Philosophy in Utah

6th Annual Intermountain Philosophy Conference

Huenemann — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 18:26:45 +0000

This Friday, 18 November, hosted by BYU. I am posting here the program and a map of the BYU campus. And here are some verbal instructions for finding your way to the conference:

We are pleased to announce the program of the 6th annual Intermountain Philosophy Conference, to be held this Friday, November 18.

The program is attached. A campus map is also attached.

Driving instructions: as you come from the north (as most of you will), exit at the University Parkway exit. (There is a lot of road construction in the area; sorry about that.) Come east and south on University Parkway until you get to 450 East (Provo–see map); then turn south for a block. At the traffic light, turn east on North Campus Drive for a block and then turn into the parking lot next to the Museum of Art (building #64 on the map). You will find free visitor parking there. From there walk southwest across the quad to the Joseph F. Smith Building (JFSB) (#70 on the map, the building with the glass facade on the east side), where the meeting will be held. (Please note that there are three buildings ending in “Smith”; ours is directly west of the library.) Go down to the basement via stairways or elevators, and to the middle of the east side, where room B192 is located, in front of the spiral staircase. That is where the opening ceremony and keynote address will be held. The following sessions will be in other rooms in the basement of the same building.

Program3
campusmap

CFP: Intermountain Philosophy Conference

Huenemann — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 14:55:31 +0000

CALL FOR PAPERS

The Utah Philosophical Association announces the sixth annual
INTERMOUNTAIN PHILOSOPHY CONFERENCE
to be held at Brigham Young University
Friday, November 18th, 2011
Papers on any philosophical topic are welcome.
Please submit abstracts to daniel_graham@byu.edu
Abstracts should be about 1 page single-spaced.
Deadline for abstracts: Friday, Oct. 14
Papers should be about 30 minutes reading time
(about 15 pages double-spaced).
It is anticipated that the conference will go from 1 p.m. to 7 p.m.,
with dinner provided at 6 p.m.
If you wish to serve as a moderator or commentator,
please send this information to the above e-mail address.
This event is free of charge. Please share this information
with philosophers of other institutions in the region

Aporia call for papers

Huenemann — Wed, 07 Sep 2011 16:33:39 +0000

Aporia, Brigham Young University’s undergraduate journal of philosophy, is pleased to announce the Fall 2011 call for papers. Aporia is dedicated to recognizing exemplary philosophical work at the undergraduate level. We are now accepting submissions for the Fall 2011 issue, which will be published online. The winning papers will be announced in November. We hope that you will inform all philosophy students of this opportunity to be recognized and to participate in the philosophical community. We especially invite professors to encourage authors of outstanding undergraduate work to submit their papers. Attached is a flier announcing the call for papers; this flier also contains important information about the submission process, as well as the due date for submissions: October 7, 2011.

Call for Papers Fall 2011

“Better never to have been”

Huenemann — Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:13:40 +0000

A couple of students and I are reading David Benatar’s Never to Have Been, alongside our reading of Schopenhauer, which, among all the ways of passing sunny summer days, must count among the most inappropriate. Benatar’s book is an argument for the claim that bringing people into existence causes them harm. He admits that, once you exist, there may be plenty of good reasons to continue to exist; but there are no good reasons to cause anyone to begin to exist, and in fact strong reasons for not doing so.

His whole argument turns on an alleged asymmetry. We DO think it is a good idea not to bring a being into existence when we know that being’s life will be unrelentingly horrible. Indeed, we are apt to censure someone who brings suffering beings into existence. (Set aside the abortion debate; think of couples who are genetically determined to bring about suffering children, or AIDS babies, or whatever; they ought to refrain from doing so.) But – here’s the alleged asymmetry – we DO NOT think it is a bad idea not to bring into existence a being whose life will be pleasant. That is to say, we are not apt to censure couples who decide not to have children when it is clear that the lives of those children would be very pleasant.

So what? Well, Benatar draws from this alleged asymmetry two claims: (1) it is bad to create a being who suffers; and (2) it is not-bad, or just plain neutral, not to create a being who has pleasure. Now think of all the beings who have been brought into existence. All of their pleasures, or high points, count as morally neutral with respect to the act of creating them. But all of their pains count as “bad” with respect to that act. Since every human life includes some suffering, we can say, of every human life, that it was better for that person never to have been brought into existence in the first place.

I keep calling the analogy “alleged” because I think the contrast is between claims of different logical structure. Take claim (1) above – “it is bad to create a being who suffers.” Now it is GRE time: which of the following is its asymmetrical counterpart?

(2) “it is not-good to create a being who has pleasure”
(3) “it is not-good not to create a being who suffers”
(4) “it is good not to create a being who has pleasure”
(5) “it is good to create a being who has no pleasure”

And, as with any good GRE question, after this you should feel like you no longer understand your own language. I have no idea which of (2)-(5) is the asymmetrical counterpart to (1), though Benatar is sure it’s (2). But after trying to think through all of these, it seems to me that a symmetrical counterpart to (1) – namely, “it is good to create a being who experiences pleasure” – seems to me at least sometimes true. I see a happy couple, with wisdom and means and love; they have children, and I think “How wonderful that these kids have such great lives!” Or I see the same couple without kids, and think “That is a loss; the world is a bit worse off for their surplus of loving support never having been spent.” I’ll admit that my complaint in this latter case is not nearly as strong as my censure when couples stupidly bring into existence suffering children; still, my feelings are a bit more colorful than neutral. And this is exactly what Benatar denies.

Now maybe my logic is limp; it wouldn’t be the first time. But I am so far unconvinced that we always do harm in bringing anyone into existence. It seems to me the truth is messier – sometimes we do, sometimes we don’t, and usually we don’t know, or there just isn’t a fact to the matter. Once again, flat-footed skepticism prevails. No shortcuts to case-by-case thinking.

But despite my disagreement, I think Benatar’s book is a great model for contemporary philosophy. It pursues a question that gets at our philosophical hearts – to be, or not to be, that is his question – and it does so with clear prose, short sentences, good analogies, elegant insights, and without getting bogged down in citations and narrow in-fights among the experts. It’s a noble and worthy effort. The world is better off for the book’s having been.

SLCC Student Philosophical Conference

Huenemann — Mon, 11 Apr 2011 16:44:05 +0000

Friday, November 11, 2010 � 10:00-2:00 p.m.
Oak Room, Student Center, Redwood Road Campus

We are thrilled to announce that this will be the FOURTH REGIONAL version of our Annual SLCC Student Philosophical Conference! The conference will consist of a one-hour plenary session featuring our keynote speaker Dr. Charlie Huenemann then a two-hour panel session. We are currently seeking undergraduate students to present papers at these breakout panels. These panels will be conducted and moderated by SLCC and/or visiting professors. Each student will read their paper (maximum of 15 minutes), after which a discussion/Q & A will take place.

Because we want to include as many participants as possible, we hope to have 5-7 papers presented at each panel. Additionally, the papers may be broader in scope than just Friedrich alone and need not be exclusive to our conference (enabling students to present at more than one conference). The deadlines are as follows: October 1, 2011 for Abstracts and October 31, 2011 for final papers. (Please email your completed Paper Submission Form to SLCCPhilosophyConference.)

Conference website here.

THEORIST-PHILOSOPHER BELL HOOKS RETURNS TO UVU FOR APRIL 1 LECTURE

Huenemann — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 14:24:08 +0000

The Utah Valley University Honors Program, in conjunction with the UVU College of Humanities & Social Sciences and the University of Utah, will welcome award-winning cultural theorist, philosopher and social activist bell hooks for a week-long residency March 28- April 1, 2011. Hailed as one of the “100 Visionaries Who Could Change Your Life” by Utne Reader, her writings cover a broad range of topics incorporating issues on feminism, race, class, education, mass media, and engaged pedagogy.
bell hooks will present a lecture on April 1 at noon in UVU’s Ragan Theater of the Sorensen Student Center. The address is general admission seating and open to the public. There will be a question-and-answer session following her remarks.
“We couldn’t be more thrilled to have her,” said Shannon Mussett, associate professor of philosophy and gender studies coordinator at UVU. “Engaged learning is part of the spirit of her theory, so she really ties into UVU’s community and philosophy. She’s going to bring in a voice that we don’t often get where we are, and it’s a voice that speaks to issues that matter to every person.”
Born in Hopkinsville, Ky., in 1952, hooks received a bachelor’s degree from Stanford University in 1973, a master’s degree in from the University of Wisconsin in 1976, and a Ph.D. from the University of California-Santa Cruz in 1983. She has held positions as professor of African and African-American studies and English at Yale University, associate professor of women’s studies and American literature at Oberlin College in Oberlin, Ohio, and as distinguished lecturer of English literature at the City College of New York. She has published more than 30 books and numerous scholarly and mainstream articles, appeared in several documentary films, and participated in various public lectures. In 1992, her book Ain’t I a Woman?: Black Women and Feminism was named one of the 20 most influential women’s books in the last 20 years by Publishers Weekly. She currently teaches at Berea College in Kentucky.
“bell hooks deliberately writes so that it’s accessible to everybody,” Mussett said. “She intentionally speaks to everyone. Her books are clearly written so that anyone can pick them up and get something out of them. She will speak to many different kinds of students and the paths they take. The event is open for every person to attend, whoever wants to come. It’s the whole spirit of her theory. It’s not in any way to be closed off from anyone.”

UVU Undergraduate Philosophy Conference

Huenemann — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 16:03:11 +0000

UVU UNDERGRADUATE
PHILOSOPHY CONFERENCE
Submission Guidelines & Prizes
Sessions: Friday March 25, 2011 from 10:00 to 5:15.
Timpanogos Room (4th Floor of UVU Library)
Word limit: 2500-3500 words
Email papers to: DONAHOER@uvu.edu and weigelch@gmail.com
Subject: “undergraduate conference entry”
The paper should contain no identifying information about the author, and should be in .doc, .docx, or .pdf format.
Awards:
100 first place
60 second place
40 third place
20 each for 5-10 honorable mentions
All accepted papers will be published
in conference proceedings.
Student Paper Submission Deadline: Friday March 11 at noon.

Call for undergraduate papers

Huenemann — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:49:11 +0000

APORIA – BYU’s undergraduate journal in philosophy

We welcome well-written undergraduate papers on any philosophical topic. We prefer
papers of approximately three to five thousand words. Essays should be original,
unpublished, and must not be in submission elsewhere. Authors must be undergraduates
during the semester of publication.

We are also soliciting shorter critical notices (fewer than ten pages) responding to articles
in the current and recent issues of Aporia.

Email submissions to aporia@byu.edu by Monday, February 7, 2011.
All submissions must be formatted for blind review: remove all identifying information
from your paper and include a cover page stating your name, title of submission,
institution, email address, and postal address. Please email your paper and cover sheet
as separate documents (we accept .doc(x), .rtf, .wpd, and .pdf formats). Questions or
comments may be sent to the editor at the same email address.

2011 Intermountain West Graduate/Undergraduate Philosophy Conference

Huenemann — Tue, 07 Dec 2010 18:26:31 +0000

We invite submissions of quality papers by graduate students (first-rate undergraduate papers
may be considered). The conference will be hosted April 7th through 9th, by the University
of Utah Philosophy Department. Papers from any field in mainstream philosophy will be
considered, and should be limited to 4,000 words. Each presentation will be scheduled for one
hour, and will include commentary and a period for Q&A.

Keynote Speaker:
Michael Thompson, University of Pittsburgh
Plenary Speaker: Justin McBrayer, Fort Lewis College

Submission Deadline: January 15, 2011
Submission Guidelines
I. Cover letter:
- Presentation title
- Author’s name
- Institutional affiliation
- Topic area of paper (e.g., Ethics, Metaphysics, Epistemology, etc.)
- Contact information (email and telephone number)
II. Paper should be prepared for blind review, accompanied by an abstract (of no more than 150
words), and submitted in .doc or .pdf format.
Please send all submissions, as well as questions about the conference, to
IWGPC2011@gmail.com.

Callicles’ challenge

Huenemann — Tue, 30 Nov 2010 22:31:58 +0000

In early November, Birkbeck College of the University of London hosted a conference called “Why Humanities?”, in response to the government’s onslaught against higher education taking place in the UK (and taking place here, with slightly less severity). One of the speakers was philosopher Raimond Gaita, in a short address entitled “Callicles’ Challenge.” At the heart of his talk is whether Philosophy should try to promote its worth by listing the extrinsic benefits of studying and teaching it. It’s an interesting and intelligent talk; here’s the link.