THE REID ROOM, Philosophy, School of Humanities, 69 Oakfield Avenue (except where otherwise noted)
This programme is sponsored by the Royal Institute of Philosophy, of which Glasgow is a branch, and whose support is gratefully acknowledged. Everyone is welcome; students, both postgrads and undergrads, are especially encouraged.
Second semester, 2012-13
08 January — Robert Williams (Leeds): “Decision making under indeterminacy”
15 January — Brian McElvee (St Andrews): “Vividness and the Relativism of Blame”
22 January — Gerald Lang (Leeds): “Theodicy and the Non-Identity Problem”
29 January — Ken Himma (Seattle Pacific U.): “A justification for the legal protection of intellectual property: the argument from investment”
05 February — Mikael Pettersson (Stockholm/Sheffield) “Negative Images: On Photography, Causation and Absences”
12 February — Julien Deonna (Geneva) /Fabrice Teroni (Bern): “Emotions as attitudes”
19 February — NO SEMINAR (hons reading party)
26 February — Marcia Baron (St Andrews) “Reasonableness”
05 March — Chris Hookway
12 March — Ulrike Heuer (Leeds)
19 March — William Mander (Oxford)
16 April — Neil Sinclair (Nottingham)
23 April — TBA
30 April — Simon Kirchin (Kent)
07 May — TBA
14 May — Neil Sinhababu (National University of Singapore)
21 May — TBA
28 May — Philip Meadows
A Series of Lectures by Myriam Bienenstock, Department of Philosophy, University François Rabelais at Tours (France)
Lecture 1: The French Connection, Wednesday, April 10, 5 p.m.
Lecture 2: The German Connection, Wednesday, April 17, 5 p.m.
Lecture 3: The Jewish Connection, Wednesday, April 24, 5 p.m.
This series of lectures is cosponsored by the Elie Wiesel Center for Judaic Studies.
The Boston University Institute for Philosophy & Religion was established in 1969/1970 to explore major issues in philosophy, theology, religion, and the humanities through lectures, colloquia, research projects, and publications. The programs are designed to transcend disciplinary divisions between religious and philosophical inquiry. The institute is an academic unit of the Boston University Graduate School of Arts & Sciences and is cosponsored by the School of Theology, the Department of Religion, and the Department of Philosophy. Funding for this year’s lecture series has been generously provided by the Boston University Center for the Humanities.
Please see the website for more detailed information.
The symposium aims to address the emerging new faces of philosophy of religion that expand on the wider cultural issues of theorizing religion today. Topics to be addressed range from how ideology critique has come to change the face of studying religion academically and whether theology and religious studies can or should, in the context of post-phenomenological debates, co-exist in the university, to whether traditional philosophy of religion, as distinct from philosophical theology and phenomenology of religion, is more properly philosophy of religious studies.
The subject matter is a pressing one. Philosophy of religion is changing so rapidly that many wonder, more now than ever, in what it consists. This often raises the urgent question whether philosophy of religion should persist. The symposiasts offer ways in which to mitigate the issues, underlining the importance of reflexivity in the context of religion and not philosophy alone.
All speakers:
John D. Caputo (Villanova University)
Carl Raschke (University of Denver)
Tyler Roberts (Grinnell College)
Pamela Anderson (Oxford University)
Maurice Boutin (McGill University)
Wesley Wildman (Boston University)
Clayton Crockett (University of Central Arkansas)
Jim Kanaris (McGill University)
Morny Joy (University of Calgary)
Jin Park (American University)
Nick Trakakis (Australian Catholic University)
Conference Schedule:
BREAKFAST (SENIOR COMMON ROOM) 8:00 AM
Symposiasts are cordially invited to a light breakfast
SESSION 1 9:00‐10:30
SESSION 2 10:45‐12:15
LUNCH (SENIOR COMMON ROOM) 12:15‐1:30
Symposiasts are cordially invited to a light lunch
SESSION 3 1:30‐3:00
SESSION 4 3:15‐5:30
DINNER (FACULTY CLUB)* 7:00 PM
Symposiasts are cordially invited to dinner
THE REID ROOM, Philosophy, School of Humanities, 69 Oakfield Avenue (except where otherwise noted)
This programme is sponsored by the Royal Institute of Philosophy, of which Glasgow is a branch, and whose support is gratefully acknowledged. Everyone is welcome; students, both postgrads and undergrads, are especially encouraged.
Second semester, 2012-13
08 January — Robert Williams (Leeds): “Decision making under indeterminacy”
15 January — Brian McElvee (St Andrews): “Vividness and the Relativism of Blame”
22 January — Gerald Lang (Leeds): “Theodicy and the Non-Identity Problem”
29 January — Ken Himma (Seattle Pacific U.): “A justification for the legal protection of intellectual property: the argument from investment”
05 February — Mikael Pettersson (Stockholm/Sheffield) “Negative Images: On Photography, Causation and Absences”
12 February — Julien Deonna (Geneva) /Fabrice Teroni (Bern): “Emotions as attitudes”
19 February — NO SEMINAR (hons reading party)
26 February — Marcia Baron (St Andrews) “Reasonableness”
05 March — Chris Hookway
12 March — Ulrike Heuer (Leeds)
19 March — William Mander (Oxford)
16 April — Neil Sinclair (Nottingham)
23 April — TBA
30 April — Simon Kirchin (Kent)
07 May — TBA
14 May — Neil Sinhababu (National University of Singapore)
21 May — TBA
28 May — Philip Meadows
“Suppose we went on a mission to Mars…
…and found a domed structure in which everything was set up just right for life to exist. The temperature, for example, was set around 70o F and the humidity was at 50%; moreover, there was an oxygen recycling system, an energy gathering system, and a whole system for the production of food. Put simply, the domed structure appeared to be a fully functioning biosphere. What conclusion would we draw from finding this structure? Would we draw the conclusion that it just happened to form by chance? Certainly not. Instead, we would unanimously conclude that it was designed by some intelligent being. Why would we draw this conclusion? Because an intelligent designer appears to be the only plausible explanation for the existence of the structure. That is, the only alternative explanation we can think of–that the structure was formed by some natural process–seems extremely unlikely. Of course, it is possible that, for example, through some volcanic eruption various metals and other compounds could have formed, and then separated out in just the right way to produce the “biosphere,” but such a scenario strikes us as extraordinarily unlikely, thus making this alternative explanation unbelievable.”
Robin Collins (Ph.D., University of Notre Dame) is Distinguished Professor of Philosophy and Chair of the Department of Philosophy at Messiah College in Pennsylvania. He has graduate level training in theoretical physics and has written over thirty-five substantial articles and book chapters on a wide range of topics in philosophy of physics, philosophy of religion, and philosophy of mind. He is one the world’s leading experts on the fine-tuning of the cosmos for life and its philosophical and theological implications, and is currently finishing two books on the topic: one that carefully explicates the physics and cosmology behind claims of cosmic fine-tuning and one that carefully works through the potential implications of the fine-tuning evidence.
The Centre for Philosophy & Phenomenology of Religion (Australian Catholic University)
invites you to:
Discussion of Falque’s Metamorphosis of Finitude
The Centre for Philosophy & Phenomenology of Religion (Australian Catholic University)
invites you to:
Prof. Falque will present a seminar paper on “Phenomenology and Theology: Testing the Boundaries”
Abstract: For many years now phenomenology in France has been the origin of theological renewal. The publication in France of The Theological
Turn of French Phenomenology clearly marked this, and many authors fit in this project, including Levinas, Ricoeur, Henry, Marion, Chrétien,
and Lacoste. However, is it enough to study theology starting from phenomenology? Can we not also imagine a “return shock”, traveling back
from theology onto phenomenology, which even comes to modify phenomenology itself? By “crossing the Rubicon” or transgressing the
boundaries, each will be further enriched in its own discipline.
THE REID ROOM, Philosophy, School of Humanities, 69 Oakfield Avenue (except where otherwise noted)
This programme is sponsored by the Royal Institute of Philosophy, of which Glasgow is a branch, and whose support is gratefully acknowledged. Everyone is welcome; students, both postgrads and undergrads, are especially encouraged.
Second semester, 2012-13
08 January — Robert Williams (Leeds): “Decision making under indeterminacy”
15 January — Brian McElvee (St Andrews): “Vividness and the Relativism of Blame”
22 January — Gerald Lang (Leeds): “Theodicy and the Non-Identity Problem”
29 January — Ken Himma (Seattle Pacific U.): “A justification for the legal protection of intellectual property: the argument from investment”
05 February — Mikael Pettersson (Stockholm/Sheffield) “Negative Images: On Photography, Causation and Absences”
12 February — Julien Deonna (Geneva) /Fabrice Teroni (Bern): “Emotions as attitudes”
19 February — NO SEMINAR (hons reading party)
26 February — Marcia Baron (St Andrews) “Reasonableness”
05 March — Chris Hookway
12 March — Ulrike Heuer (Leeds)
19 March — William Mander (Oxford)
16 April — Neil Sinclair (Nottingham)
23 April — TBA
30 April — Simon Kirchin (Kent)
07 May — TBA
14 May — Neil Sinhababu (National University of Singapore)
21 May — TBA
28 May — Philip Meadows
The Centre for Philosophy & Phenomenology of Religion (Australian Catholic University)
invites you to:
Prof. Falque will present a seminar paper on “Toward a Philosophy of the Eucharist”
Abstract: The description of philosophical experiences is always the source for the renewal of theological dogmas. The gift of “this is my
body” in the Eucharist will neither be heard in this sense nor understood independently of the gift of bodies between spouses or of a valid
consideration of the density of our own bodies today. Since “all that is not assumed is not saved,” the Eucharist joins the chaos of our humanity
– even our animality – in order to incorporate and transform it in the Triune God.