InterPhil: CFP: The Empire and Interreligious Conflicts
__ Call for Papers Theme: The Empire and Interreligious Conflicts Type: International Conference Institution: Istituto Svizzero di Roma University of Bern Location: Rome (Italy) Date: 8.–10.6.2020 Deadline: 14.2.2020 __ This conference is a part of a broader project on epistemology of interreligious conflicts. Its ongoing effort is to study such conflicts, both conceptually and historically, as inter-epistemic conflicts, namely as conflicts between radically different conceptions and performances of truth. The present conference, which will take place in Rome, is dedicated to the political dimension of inter-religious conflicts, more specifically to the role of the Empire. Rome is in fact a striking paradigm for the central and ambivalent role of the imperial power in the history of inter-religious conflicts as conflicts on truth. The Roman Empire was, first, as imperium, the commanding and oppressing power, a primary enemy of the monotheistic message on divine and true justice, championed by both early Christianity and rabbinic Judaism. Monotheistic truth was spoken to Rome’s imperial power. Inter-religious conflict would be a conflict on how to best resist the Empire. Nonetheless, Rome, enemy and competitor, was also an inspiration for the political vision of monotheism. The expansive, universal reach of the Emperor, a king of kings, was a living model for the glory of the Kingdom of God, Sovereign of the World. The monotheistic message, like all truth, has a universal scope and accordingly a global, imperial claim. The history of inter-religious conflict is thus also a history of diverging strategies of coping with the Empire. The Jewish-Christian conflict arises from different approaches to living with Rome. Islam, emerging beyond Rome, interacts with different Empires, whose inter-imperial competition with Rome will inform the Islamic-Christian conflict. Finally, besides being an enemy and role model for monotheism’s universal message, the Roman Empire could be also imagined as the external, neutral space, precisely a space of non-truth, which enables the peaceful co-existence of multiple monotheisms, in conflict with each other as well as with other truths. The Empire puts an end to wars, or at least, to follow Carl Schmitt’s theo-political notion of katechon, “hedges” war by postponing the moment of truth. Speakers are invited to reflect on these and other historical models, first, with respect to various configurations of Roman Empires, West and East, with their different political theologies and different wars, but also with respect to other imperial and religious constellations: like the Babylonian, the Persian, the Greek, the Sasanian, and the different Caliphates. The inquiry is not only historical, but ultimately concerns the contemporary situation of inter-religious conflicts. Special attention will be given to the modern condition, which is closely linked to the disappearance of the Roman Empire, as well as, on the one hand, the rise of territorially limited, particular nation-states, and on the other hand, the rise of new forms of imperialism and globalization (capitalist, technological, informational etc.). Participants will be accordingly invited to reflect on inter-religious and other inter-epistemic conflicts in their relation to modern models and conceptions of empires (like the Iberians, the French, the British, The (Third) Reich, the Czarist, the USSR), as well as contemporary super-powers or regional powers (like the USA, China and Russia, or corporate global powers such as Walmart, Shell or Apple). These and other imperial constellations will be contemplated in their relations to contemporary cultures and conflicts of truth, such as the notions of “post-truth”, “return to religion” and “conflict of civilizations”. Presentations will be strictly limited to 20 minutes, followed by discussion. Conference languages are English and Italian (with simultaneous interpretation). Travel and accommodation costs will be covered by the organizing institutions. This call is especially addressed to potential speakers on empires in antiquity and in the middle ages. Organizers: Luca Di Blasi (University of Bern) Elad Lapidot (University of Bern) Submission: February 14, 2020 Please submit abstracts of 200 words to Elad Lapidot (elad.lapi...@theol.unibe.ch) and Luca Di Blasi (luca.dibl...@theol.unibe.ch) __ InterPhil List Administration: https://interphil.polylog.org InterPhil List Archive: https://www.mail-archive.com/interphil@list.polylog.org/ __
InterPhil: CONF: Autonomy, Diversity and the Common Good
__ Conference Announcement Theme: Autonomy, Diversity and the Common Good Type: 41st Annual Philosophy of Religion Conference Institution: Claremont Graduate University Location: Claremont, CA (USA) Date: 6.–8.2.2020 __ The theme of the 41st Claremont Annual Philosophy of Religion Conference will be Autonomy, Diversity and the Common Good. The conference will be held at Claremont Graduate University in Claremont, California, on February 6-8, 2020. Topic Description We live in a time of growing social and cultural diversity and inequality. This has increased the traditional tensions between individual freedom and social responsibility to a point where the binding forces of our societies seem to be exhausted. Where previously the commonalities of nature, culture, and tradition that connect us before we become an individual self were emphasized, we have learned to deconstruct these commonalities and replace them with our own cultural constructions without being disturbed by the biological, cultural, moral or religious limitations of earlier times. However, instead of creating a society of equals, for which many have hoped, we have increased inequality, diversity, and injustice in our societies to an unprecedented degree. In order to create more just conditions for everybody, we pursue politics that promote greater self-determination, cultural participation, and political power for marginalized groups in order to help them assert their distinctiveness and gain recognition in contexts of real or perceived inequality or injustice. But we often do it without due regard for the interests and potentials of society at large, or the different needs of others, or the commonalities we must share for our society to work. Like the sorcerer’s apprentice, we have inaugurated a global process of social change but cannot control the forces that drive us apart or prevent the weakening of the forces that bind us together. The tensions between centripetal and centrifugal forces in society can be observed everywhere, and they have been fueled by the global spread of capitalism and consumerism. For some freedom, independence and autonomy are the highest values in our society that must not be compromised by any social commitments, legal restrictions or political obligations. Others emphasize justice, equity, and equality and insist that we must practice solidarity with those who need it and assume responsibility even for that for which we are not responsible. But why play off one against the other? Is it true that insistence on autonomy and diversity weakens social cohesion, or that striving for justice, equity and equality undermines individual freedom? How much individuality and what kinds of diversity are we ready to accept? Where do we want to draw a line, if we do, and for which reasons? How much autonomy and diversity are possible without destroying social cohesion and human solidarity? And how much social commonality is necessary to be able to live an autonomous life and do justice to diversity? A long tradition has seen the common good as the social order in which individuals and groups can best strive for perfection. Liberal societies insist that this perfecting must not be done at the cost of others or by restricting the right to such a striving only to some and not granting it also to others. But what does ‘perfection‘ mean today? And what has become of the common good in our time? There are significant differences between conceptions of the common good in the West and East and between secular and religious interpretations of the human pursuit of happiness and fulfilled life. What are the contributions to this debate by religious traditions? How do they configure the ideas of autonomy, diversity, and the common good? Do they have anything to offer that goes beyond secular conceptions? If so, is what they offer compatible with secular views? Or must we depart from the idea of the common good and seek alternatives that would allow us to better hold together the diverging forces of autonomy, individuality, and diversity on the one hand and the binding forces of social justice, equality, solidarity, and responsibility on the other? Main Conference Participants: - Clare Carlisle (King’s College London) - Jörg Dierken (Halle) - Nils Ole Oermann (Lüneburg / Oxford) - Joseph Prabhu (Cal State LA) - Michael Puett (Harvard) - Hartmut von Sass (Berlin) - Francis Schüssler Fiorenza (Harvard) - Linn Tonstad (Yale) - Graham Ward (Oxford) - Elliot Wolfson (UCSB) Click here to register: https://forms.gle/ev6vjebLc1YjmwLV7 Conference website: https://research.cgu.edu/philosophy-of-religion-conference/about/conferences-publications/2020-autonomy-diversity-and-the-common-good/ __ InterPhil List Administration: https://interphil.polylog.org InterPhil List Archive:
InterPhil: CFP: Ethics in a Global Environment
__ Call for Papers Theme: Ethics in a Global Environment Type: 6th Annual Conference Institution: Centre for the Study of Global Ethics, University of Birmingham Location: Birmingham (United Kingdom) Date: 28.–29.5.2020 Deadline: 1.2.2020 __ The Centre for the Study of Global Ethics (Edgbaston Campus, University of Birmingham) is pleased to announce its Sixth Annual Conference. The theme for 2020 is Ethics in a Global Environment. Human activity is increasingly compromising the global environment in which we and other species live. Whether it be greenhouse gas emissions, plastic pollution, overconsumption, landfills, or deforestation, human ways of life are undeniably responsible for making our planet less and less hospitable. As a result, biodiversity is declining at unprecedented rates, and environmental degradation makes a flourishing life impossible for many sentient individuals across the globe. These problems give rise to fundamental questions about what we owe to one another globally, how we should relate to other animals and nature, and what kinds of society we want to live in. What do we owe to our fellow humans and other sentient creatures? What kinds of environmental goods are individuals entitled to? Are there duties of environmental justice? Are there moral duties to protect species and ecosystems? Who is responsible for the harms caused by environmental degradation? How do systems of oppression intersect to exacerbate environmental injustice? What ethical and political philosophical frameworks are appropriate in an ever-changing global environment? We believe that adequately addressing these questions will require a multidisciplinary approach to the challenges they raise, and we therefore welcome contributions from a variety of disciplines, including, but by no means limited to, philosophy, geography, law, politics, animal studies, sociology, and history. Submissions We welcome abstract submissions addressing the central theme of the conference, as well as a wide range of topics within global ethics, from faculty, graduate students, activists, and others. First, we welcome abstract submissions addressing the central theme of Ethics in a Global Environment, including, but not limited to, the following sub-themes: - Environmental ethics - Animal ethics - The ethics of technology (e.g. in preserving species, promoting biodiversity, and climate change mitigation and adaptation) - Agricultural ethics - Indigenous perspectives on environmental sustainability - Climate justice - Urbanization and just urban environments - Ethics regarding the transition towards environmental sustainability - Environmental governance - Justice in interspecies societies - Postcolonialism and the environment - Intersectionality and the environment In addition, we encourage scholars in global and practical ethics; legal, social and political philosophy; and cognate disciplines to submit an abstract on a wide range of topics within global ethics. Areas of research may include: - Gender justice - Global distributive and social justice - Justice and race - Just war theory - Humanitarian ethics - Global bioethics Submission guidelines We aim to make this conference accessible to all people with a disability, and ask you to help us achieve this goal. We would really appreciate it if you could comply with the requests in section 2.3 (on pages 6 and 7) of the BPA/SWIP Guidelines for Accessible Conferences. To propose a paper (suitable for presentation in 15 minutes), please send the following two documents (doc or pdf) to: globalethicseve...@contacts.bham.ac.uk - Blind abstract: document containing title, abstract (500 words max.), 3-5 keywords - anonymised for blind review (so not containing any author information) - Non-blind abstract: document containing title, abstract (500 words max.), 3-5 keywords as well as author information (name, position, affiliation, contact details, and short biography) Submission deadline: 1 February 2020 We aim to let you know the outcome of the blind review by 1 March 2020. Conference website: https://globalethics2020.weebly.com __ InterPhil List Administration: https://interphil.polylog.org InterPhil List Archive: https://www.mail-archive.com/interphil@list.polylog.org/ __
