In collaboration with the Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities, the
London Conference in Critical Thought (LCCT) is designed to create a space
for an interdisciplinary exchange of ideas for scholars who work with
“critical” traditions and concerns. We welcome work from the humanities and
social sciences, including but not limited to papers drawing upon
continental philosophy, critical legal theory, critical geography and the
Frankfurt School. The LCCT aims to provide an opportunity for those who
frequently find themselves at the margins of their department or discipline
to engage with other scholars who share theoretical approaches and
interests. Interdisciplinary and inter-institutional, the conference hopes to
foster emergent critical thought and provide new avenues for critically
orientated scholarship and collaboration.
Scholars working in
philosophy, literature, geography, law, art, and politics departments have
already proposed panels and/or streams for the conference. These address
issues as diverse as animality, sovereignty, human rights, cosmopolitanism,
the city, and the relationship between text and space. Through these streams
participants are encouraged to engage with a variety of thinkers including
Kant, Deleuze, Marx, Lacan, Foucault, Spinoza and Derrida, to name a few.
http://londonconferenceincriticalthought.wordpress.com/
Showing posts with label History: Twentieth Century: Continental. Show all posts
Showing posts with label History: Twentieth Century: Continental. Show all posts
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Seventh Annual Meeting, Comparative and Continental Philosophy Circle, San Diego University, March 8-10, 2012.
Keynote Speakers:
Douglas Kellner (UCLA)
Brian Schroeder (Rochester Institute of Technology)
For more information, visit http://www.comcontphilosophy.org/.
Douglas Kellner (UCLA)
Brian Schroeder (Rochester Institute of Technology)
For more information, visit http://www.comcontphilosophy.org/.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Prado, C. G. Review of Jeff Malpas, ed. DIALOGUES WITH DAVIDSON. NDPR (October 2011).
Malpas, Jeff,
ed. Dialogues with Davidson: Acting,
Interpreting, Understanding. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press, 2011.
This is an impressive collection, though one defying brief review. It consists of an illuminating Foreword, a clear, stage-setting Introduction, twenty articles in three topical sections, and an extensive Bibliography. The orientation of the collection turns on Jeff Malpas' attempt to cast Donald Davidson's work as broader than the narrowly analytic corpus many take it to be: e.g., Ernest LePore. (xviii) Another collection in this vein, to which I refer below, is Ludwig 2003.
Two comments on the orientation before turning to the articles: first, no one, including the philosopher in question, can legitimately limit interpretation of and extrapolation from a philosophical corpus. Second, that said, I had the privilege of meeting Davidson and commenting on his "A Nice Derangement of Epitaphs" two years before its publication. (Queen's University, 9/27/84). I drew a parallel between him and Gadamer that Davidson resisted. He seems later to have changed his mind to some extent, but I suspect he would be ambivalent about several of this collection's articles, despite their being as intellectually productive as they are convincingly supportive of Malpas' view of Davidson's work.
I proceed by saying a bit about each article and more about those I found most interesting. I will say now that this is a book anyone interested in Davidson should own.
A preliminary point: the collection's articles are "dialogues" with Davidson; discussion of his work in relation to continental thinkers is not about one-way or reciprocal influences but about parallels in philosophical thought. It is one thing to draw parallels, though, and another to exploit them: a difference evident in the more and less successful articles. . . .
http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/26831-dialogues-with-davidson-acting-interpreting-understanding/
This is an impressive collection, though one defying brief review. It consists of an illuminating Foreword, a clear, stage-setting Introduction, twenty articles in three topical sections, and an extensive Bibliography. The orientation of the collection turns on Jeff Malpas' attempt to cast Donald Davidson's work as broader than the narrowly analytic corpus many take it to be: e.g., Ernest LePore. (xviii) Another collection in this vein, to which I refer below, is Ludwig 2003.
Two comments on the orientation before turning to the articles: first, no one, including the philosopher in question, can legitimately limit interpretation of and extrapolation from a philosophical corpus. Second, that said, I had the privilege of meeting Davidson and commenting on his "A Nice Derangement of Epitaphs" two years before its publication. (Queen's University, 9/27/84). I drew a parallel between him and Gadamer that Davidson resisted. He seems later to have changed his mind to some extent, but I suspect he would be ambivalent about several of this collection's articles, despite their being as intellectually productive as they are convincingly supportive of Malpas' view of Davidson's work.
I proceed by saying a bit about each article and more about those I found most interesting. I will say now that this is a book anyone interested in Davidson should own.
A preliminary point: the collection's articles are "dialogues" with Davidson; discussion of his work in relation to continental thinkers is not about one-way or reciprocal influences but about parallels in philosophical thought. It is one thing to draw parallels, though, and another to exploit them: a difference evident in the more and less successful articles. . . .
http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/26831-dialogues-with-davidson-acting-interpreting-understanding/
Fritzman, J. M. Review of Thomas Nenon, ed. KANT, KANTIANISM, AND IDEALISM. NDPR (October 2011).
Nenon, Thomas, ed. Kant, Kantianism, and Idealism: the
Origins of Continental Philosophy. Vol.
1 of The History of
Continental Philosophy. 8 Vols. Gen. Ed. Alan D. Schrift. Chicago: U of Chicago P,
2010.
This is the first of eight volumes in the series The History of Continental Philosophy. In his introductory chapter, Thomas Nenon notes that, in contrast to analytic philosophy, continental philosophy developed through a deep and sustained dialogue with Kant's philosophy and those thinkers influenced by it in France and Germany during the nineteenth century. He is correct; Kant's philosophy begins its rehabilitation in analytic philosophy with the 1966 publications of Jonathan Bennett's Kant's Analytic and Peter Strawson's Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. He also observes that, although Kant's philosophy has now been appropriated by both analytic and continental philosophy, the other philosophers discussed in this book have generally been ignored in analytic philosophy.
Nenon writes that the French Revolution was taken by Kant to directly challenge two of the fundamental beliefs of the Enlightenment. The first belief was that enlightenment is compatible with order, stability, and the gradual reform of political and social institutions. The second was that progress in any one area of human endeavor would be mirrored by progress in other areas. Nenon suggests that there were two chief responses to this challenge. The "romantic view" of Fichte, the early Hegel, and Marx maintained that progress will result in the elimination of the state. The "realist position" of the later Hegel held that the rational state is not only required for progress but is itself an instance of that progress.
This is the first of eight volumes in the series The History of Continental Philosophy. In his introductory chapter, Thomas Nenon notes that, in contrast to analytic philosophy, continental philosophy developed through a deep and sustained dialogue with Kant's philosophy and those thinkers influenced by it in France and Germany during the nineteenth century. He is correct; Kant's philosophy begins its rehabilitation in analytic philosophy with the 1966 publications of Jonathan Bennett's Kant's Analytic and Peter Strawson's Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. He also observes that, although Kant's philosophy has now been appropriated by both analytic and continental philosophy, the other philosophers discussed in this book have generally been ignored in analytic philosophy.
Nenon writes that the French Revolution was taken by Kant to directly challenge two of the fundamental beliefs of the Enlightenment. The first belief was that enlightenment is compatible with order, stability, and the gradual reform of political and social institutions. The second was that progress in any one area of human endeavor would be mirrored by progress in other areas. Nenon suggests that there were two chief responses to this challenge. The "romantic view" of Fichte, the early Hegel, and Marx maintained that progress will result in the elimination of the state. The "realist position" of the later Hegel held that the rational state is not only required for progress but is itself an instance of that progress.
Following this introductory chapter, there are ten that discuss specific philosophers. . . .
"Varieties of Continental Thought and Religion," Ryerson University, June 15-16, 2012.
We invite submissions from scholars and graduate students based in Canada and
abroad on the topic of Continental Thought and Religion. The general theme of
the conference is meant to reflect the variety of articulations of religion that
have emerged in contemporary European thought. While the focus of the conference
is continental thought, we nonetheless conceive the latter in an
interdisciplinary manner (including literary theory, social and political
thought, psychoanalysis, and religious studies). We also encourage submissions
from people interested in exploring possible connections with analytic
philosophy.
Confirmed Speakers: John Caputo (Syracuse U.), Bettina Bergo (U. de Montréal), more to be announced in the near future.
In addition to our keynote speaker, John Caputo, we will have four commissioned workshops comprised of two papers and a response, and a series of themed panels. We invite submissions of three-page proposals for essays for the following themed panels with included possible topics:
Phenomenology of Religion
The thought of Chrétien, Henry, Lacoste, Levinas, Marion, and Ricoeur
Topics: the gift; the work of art; appearance and transcendence; call and response
Religion and Politics
The thought of Agamben, Asad, Connolly, Derrida, de Vries, Girard, Habermas, Schmitt, and Taylor
Topics: political theology; the post-secular; sovereignty; religion and violence; pluralism
Religion and Speculative Realism
The thought of Brassier, Harman, Laruelle, and Meillassoux
Topics: materialism; correlationism; nihilism; the things themselves; divine inexistence; ‘future Christ’
Beyond Theism and Atheism
The thought of Caputo, Kearney, Kristeva, Milbank, Vattimo
Topics: kenosis; anatheism; weak theology; a/theology; radical orthodoxy
Continental Thought, Religion, and Aesthetics
The artwork of Bresson, Caravaggio, Celan, Chagall, Dostoyevsky, Dumont, Artemisia Gentileschi, Kahlo, Kapoor, Kiarostami, Kiefer, Malick, Newman, O'Keefe, and Stevens
The thought of Cavell, Cixous, Critchley, Irigaray, Marion, Nancy, and Rancière
Topics: transcendence in art; image and icon; creativity and creation; representation and idolatry
Immanentism and Religion
Agamben, Badiou, Bergson, Deleuze, James, Foucault, Keller, and Žižek
Topics: self-organization; the event; plurality; bio-power; polydoxy
History of Continental Thought and Religion
Spinoza, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Freud, Benjamin, Heidegger
Topics: death of God; reason and faith; scripture and philosophy; religion and fantasy; onto-theology
Please send only one three-page (double-spaced) proposal on one of the above themes and any questions to varieties2012@gmail.com by December 31, 2011
Confirmed Speakers: John Caputo (Syracuse U.), Bettina Bergo (U. de Montréal), more to be announced in the near future.
In addition to our keynote speaker, John Caputo, we will have four commissioned workshops comprised of two papers and a response, and a series of themed panels. We invite submissions of three-page proposals for essays for the following themed panels with included possible topics:
Phenomenology of Religion
The thought of Chrétien, Henry, Lacoste, Levinas, Marion, and Ricoeur
Topics: the gift; the work of art; appearance and transcendence; call and response
Religion and Politics
The thought of Agamben, Asad, Connolly, Derrida, de Vries, Girard, Habermas, Schmitt, and Taylor
Topics: political theology; the post-secular; sovereignty; religion and violence; pluralism
Religion and Speculative Realism
The thought of Brassier, Harman, Laruelle, and Meillassoux
Topics: materialism; correlationism; nihilism; the things themselves; divine inexistence; ‘future Christ’
Beyond Theism and Atheism
The thought of Caputo, Kearney, Kristeva, Milbank, Vattimo
Topics: kenosis; anatheism; weak theology; a/theology; radical orthodoxy
Continental Thought, Religion, and Aesthetics
The artwork of Bresson, Caravaggio, Celan, Chagall, Dostoyevsky, Dumont, Artemisia Gentileschi, Kahlo, Kapoor, Kiarostami, Kiefer, Malick, Newman, O'Keefe, and Stevens
The thought of Cavell, Cixous, Critchley, Irigaray, Marion, Nancy, and Rancière
Topics: transcendence in art; image and icon; creativity and creation; representation and idolatry
Immanentism and Religion
Agamben, Badiou, Bergson, Deleuze, James, Foucault, Keller, and Žižek
Topics: self-organization; the event; plurality; bio-power; polydoxy
History of Continental Thought and Religion
Spinoza, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Freud, Benjamin, Heidegger
Topics: death of God; reason and faith; scripture and philosophy; religion and fantasy; onto-theology
Please send only one three-page (double-spaced) proposal on one of the above themes and any questions to varieties2012@gmail.com by December 31, 2011
Thursday, May 05, 2011
Cfp: "Thinking the Absolute: Speculation, Philosophy and the End of Religion," Association for Continental Philosophy of Religion, Liverpool Hope University, June 29-July 1, 2012.
Keynote Speakers: Ray Brassier, Levi Bryant, Iain Hamilton Grant and Catherine Malabou
‘The contemporary end of metaphysics is an end which, being sceptical, could only be a religious end of metaphysics.' Quentin Meillassoux, After Finitude: an Essay on the Necessity of Contingency (London: Continuum, 2008).
Meillassoux identifies the ‘turn to religion' in contemporary continental philosophy with a failure of thinking. The Kantian refusal to think the absolute leads to scepticism about reality in itself. Ironically, this lends itself to ‘fideism', the decision to project religious meaning on to the unknowable beyond. According to Meillassoux, a philosophy obsessed with mystery becomes the accomplice of irrational faith. The solution is to find ways of once more thinking the absolute in its reality, severed from its dependence upon a knowing subject, or upon language and social norms. At the same time, new possibilities for thinking religion (exemplified by Meillassoux's own Divine Inexistence) are emerging.
This conference invites proposals which critically consider this speculative turn in philosophy and its implications for thinking about religion. To what ‘end' is speculation leading? Does it simply announce the closure of religion and its subordination to a philosophy of the absolute, nature or the ‘All'? Can it open new lines for a philosophy of religion which is not wedded to the Kantian horizon? Is speculation itself open to Kierkegaardian critique as yet another move to position and reduce ethical and religious claims, sacrificing the future on the altar of abstract possibility? Does renewed attention to the canon of speculative idealism offer a way beyond the impasse between relativism and dogmatism?
The organisers welcome proposals which examine the roots and extensity of recent speculative thinking, and which critically consider its impact - direct and indirect - on philosophy of religion. Relevant thinkers and themes might include Quentin Meillassoux on God and the absolute, Alain Badiou's ontology, Catherine Malabou on Hegel and plasticity, Francois Laruelle's ‘future Christ', Iain Hamilton Grant on Schelling's Naturphilosophie and the thinking of the All, Ray Brassier's nihilism. However, we are particularly looking for contributions which creatively use or depart from the speculative turn to offer original insights into the nature and content of the field.
Visit: http://www.hope.ac.uk/acpr/call-for-papers.html.
‘The contemporary end of metaphysics is an end which, being sceptical, could only be a religious end of metaphysics.' Quentin Meillassoux, After Finitude: an Essay on the Necessity of Contingency (London: Continuum, 2008).
Meillassoux identifies the ‘turn to religion' in contemporary continental philosophy with a failure of thinking. The Kantian refusal to think the absolute leads to scepticism about reality in itself. Ironically, this lends itself to ‘fideism', the decision to project religious meaning on to the unknowable beyond. According to Meillassoux, a philosophy obsessed with mystery becomes the accomplice of irrational faith. The solution is to find ways of once more thinking the absolute in its reality, severed from its dependence upon a knowing subject, or upon language and social norms. At the same time, new possibilities for thinking religion (exemplified by Meillassoux's own Divine Inexistence) are emerging.
This conference invites proposals which critically consider this speculative turn in philosophy and its implications for thinking about religion. To what ‘end' is speculation leading? Does it simply announce the closure of religion and its subordination to a philosophy of the absolute, nature or the ‘All'? Can it open new lines for a philosophy of religion which is not wedded to the Kantian horizon? Is speculation itself open to Kierkegaardian critique as yet another move to position and reduce ethical and religious claims, sacrificing the future on the altar of abstract possibility? Does renewed attention to the canon of speculative idealism offer a way beyond the impasse between relativism and dogmatism?
The organisers welcome proposals which examine the roots and extensity of recent speculative thinking, and which critically consider its impact - direct and indirect - on philosophy of religion. Relevant thinkers and themes might include Quentin Meillassoux on God and the absolute, Alain Badiou's ontology, Catherine Malabou on Hegel and plasticity, Francois Laruelle's ‘future Christ', Iain Hamilton Grant on Schelling's Naturphilosophie and the thinking of the All, Ray Brassier's nihilism. However, we are particularly looking for contributions which creatively use or depart from the speculative turn to offer original insights into the nature and content of the field.
Visit: http://www.hope.ac.uk/acpr/call-for-papers.html.
Friday, April 15, 2011
"Speculative Philosophies and Religious Practices: New Directions in the Philosophy of Religion and Post-Secular Practical Theology," Centre for Faiths and Public Policy, University of Chester, June 1, 2011.
This workshop is a one-day workshop exploring the intersection between recent trends in continental philosophy of religion and realist versions of public theology. It is an interrogation of the implications – whether political, theological or practical – of the turn to the Real in recent thought. From the perspective of public and practical theology, this involves bolstering the realist strands of the discipline (Manchester Realism and the William Temple Foundation) with the resources of philosophy, constructing a philosophical toolkit for realist public theologians. John Reader and Christopher Baker’s Entering the New Theological Space, for example, has already started drawing on post-Derridean philosophies as theoretical background to their theological enterprises, moving beyond the sociological and pragmatic basis that public theologians have traditionally found sufficient; there is a growing realisation, however, that a new generation of philosophers – the philosophers of the speculative turn – may well be more fruitful for deepening and broadening public theology’s self-understanding. Therefore and from the perspective of philosophy of religion, this interrogation of the Real involves thinking through the consequences of continental philosophy of religion’s recent flirtations with a more realist brand of speculation. The philosophies of Alain Badiou, Slavoj Zizek, Graham Harman, Iain Hamilton Grant and Quentin Meillassoux are beginning to be felt throughout the humanities, and the papers in this workshop, following the lead established in Smith and Whistler’s After the Postsecular and the Postmodern, will begin to think through the broader impact of this new tendency, especially as it impacts on philosophy of religion. In other words, the guiding question for the day is: what has the speculative turn in continental philosophy of religion to do with religious practice? This workshop brings together public theologians and philosophers of religion to inhabit the intersection between philosophical theory and religious phenomena.
See: http://www.chester.ac.uk/sites/files/chester/Speculative%20Philosophies%20and%20Religious%20Practices%20-%20vs%202.pdf.
See: http://www.chester.ac.uk/sites/files/chester/Speculative%20Philosophies%20and%20Religious%20Practices%20-%20vs%202.pdf.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Cfp: Annual Conference, Canadian Society for Continental Philosophy, Memorial University of Newfoundland, October 6-8, 2011.
Keynote Speakers:
James Mensch (St. Francis Xavier University), Winner of the 2010 Symposium Annual Book Prize
Alia Al-Saji (McGill University)
Sophie-Jan Arrien (Université Laval)
John Russon (University of Guelph)
Peter Trnka (Memorial University of Newfoundland)
Visit: http://www.c-scp.org/en/congress-parent/congress.html.
James Mensch (St. Francis Xavier University), Winner of the 2010 Symposium Annual Book Prize
Alia Al-Saji (McGill University)
Sophie-Jan Arrien (Université Laval)
John Russon (University of Guelph)
Peter Trnka (Memorial University of Newfoundland)
Visit: http://www.c-scp.org/en/congress-parent/congress.html.
Monday, April 11, 2011
"Creation, Creatureliness, and Creativity: the Human Place in the Natural World," Annual Conference, Society for Continental Philosophy and Theology, Loyola Marymount University, April 20-22, 2012.
Keynote Speakers:
Bruce Foltz (Eckerd College)
Janet Martin Soskice (Cambridge University)
Norman Wirzba (Duke Divinity School)
SCPT's 2012 conference takes today’s ecological crises as its point of departure. We invite theological and philosophical contributions informed by continental traditions such as phenomenology, hermeneutics, eco-feminism, post-structuralism, post-colonial studies, deconstruction, and social and deep ecology that help us understand and implement a sustainable future together. Authors may submit papers that address ecological issues head on, as well as those that tackle philosophical and theological themes that underlie these issues.
The Society for Continental Philosophy and Theology seeks to promote inquiry at the intersection of philosophy and theology. For more information about SCPT, visit http://www.scptonline.org/.
Bruce Foltz (Eckerd College)
Janet Martin Soskice (Cambridge University)
Norman Wirzba (Duke Divinity School)
SCPT's 2012 conference takes today’s ecological crises as its point of departure. We invite theological and philosophical contributions informed by continental traditions such as phenomenology, hermeneutics, eco-feminism, post-structuralism, post-colonial studies, deconstruction, and social and deep ecology that help us understand and implement a sustainable future together. Authors may submit papers that address ecological issues head on, as well as those that tackle philosophical and theological themes that underlie these issues.
The Society for Continental Philosophy and Theology seeks to promote inquiry at the intersection of philosophy and theology. For more information about SCPT, visit http://www.scptonline.org/.
Wednesday, March 02, 2011
LaZella, Andrew. Review of Jon Stewart, IDEALISM AND EXISTENTIALISM. NDPR (February 2011).
Stewart, Jon. Idealism and Existentialism: Hegel and Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century European Philosophy. London: Continuum, 2010.
The world of Continental philosophy has been shaped by two irreconcilable schools: German idealism on the one hand and phenomenology/existentialism on the other. If they can be called a tradition at all, it is not one of shared inheritance, but of continued revolt. Phenomenology/existentialism disdains German idealism's goal of seeking systematic totality insofar as it loses sight of the lived-experience of the individual human being. True, the idealist would argue that such lived-experience has not been lost, but preserved, albeit in a higher form and according to its immanent rational structure. For phenomenology/existentialism, however, such rational preservation renders inert and lifeless the very dynamism and spontaneity that characterized lived-experience in the first place. The distinction between the two can be simplified to various sets of irreconcilable dichotomies: systematicity vs. individuality, rational necessity vs. freedom, and so on.
This is the misconceived caricature that Jon Stewart's Idealism and Existentialism seeks to shatter. In this work, Stewart challenges this purported truism of irreconcilable antagonists by displaying the wealth of factors the two schools share, even if not always with the same intentions or toward the same results. The text is divided into three parts: The first covers Hegel and German idealism, exploring myths surrounding Hegel as an "arch-rationalist" in addition to more technical studies on the Phenomenology of Spirit. The second part takes up the relation between Hegelian idealism and the forms of proto-existentialism found in Schopenhauer, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche, targeting points of contact between supposed antagonists. The third part turns to a study of existentialism proper, with particular emphasis on the thought of Sartre and Merleau-Ponty.
For reasons to be discussed below, the thesis proposed in the introduction does little to unite this work into an integrated whole, and instead the chapters remain a series of loosely related studies. Stewart himself notes: "While the individual chapters each pursue their own goals with respect to specific texts or concepts, they are united in their attempt to reveal in one way or another the long shadow cast by Kant and Hegel over the subsequent history of European thought" (2). At times, the thesis shines through the individualized studies. With all but one chapter having been published previously, however, these stand-alone studies only indirectly reinforce each other to form a unified project. Although various elements of the text succeed, the project of bringing the two traditions closer together remains underdeveloped, making for a somewhat loosely stitched-together patchwork whose overall contribution could be enhanced by greater communication among the chapters themselves. . . .
Read the rest here: http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=22810.
The world of Continental philosophy has been shaped by two irreconcilable schools: German idealism on the one hand and phenomenology/existentialism on the other. If they can be called a tradition at all, it is not one of shared inheritance, but of continued revolt. Phenomenology/existentialism disdains German idealism's goal of seeking systematic totality insofar as it loses sight of the lived-experience of the individual human being. True, the idealist would argue that such lived-experience has not been lost, but preserved, albeit in a higher form and according to its immanent rational structure. For phenomenology/existentialism, however, such rational preservation renders inert and lifeless the very dynamism and spontaneity that characterized lived-experience in the first place. The distinction between the two can be simplified to various sets of irreconcilable dichotomies: systematicity vs. individuality, rational necessity vs. freedom, and so on.
This is the misconceived caricature that Jon Stewart's Idealism and Existentialism seeks to shatter. In this work, Stewart challenges this purported truism of irreconcilable antagonists by displaying the wealth of factors the two schools share, even if not always with the same intentions or toward the same results. The text is divided into three parts: The first covers Hegel and German idealism, exploring myths surrounding Hegel as an "arch-rationalist" in addition to more technical studies on the Phenomenology of Spirit. The second part takes up the relation between Hegelian idealism and the forms of proto-existentialism found in Schopenhauer, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche, targeting points of contact between supposed antagonists. The third part turns to a study of existentialism proper, with particular emphasis on the thought of Sartre and Merleau-Ponty.
For reasons to be discussed below, the thesis proposed in the introduction does little to unite this work into an integrated whole, and instead the chapters remain a series of loosely related studies. Stewart himself notes: "While the individual chapters each pursue their own goals with respect to specific texts or concepts, they are united in their attempt to reveal in one way or another the long shadow cast by Kant and Hegel over the subsequent history of European thought" (2). At times, the thesis shines through the individualized studies. With all but one chapter having been published previously, however, these stand-alone studies only indirectly reinforce each other to form a unified project. Although various elements of the text succeed, the project of bringing the two traditions closer together remains underdeveloped, making for a somewhat loosely stitched-together patchwork whose overall contribution could be enhanced by greater communication among the chapters themselves. . . .
Read the rest here: http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=22810.
Pub: Goodfellow, Aaron, ed. Religion and Sexuality. BORDERLANDS 9.3 (2010).
INTRODUCTION
- Aaron Goodfellow, "Religion/Sexuality: Politics/Affects"
- Veena Das, "Sexuality, Vulnerability, and the Oddness of the Human: Lessons from the Mahabharata"
- Naveeda Khan, "Images That Come Unbidden: Some thoughts on the Danish cartoons controversy"
- Éric Fassin, "Celibate Priests, Continent Homosexuals: What the exclusion of gay (and gay-friendly) men from priesthood reveals about the political nature of the Roman Catholic Church"
- Deepak Mehta, "Self-Dissolution, Politics and the Work of Affect: The life and death of Sufi Baba"
- Bhrigupati Singh, "Asceticism and Eroticism in Gandhi, Thoreau and Nietzsche: An essay in geo-philosophy"
- François-David Sebbah, "Erotic Face and Ethical Face After Levinas"
- Dinesh Joseph Wadiwel, "A Human Right to Stupidity" (Jacques Derrida, The Beast and the Sovereign Volume 1, trans. Geoffrey Bennington, Chicago and London: Chicago University Press, 2009.)
- Vineeth Mathoor, (Anouar Majid, We Are All Moors: Ending Centuries of Crusades against Muslims and Other Minorities, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2009.)
- Guy Lancaster, "Promoting Conflict or Peace through Identity" (Nikki Slocum-Bradley (ed.), Promoting Conflict or Peace through Identity, Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2008.)
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Cfp: "The Time(s) of Our Lives," Annual Meeting, Australasian Society of Continental Philosophy, La Trobe University, December 12-14, 2011.
Keynote Speakers:
Professor Elizabeth Grosz (Rutgers University)
Professor John McCumber (UCLA)
Professor James Williams (University of Dundee)
In the 1980s, US economist Jeremy Rifkin claimed that, “a battle is brewing over the politics of time.” He felt that the pivotal issue of the twenty-first century would be the question of time and who controlled it. In this conference, we open up the possibility that a battle over the politics (and philosophy) of time is also what is at stake in the differences between various major currents of contemporary European philosophy.
This is arguably so despite there being a metaphilosophical agreement amongst the vast majority of continental philosophers, which is that starting with the supposition of the ultimate truth of objective time is the wrong way to go, since the time of our lives will not be able to be adequately reconstructed, as David Hoy suggests.
Indeed, the endorsement (and rejection) of various different philosophical methods is partly bound up with their success (and failure) in illuminating the relationship between time and the socio-political. Consider the following methods: dialectics, transcendental reasoning post-Kant, genealogy, hermeneutical and psychoanalytic techniques, Heidegger’s destructive retrieve, Derridean deconstruction, the Frankfurt School style critique of modernity, as well as the general wariness of aligning philosophical method with either common sense or a deferential relationship to the findings of the sciences. From Husserl’s genetic phenomenology, to Bergson’s durée and the use of intuition as a method which is claimed to put us inside rather than outside time, to Heidegger’s Being and Time, time and method have been central to continental philosophy at least since the nineteenth century. Taken together, these methods also ensure that sustained textual engagement, and a concern with culture and history, undergird large parts of contemporary continental philosophy.
When it comes to thematising the ethico-political and normativity more generally, continental philosophers also invariably invoke time, and this often depends on forms of transcendental philosophy and temporal orders of priority. This is partly due to the vast influence of Heidegger. While Heidegger’s work is subsequently contested by Levinas, Derrida, and Deleuze (as well as others), it is typically contested on temporal grounds. Other continental philosophers associated time and normativity in the nineteenth century. While Hegel is an obvious case, arguing that the task of philosophy ought to be to grasp one’s own time in thought, we might also think of Nietzsche’s revaluation of values in which time is central. Nietzsche argues, for example, that all ressentiment is resentment of the present (the “now”) and claimed in Ecce Homo that the notion of the eternal return of the same was his greatest idea, along with the associated idea of amor fati: become what one is. We might also consider Marx, whose rich and varied analyses of the relation between certain modes of production and time (e.g. time-as-measure) remains influential. Kierkegaard’s work is primarily concerned with the manner in which the genuinely religious life involves a contradiction between temporal existence and eternity, as well as the manner in which the choice, or leap of faith, occurs at an instant in which time (lived time) and eternity are envisaged to intersect.
Drawing on these traditions, David Wood suggests that violence (both of a conceptual and more empirical nature) is best understood as fundamentally a disease of time, as a “chronopathology.” Ethico-political problems are in store for us when the living-present is understood as self-contained, when we are nostalgic for the past (or seek to return to some origin), and when the future is understood as entirely circumscribed and delimited by the expectations of the present. Current institutions are worth of critique to the extent that any of these chronopathologies are dominant, and thus exclude other times.
In that respect, of course, the irony of the title of the conference – the time(s) of our lives – is also deliberate. With global warming, the financial crisis, etc., it would be hard to say these are, in fact, the times of our lives in a positive sense, representing any kind of apotheosis of modernity. We hence hope to invoke reflections on these times, open to a variety of disciplines, including politics, social theory, and literature amongst others, all of which in their different ways remain critical of the present, tracing alternative temporal trajectories that fracture or wound – what Elizabeth Grosz calls the nick of time – any sense of our times as stable, progressive, and improving.
This critical dimension remains vital to European philosophy today, but within which some important temporal tensions remain. Are there biases enshrined, for example, in the phenomenological preoccupation with the living-present, or the post-structuralist valorisation of the future? Must the philosopher always be utopian in some sense?
A call for papers on these questions, as well as any others within continental philosophy broadly construed, will be sent out in early in 2011.
Professor Elizabeth Grosz (Rutgers University)
Professor John McCumber (UCLA)
Professor James Williams (University of Dundee)
In the 1980s, US economist Jeremy Rifkin claimed that, “a battle is brewing over the politics of time.” He felt that the pivotal issue of the twenty-first century would be the question of time and who controlled it. In this conference, we open up the possibility that a battle over the politics (and philosophy) of time is also what is at stake in the differences between various major currents of contemporary European philosophy.
This is arguably so despite there being a metaphilosophical agreement amongst the vast majority of continental philosophers, which is that starting with the supposition of the ultimate truth of objective time is the wrong way to go, since the time of our lives will not be able to be adequately reconstructed, as David Hoy suggests.
Indeed, the endorsement (and rejection) of various different philosophical methods is partly bound up with their success (and failure) in illuminating the relationship between time and the socio-political. Consider the following methods: dialectics, transcendental reasoning post-Kant, genealogy, hermeneutical and psychoanalytic techniques, Heidegger’s destructive retrieve, Derridean deconstruction, the Frankfurt School style critique of modernity, as well as the general wariness of aligning philosophical method with either common sense or a deferential relationship to the findings of the sciences. From Husserl’s genetic phenomenology, to Bergson’s durée and the use of intuition as a method which is claimed to put us inside rather than outside time, to Heidegger’s Being and Time, time and method have been central to continental philosophy at least since the nineteenth century. Taken together, these methods also ensure that sustained textual engagement, and a concern with culture and history, undergird large parts of contemporary continental philosophy.
When it comes to thematising the ethico-political and normativity more generally, continental philosophers also invariably invoke time, and this often depends on forms of transcendental philosophy and temporal orders of priority. This is partly due to the vast influence of Heidegger. While Heidegger’s work is subsequently contested by Levinas, Derrida, and Deleuze (as well as others), it is typically contested on temporal grounds. Other continental philosophers associated time and normativity in the nineteenth century. While Hegel is an obvious case, arguing that the task of philosophy ought to be to grasp one’s own time in thought, we might also think of Nietzsche’s revaluation of values in which time is central. Nietzsche argues, for example, that all ressentiment is resentment of the present (the “now”) and claimed in Ecce Homo that the notion of the eternal return of the same was his greatest idea, along with the associated idea of amor fati: become what one is. We might also consider Marx, whose rich and varied analyses of the relation between certain modes of production and time (e.g. time-as-measure) remains influential. Kierkegaard’s work is primarily concerned with the manner in which the genuinely religious life involves a contradiction between temporal existence and eternity, as well as the manner in which the choice, or leap of faith, occurs at an instant in which time (lived time) and eternity are envisaged to intersect.
Drawing on these traditions, David Wood suggests that violence (both of a conceptual and more empirical nature) is best understood as fundamentally a disease of time, as a “chronopathology.” Ethico-political problems are in store for us when the living-present is understood as self-contained, when we are nostalgic for the past (or seek to return to some origin), and when the future is understood as entirely circumscribed and delimited by the expectations of the present. Current institutions are worth of critique to the extent that any of these chronopathologies are dominant, and thus exclude other times.
In that respect, of course, the irony of the title of the conference – the time(s) of our lives – is also deliberate. With global warming, the financial crisis, etc., it would be hard to say these are, in fact, the times of our lives in a positive sense, representing any kind of apotheosis of modernity. We hence hope to invoke reflections on these times, open to a variety of disciplines, including politics, social theory, and literature amongst others, all of which in their different ways remain critical of the present, tracing alternative temporal trajectories that fracture or wound – what Elizabeth Grosz calls the nick of time – any sense of our times as stable, progressive, and improving.
This critical dimension remains vital to European philosophy today, but within which some important temporal tensions remain. Are there biases enshrined, for example, in the phenomenological preoccupation with the living-present, or the post-structuralist valorisation of the future? Must the philosopher always be utopian in some sense?
A call for papers on these questions, as well as any others within continental philosophy broadly construed, will be sent out in early in 2011.
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
Pub: PARRHESIA 10 (2010).
Features:
- "The Metaphormatted Human: Bio-Artistic Practices of the Human Nexus" by Thierry Bardini & Marie-Pier Boucher
- "The Eternal Return and the Phantom of Difference" by Catherine Malabou, translated by Arne De Boever
- "The Birth of Immunopolitics" by Frédéric Neyrat, translated by Arne De Boever
- "Philosophical Anthropology in Kant, Foucault and Agamben" by Colin McQuillan
- "A Taste for Life (On Some Suicides in Deleuze and Spinoza)" by Jason E. Smith
- "Lacan’s Ethics and Foucault’s Care of the Self: Two Diagrams of the Production of Subjectivity" by Simon O'Sullivan
- James W. Heisig, Philosophers of Nothingness: an Essay on the Kyoto School reviewed by Eugene Thacker
- Thomas Wheatland, The Frankfurt School in Exile reviewed by Mark Tomlinson
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Nulty, Timothy J. Review of Jack Reynolds, et al., eds. POSTANALYTIC AND METACONTINENTAL. NDPR (January 2010).
Reynolds, Jack, James Chase, James Williams, and Edwin Mares, eds. Postanalytic and Metacontinental: Crossing Philosophical Divides. London: Continuum, 2010.
This important book is one of the better anthologies currently available on the relationship, or lack thereof, between the typically disparate traditions of analytic and continental philosophy. The anthology contains essays that offer broader general assessments of methodological differences between traditions as well as a number of very good essays on specific points of convergence or divergence between the traditions. The editors and authors are to be commended for their diligence in avoiding two common mistakes when characterizing these traditions -- either an essentialism which denies the possibility of meaningful dialogue between traditions or a deflationary view prone to ignoring important methodological and substantive differences between analytic and continental philosophy. Indeed, the editors, in their introduction, offer strong considerations for rejecting both of these characterizations while providing examples of their prevalence in the literature. This anthology is a valuable resource for those currently engaged in comparative work and for those who want to understand these two traditions beyond the usual superficial and frequently unjustified characterizations. In what follows, I will provide a brief summary of each of the major sections first and then return to examine in greater detail some of the chapters. . . .
Read the rest here: http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=22229.
This important book is one of the better anthologies currently available on the relationship, or lack thereof, between the typically disparate traditions of analytic and continental philosophy. The anthology contains essays that offer broader general assessments of methodological differences between traditions as well as a number of very good essays on specific points of convergence or divergence between the traditions. The editors and authors are to be commended for their diligence in avoiding two common mistakes when characterizing these traditions -- either an essentialism which denies the possibility of meaningful dialogue between traditions or a deflationary view prone to ignoring important methodological and substantive differences between analytic and continental philosophy. Indeed, the editors, in their introduction, offer strong considerations for rejecting both of these characterizations while providing examples of their prevalence in the literature. This anthology is a valuable resource for those currently engaged in comparative work and for those who want to understand these two traditions beyond the usual superficial and frequently unjustified characterizations. In what follows, I will provide a brief summary of each of the major sections first and then return to examine in greater detail some of the chapters. . . .
Read the rest here: http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=22229.
Cfp: "Philosophy and . . .," Joint Conference 2011, Society for European Philosophy and Forum for European Philosophy, York St John University, August 31-September 3, 2011.
Keynote Speakers:
Joan Copjec (University at Buffalo)
Graham Harman (American University, Cairo)
Michèle Le Doeuff (Centre National de la Recherche Scientific, Paris)
In a year when the UK has seen devastating cuts in the funding of the arts and humanities, it would be easy to be pessimistic about the future of Continental Philosophy. Yet, while reflection on the challenges ahead is certainly necessary, recent events also offer us the opportunity to respond to those who dismiss European Philosophy, not only with a vigorous defense, but also a demonstration and celebration of the profound impact it has had and continues to have on an enormous range of other disciplines. So, while this year’s conference follows recent tradition in not having a theme, and thereby welcomes proposals from the broadest range of European philosophical thought, we particularly welcome papers and other contributions that explore the limits of what can be placed together with, and within, the category of philosophy.
“PHILOSOPHY & . . .” is here offered as an opening onto the interdisciplinary terrains upon which European philosophy engages, provokes, interrupts and enriches (as it, in turn, is engaged, provoked, interrupted and enriched by them): …. politics; visual culture; performance art; art practice; architecture; literature; music; film/video; theatre; dance; science; feminism; cultural studies; psychoanalysis; and much more….
Anyone interested in presenting a paper, proposing a themed panel, or offering a different type of contribution, should submit a one page abstract to Gary Peters: g.peters@yorksj.ac.uk. The deadline for submissions is May 6, 2011. Please include your name, affiliation (if any, and please note that we wish to encourage proposals from independent scholars), your email and postal address. Decisions regarding the programme will be made by June 3.
Joan Copjec (University at Buffalo)
Graham Harman (American University, Cairo)
Michèle Le Doeuff (Centre National de la Recherche Scientific, Paris)
In a year when the UK has seen devastating cuts in the funding of the arts and humanities, it would be easy to be pessimistic about the future of Continental Philosophy. Yet, while reflection on the challenges ahead is certainly necessary, recent events also offer us the opportunity to respond to those who dismiss European Philosophy, not only with a vigorous defense, but also a demonstration and celebration of the profound impact it has had and continues to have on an enormous range of other disciplines. So, while this year’s conference follows recent tradition in not having a theme, and thereby welcomes proposals from the broadest range of European philosophical thought, we particularly welcome papers and other contributions that explore the limits of what can be placed together with, and within, the category of philosophy.
“PHILOSOPHY & . . .” is here offered as an opening onto the interdisciplinary terrains upon which European philosophy engages, provokes, interrupts and enriches (as it, in turn, is engaged, provoked, interrupted and enriched by them): …. politics; visual culture; performance art; art practice; architecture; literature; music; film/video; theatre; dance; science; feminism; cultural studies; psychoanalysis; and much more….
Anyone interested in presenting a paper, proposing a themed panel, or offering a different type of contribution, should submit a one page abstract to Gary Peters: g.peters@yorksj.ac.uk. The deadline for submissions is May 6, 2011. Please include your name, affiliation (if any, and please note that we wish to encourage proposals from independent scholars), your email and postal address. Decisions regarding the programme will be made by June 3.
Cfp: "The Political Animal," Third Annual Meeting, Pacific Association for the Continental Tradition (PACT), Seattle University, October 7-8, 2011.
Abstracts of 500 words (or complete papers) addressing any aspect of the problem of “the political animal” can be submitted through email to Jason Wirth (wirthj@seattleu.edu). The deadline for submissions is April 15, 2011. The aim of PACT is to create a platform for philosophical dialogue on the
West Coast. The annual conference alternates between Seattle (Seattle University) and San Francisco (University of San Francisco). PACT takes “Continental Philosophy” in its broadest sense, and everyone with an interest in continental thinking is invited to send in a submission and to participate. For more information, please contact: Jason Wirth wirthj@seattleu.edu or Gerard Kuperus gkuperus@usfca.edu.
West Coast. The annual conference alternates between Seattle (Seattle University) and San Francisco (University of San Francisco). PACT takes “Continental Philosophy” in its broadest sense, and everyone with an interest in continental thinking is invited to send in a submission and to participate. For more information, please contact: Jason Wirth wirthj@seattleu.edu or Gerard Kuperus gkuperus@usfca.edu.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Sixth Annual Meeting, Comparative and Continental Philosophy Circle, University College Cork, March 3-5, 2011.
The Comparative and Continental Philosophy Circle is an open, congenial, and discussion-driven philosophy Circle that meets nationally every spring. The CCPC has been meeting regionally since 1995 and internationally since 2006. We invite papers/presentations on any aspect of Comparative philosophy, Continental philosophy, and/or bridges between them. Papers will be considered for publication in our journal, Comparative and Continental Philosophy.
Send electronic abstracts, papers, or inquiries to this year’s program chair, Michael Schwartz, by January 5, 2011: mschwart@aug.edu or mschwartz@knology.net.
For more information, see our website: http://www.comcontphilosophy.org/.
Send electronic abstracts, papers, or inquiries to this year’s program chair, Michael Schwartz, by January 5, 2011: mschwart@aug.edu or mschwartz@knology.net.
For more information, see our website: http://www.comcontphilosophy.org/.
Friday, November 12, 2010
Melbourne School of Continental Philosophy Summer School, January 31-March 1, 2011.
Evening School Over Five Weeks (Jan 31 - March 1):
Aesthetics: A Philosophical Introduction Mondays 6-8pm
Introduction to Jacques Lacan Tuesdays 6-8pm
Week 1: 31 Jan - Feb 4:
Phenomenology meets the Neurosciences 11am-1pm
Deleuze and Cinema 2-5pm
Week 2: Feb 7-11:
Brandom's Linguistic Rationalism 11am-1pm
Jacob Klein: Greek Mathematical Thought and the Origin of Algebra 2-4pm
Week 3: Feb 14-18:
European Philosophy and The Law (Part 1) 11am-1pm
The Philosophy of Alain Badiou (Part 1) 2-4pm
Week 4: Feb 21-25:
European Philosophy and The Law (Part 2) 11am-1pm
The Philosophy of Alain Badiou (Part 2) 2-4pm
The Melbourne School of Continental Philosophy is an independent teaching and research group housed in the Philosophy Department at the University of Melbourne. The MSCP teaches philosophy courses at its annual summer and winter schools. Please see the website for details and join our mailing list to be notified of upcoming MSCP events and philosophical activity in the community.
Visit the School website here: http://www.mscp.org.au/. For any enquiries: admin@mscp.org.au.
Aesthetics: A Philosophical Introduction Mondays 6-8pm
Introduction to Jacques Lacan Tuesdays 6-8pm
Week 1: 31 Jan - Feb 4:
Phenomenology meets the Neurosciences 11am-1pm
Deleuze and Cinema 2-5pm
Week 2: Feb 7-11:
Brandom's Linguistic Rationalism 11am-1pm
Jacob Klein: Greek Mathematical Thought and the Origin of Algebra 2-4pm
Week 3: Feb 14-18:
European Philosophy and The Law (Part 1) 11am-1pm
The Philosophy of Alain Badiou (Part 1) 2-4pm
Week 4: Feb 21-25:
European Philosophy and The Law (Part 2) 11am-1pm
The Philosophy of Alain Badiou (Part 2) 2-4pm
The Melbourne School of Continental Philosophy is an independent teaching and research group housed in the Philosophy Department at the University of Melbourne. The MSCP teaches philosophy courses at its annual summer and winter schools. Please see the website for details and join our mailing list to be notified of upcoming MSCP events and philosophical activity in the community.
Visit the School website here: http://www.mscp.org.au/. For any enquiries: admin@mscp.org.au.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)