and I are the section heads for the political theory section of the conference. I encourage you to consider submitting a paper proposal (deadline is Nov. 3rd) via the online submission site.  And please help spread the word about the conference.

Submissions on any topic in political theory are welcome.

We also invite submissions for our Workshop on the themes Global Justice and Global Governance. Some details about the workshop:

The workshop organizers invite political theorists to submit proposals that explore the themes of global justice and global governance. What obligations and duties do we have to non-nationals? Which principles and (existing or possible) global institutions are best suited to address the diverse concerns that arise in the world today? And which historical figures in the canon of political theory (e.g. Aristotle, Hobbes, Kant, etc.) promote ideas and concepts that can help us address the challenges of today’s interdependent and complex world?

We seek papers that cover these themes, and related issues, from all areas of political theory (e.g. normative theory, history of political thought, applied theory, etc.) that bring precision and reflection to the topics of global justice and global governance. From cosmopolitanism and nationalism, to concerns of global health, immigration and international institutions, we invite papers that link theory to the practical concerns that arise in an era of globalization.

The workshop will consist of a number of panels with three papers and a commentator in each panel.

I hope some of you will be able to join us in Waterloo for the CPSA conference in May!

Cheers,
Colin

Stanford University 2011-12 | Deadline: 12 Jan 2011

The Stanford Center for Ethics in Society and the Program on Global Justice are seeking up to four post-doctoral fellows for 2011-12:

“We welcome candidates with substantial normative research interests from diverse backgrounds including philosophy, the social sciences, and professional schools. We are especially interested in candidates with research interests in international topics, including human rights, immigration, and environmental justice, but we welcome all applicants with strong normative interests that have some practical implications. Fellows will teach one class, participate in the Political Theory and Global Justice Workshops, interact with undergraduates in the Ethics in Society program and help in developing an inter-disciplinary ethics community across the campus. Appointment is for one year, but may be renewed for an additional year. Applicants must have their doctoral degree in hand no later than 30 days prior to the appointment start date and be no more than 3 years from the awarding of the degree.”

Applications are to be submitted via an online application system that will be ready later this year. Information about that will be posted on their website. Contact Joan Berry for more details.

sandelbudistinguishedlecture.pdf

Boston University School of Law is pleased to announce the Annual Distinguished Lecture

Justice: What’s the Right Thing To Do?A Public Lecture and Symposium on Michael J. Sandel’s Recent BookOctober 14, 2010Boston University School of Law

Book Symposium: 2:30 to 6:00

Professor Michael J. Sandel will give the annual Boston University School of Law Distinguished Lecture concerning his recent book, Justice: What’s the Right Thing To Do?, followed by a symposium on the book. The symposium will feature commentators in law, philosophy, and political science along with a response by Professor Sandel. Boston University Law Review will publish the lecture, commentaries, and response.

Here is the schedule:

Boston University Law Review Lecture (Barristers Hall, 12:30-2:00 p.m.)

Lecture: Professor Michael J. Sandel, Harvard University

Book Symposium (Barristers Hall, 2:30-6:00)Panel 1 (2:30-3:30)

James Fleming and Linda McClain, BU School of Law

Gary Lawson, BU School of Law

Panel 2 (3:45-4:45)

Hugh Baxter, BU School of Law and Department of Philosophy

Anna di Robilant, BU School of Law

Panel 3 (5:00-6:00)

David Roochnik, BU Department of Philosophy

Judith Swanson, BU Department of Political Science

Reception (6:00)

All - including not only professors, visiting scholars, law students, graduate students, and undergraduates but also alumni and members of the general public - are welcome to attend. There is no registration fee, but if you plan to attend, please RSVP to Andrea Larsen Rice, ajrice@bu.edu. If you have academic questions about the program, please contact Professor James Fleming, jfleming@bu.edu.

Application deadline: 15 November 2010

The Center for Ethics and Public Affairs at Tulane University is inviting applications for faculty fellowships for the 2011-12 academic year. This is something for which anyone working in ethics or political philosophy should definitely consider applying. There’s a super group of value theorists at Tulane and it would be difficult for the Center to be a more hospitable place. Plus New Orleans is a great city to explore: Audubon Park is across St. Charles Avenue from the Center, Magazine Street is not far away, and the streetcar takes you straight downtown to the French Quarter.

For those of you who do not know, Cambridge is about to publish Jerry Gaus’s new book, The Order of Public Reason. It will be out in hardback by the first of next year. Here’s a general description of the book:

In this innovative and important work, Gerald Gaus advances a revised, and more realistic, account of public reason liberalism, showing how, in the midst of fundamental disagreement about values and moral beliefs, we can achieve a moral and political order that treats all as free and equal moral persons. The first part of this work analyzes social morality as a system of authoritative moral rules. Drawing on an earlier generation of moral philosophers such as Kurt Baier and Peter Strawson as well as current work in the social sciences, Gaus argues that our social morality is an evolved social fact, which is the necessary foundation of a mutually beneficial social order. The second part considers how this system of social moral authority can be justified to all moral persons. Drawing on the tools of game theory, social choice theory, experimental psychology, and evolutionary theory, Gaus shows how a free society can secure a moral equilibrium that is endorsed by all, and how a just state respects, and develops, such an equilibrium.

Given the orientation of the blog, I suspect the book will be of interest. Would anyone be interested in running a reading group here?

This is a call for papers for a Panel(s) on ‘Genetics and Justice’ for the forthcoming PSA Conference in London. The conference takes place from the 19-21st April 2011 and the conference theme is ‘Transforming Politics: New Synergies’, including the notion of developing new and revisiting old theory.
 
Panel Organiser/Chair: Dr. Oliver Feeney, National University of Ireland, Galway oliver.p.feeney@nuigalway.ie

Panel Abstract: This PSA Panel seeks to explore how current and speculative advances in new genetic technologies affect our understanding of social justice. This exploration focuses both on how contemporary theories of social justice can be applied to the ‘post-genetic’ world and also how such attempts to apply these theories may highlight certain strengths and weaknesses within social justice in the first place. Overall, the Panel seeks to answer a narrow question (What access to new genetic technologies would be just?) and a wide question (What does the first answer tell us about justice?). The answer to the wide question will have implications far beyond genetic technology. Papers in any area of the social justice implications of new genetic technologies are very welcome as well as papers that discuss the closely related questions on the treatment versus enhancement distinction, permissible versus morally obligatory interventions, designer disability and respect for parental autonomy versus the rights of the child for an ‘open future’ and so on.

If you are interested, please send an email to me, including a paper title with abstract of not more than 200 words. Submissions must be received by Wednesday 22nd Sept to be considered for the overall 24th Sept deadline for panel proposals. 

What is the single best thing to read about public reason?  Something by Josh Cohen?  David Estlund?  Rawls himself?  Other?  (Particulars appreciated.)  If context matters, say I want something that will convince an opponent that the later Rawlsian approach to liberalism (particularly liberal toleration) works.

The Groupe de recherche interuniversitaire en philosophie politique de Montréal (GRIPP), along with the Research Group on Constitutional Studies (RGCS) and Departments of Philosophy and Political Science at McGill University, will offer one or more postdoctoral fellowships at McGill in 2011-12.

Area of specialization is open within political theory and political philosophy, but we are especially interested in applicants whose research is relevant to one or more of these GRIPP research themes:
1) The history of liberal and democratic thought, especially early modern thought;
2) Moral psychology and political agency, or politics and affect or emotions or rhetoric;
3) Democracy, diversity and pluralism;
4) Democracy, justice, and transnational institutions

Ph.D. must be in hand by 1 September 2011; preference may be given to candidates whose Ph.D.s will be in hand by 15 April 2011. Preference may also be extended to those with a knowledge of French, and to Canadian citizens or permanent residents; please indicate French knowledge and Canadian status in cover letter.

The fellow will be expected to be in residence at McGill for the academic year and to take part in GRIPP and RGCS workshops and conferences. The stipend will be at least $C 27,000 and may be higher. Summer fellowships, paid teaching on top of the stipend, an a research allowance are possible.

Please submit cover letter, CV, a writing sample of one chapter or paper, research statement, and three letters of recommendation via email to GRIPP.postdoc@gmail.com . Materials may be sent if needed to: GRIPP postdoctoral fellowship, Political Science, McGill University, 855 Sherbrooke St W, Montreal QC H3A 2T7, but electronic submission is preferred. Deadline: September 15.

Nominations Open: 21-31 August 2010

Via Abbas Raza, 3 Quarks Daily – the website you should be reading if you are not already — are hosting their second annual prize for the best blog writing in philosophy. Akeel Bilgrami will be the judge. The details of last year’s contest are here. You can nominate blog posts written in English in the last year and not longer than 4000 words.

Eastern APA: 28 Dec 2010

For everyone intending to go to the Eastern APA in Boston this year, the Society for Philosophy and Public Affairs will be holding a session on the Ethics of Compromise in Democracy on Tuesday 28 December, 2010, from 2pm-5pm. We’ll be looking at the topic of political compromise from a number of angles: compromise in international politics, the epistemology of disagreement, and the role of partisanship in politics. There’s been comparatively little systematic work on this ubiquitous political phenomenon, despite its moral and philosophical complexity, so we’ll be hoping to have a discussion that adds impetus to its study.

Chair: Randall Harp (Vermont)
Speakers:
Eric Beerbohm (Harvard): Compromise among Epistemic Peers
Simon Cabulea May (Virginia Tech): Deep Compromise in Partisan Politics
Dan Weinstock (Montreal): Compromises beyond Peace

Problems with Priority?
A one-day conference hosted by the Manchester Centre for Political Theory (MANCEPT)

19th November 2010
10.30am – 5.30pm
University of Manchester, UK

Speakers
Martin O’Neill (York)
Michael Otsuka (University College London)
Thomas Porter (Manchester)
Alex Voorhoeve (LSE)
Andrew Williams (I.C.R.E.A. and Pompeu Fabra University)

Details
The Priority View is widely seen as a leading alternative to egalitarianism that avoids some of the difficulties associated with the latter.  However, in their 2009 Philosophy & Public Affairs article “Why It Matters That Some Are Worse Off Than Others: An Argument against the Priority View” (P&PA vol. 37, no. 2), Michael Otsuka and Alex Voorhoeve have offered a new argument to show that the Priority View is vulnerable to fatal objection.  This conference is devoted to exploration and criticism of that new argument and will include a ‘response to critics’ session with Otsuka and Voorhoeve.

Registration and further details
http://www.socialsciences.manchester.ac.uk/disciplines/politics/events/priority/

Please note: thanks to the Analysis Trust, there are a limited number of subsidised places for graduate students.  These places will be allocated on a first come, first served basis.

Contact
Please contact Noémie Rouault (noemie.rouault@manchester.ac.uk) if you have any queries.

CFP: First Biannual Meeting of the North American Kant Society

The conference is to be held at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign on June 2-4, 2011. Papers can be in any of the three areas of Kant’s philosophy: theoretical, practical or aesthetic. Please identify the area under which you wish your paper to be considered. Papers should not exceed 20 minutes reading time (approx. 3000 words). Papers are due on October 15, 2010 and will be blind reviewed. Please keep identifying information on a separate page. We encourage graduate student submissions. If you are a graduate student, please identify yourself as such. A $100 travel award will be provided for the best graduate paper and this paper will be considered for the annual Markus Herz Prize. Send your submission by email to Sharon Anderson-Gold: anders@rpi.edu

Public Reason, Vol. 2, No. 1, June 2010 is now available online.

Contents:
Lockean Theories of Property: Justifications for Unilateral Appropriation
Karl Widerquist (Georgetown University – Qatar)

Abortion and the Limits of Political Liberalism
Henrik Friberg-Fernros (University of Gothenburg)

On the Public Reason of the Society of Peoples
Alexander Brown (University of East Anglia)

Crooked Wood, Straight Timber – Kant, Development and Nature
Rafael Ziegler (Ernst Moritz Arndt University of Greifswald)

Human Security and Liberal Peace – Some Rawlsian Considerations
Alejandro Agafonow (The Autonomous University of Barcelona)

Compulsory Victim Restitution Is Punishment: A Reply to Boonin
Michael Cholbi (California State Polytechnic University)

Book Reviews:

Jonathan Israel, A Revolution of the Mind
Reviewed by Reidar Maliks

Alex Voorhoeve, Conversations on Ethics
Reviewed by Cristian Iftode

G. A. Cohen, Rescuing Justice and Equality
Reviewed by Kevin William Gray

Public Reason is an open access journal of political and moral philosophy,
but it is also available in print (ISSN 2065-7285; EISSN 2065-8958).
Public Reason publishes articles, book
reviews, as well as discussion notes from all the fields of political
philosophy and ethics, including political theory, applied ethics, and
legal philosophy. The Journal encourages the debate around rationality in
politics and ethics in the larger context of the discussion concerning
rationality as a philosophical problem.

Public Reason is committed to a pluralistic approach, promoting
interdisciplinary and original perspectives as long as the ideal of
critical arguing and clarity is respected. The journal is intended for the
international philosophical community, as well as for a broader public
interested in political and moral philosophy. It aims to promote
philosophical exchanges with a special emphasis on issues in, and
discussions on the Eastern European space.

Starting from 2010 Public Reason publishes two issues per year, in June
and December. Public Reason is an open access e-journal, but it is also
available in print.

Via Edward Lewis, the first part of a two-part interview with Stuart White on political philosophy and the left at the New Left Project. Topics include Cohen on luck egalitarianism and freedom.

Visiting Fulbright Chair in the Theory and Practice of Federalism and Constitutionalism, McGill University, Department of Political Science and Research Group on Constitutional Studies, 2011-2012.Open to US citizens (who are not also Canadian citizens or permanent residents); must have received Ph.D. by the end of 2010. Stipend of $US 25,000 for stays of 4-9 months.Specializations: Normative, jurisprudential, comparative, historical, or analytic/formal studies of constitutional theory and practice, with preference for studies that encompass some aspect of constitutional federalism. Methodologically open within political theory and political science, including intellectual and institutional history.For more information please contact me.To apply click here; application deadline August 2.

22nd-23rd July, Budapest

Registration Open, send an email to Molesa@ceu.hu or MiklosiZ@ceu.hu

http://www.ceu.hu/events/2010-07-22/democracy-and-legitimacy-dealing-with-extremism

Twenty years after the fall of Communism we witness an important rise in support for right wing political parties across Europe. In the last European elections the vote shifted to the right dramatically. Worryingly, far right political parties have fared well recently in the UK, Bulgaria, Italy, Austria, the Netherlands and Hungary. All of these countries have representatives from far right wing parties in the European Parliament. Many analysts suggest that people are turning to the far right groups as a reaction to (what they perceive as) shortcomings in democratic regimes.

In the face of these developments several questions arise: what resources does democracy have to resist far right parties? And more generally how should liberal democracy respond to illiberal groups? In many cases, these groups challenge the limits of free speech, making necessary to reflect once again on to what extent and why even “hate speech” ought to be protected against legal restrictions. On a related note, some governments have reacted against some groups by restricting the scope of free association or by interfering with the entry policies of some groups. Are there any limits to private association?

Meanwhile, the rise of the extreme right, together with heightened discrimination and segregation of disadvantaged minority groups give rise to another set of related questions about what governments may do to protect and assist these groups which might not be able to protect themselves, which might not be able to respond to prejudice against them. Is it permissible to restrict privacy rights by registering ethnic data in order to help fight against discrimination? Is it permissible to use such data for the purpose of reverse discrimination?

The conference is motivated by two sets of reasons: on the one hand we aim to discuss how the recent ‘turn to the right’ might affect liberal democracy and what can be done about it. On the other hand, we plan to do this by bringing together experts in both political theory, legal studies, public and social policy. We believe that cross-fertilisation is beneficial for all camps of enquiry.

Timetable:

THURSDAY, 22 JULY

Registration 9:30

Welcome 9:45

Keynote speech 10:00-11:15

T. Christiano, Democratic Authority and International Institutions

            Commented by Andrew Williams

Coffee 11:15-11:30

Panel 1 11:30-13:00

Enzo Rossi, Justice, Legitimacy and (Normative) Authority for Political Realists

Emanuela Ceva, Resolving, Containing, Managing: What Response to Value Conflicts in Politics?

Eszter Kollar, Ethical Insignificance and Political Significance of the Nation

Lunch 13:00-14:00

Panel 2 14:00-15:30

Richard Winfield The Vocabulary of Extremism: State-Sponsored Hate Speech Inciting Violence

Lucia Scaffardi, Freedom of Expression and Its Limits: Racial Hate Speech in Italy

Todd Grabarsky, The Rule of Law and Anti-Hate Speech Legislation in Democratic Germany

Coffee 15:30-15:45

Panel 3 15:45-17:15

Alexa Zellentin, Liberal Neutrality, Equal Citizenship and Cultural Differences

Nils Holtug, Secularism and Liberal Neutrality: The Case of Judges and Religious Symbols

Matthew Clayton, Rebutting Arguments for Religiously-Motivated Disobedience: Rawlsian Considerations

Coffee 17:15-17:30

Panel 4 17:30-19:00

Bernard Rorke, Anti-Roma Speech, Segregation and Discrimination

Stanislav (Stanko) Daniel, Mainstreaming Racism in Politics

Laura Ranca, Media(ted) extremism? Addressing Roma minority representation in Romania’s mainstream media

Wine reception at CEU Japanese Garden 19:00

FRIDAY, 23 JULY

Keynote Speech 10:00-11:15

Anthony Appiah, The theory and practice of cosmopolitanism           

Comments, TBD

Coffee 11:15-11:30

Panel 5 11:30- 13:00

Espen Gamlund, The Requirements of Toleration

Kristian Ekeli, The Political Rights of Anti-liberal Democratic Groups

Ekow Yankah, Rawls, Secular Communication and Exclusion

Lunch 13:00-14:00

Panel 6 14:00-15:30

Willem Korthals Altes, Hate speech, Religion, Discrimination

Janne Teller, May Allah Have Mercy on My Country

Naser Khader (Pending)

Coffee 15:30-15:45

Panel 7 15:45-17:15

David Heller, Regulating Hate Speech in Cyberspace: Local Norms, Global Inforcement?

Suzette Bronkhorst, The Internet and How Extremists Use Its Full Potential

Ronald Eissens, Liberty, Progress and Extremism: Lessons not Learned

Coffee 17:15-17:30

Panel 8 17:30-18:30

Rastislav Dinic, Tradition, Prejudice and Folk Epistemology

John Harris, Doubts about Democracy

Closing dinner at a restaurant in historic downtown Budapest 19:30