InterPhil: PUB: Justice, Legitimacy and Secession
__ Call for Publications Theme: Justice, Legitimacy and Secession Publication: Las Torres de Lucca. International Journal of Philosophy Date: Number 18 (January-June 2021) Deadline: 24.4.2020 __ Politics is about managing conflict, about how we should live together. Many traditions of thought and political thinkers have nonetheless taken this shared space of conflict, this ‘we the people’, as a given. ‘The people’ is just considered as a necessary precondition for politics. What happens when a part of this ‘we’ disagrees with that? When some consider this shared community should not be taken as given and claim for their right to secede and build their own independent political community. Such claims have bearings on the fundamental questions ‘who is the demos? And who are the people entitled to self-government?’ Political philosophers have reflected on this issue widely. Some have defended the morality of groups to secede if they have a democratic majority. Others have argued that secession is justified only when it is a remedy against an evil – for example, when a minority group is persecuted by a state controlled by a majority group. This kind of conflict constitutes a pressing issue in contemporary democratic societies. It thus calls for further philosophical reflection. How should political institutions deal with secession? Are democratic procedures a normatively appealing solution? Pro-independence supporters argue the affirmative on the basis of a right to self-determination. From a philosophical point of view, however, things are not obvious. Which majority are we talking about? A majority state-wide, or only within the minority group claiming for independence? Going further, what does self-determination mean and imply in democratic terms? Does it imply the creation of a nation-state or should internal self-government suffice? Is self-determination territorially conditioned? What would happen with dispersed minorities? Besides, is a democratic procedure enough to justify a decision regardless of its content? What is the place of justice when discussing on secession issues? How should we balance justice claims and democratic procedures when dealing with secession? All these questions seem fundamental philosophically speaking, but secession is also a relevant issue in our contemporary societies. It is part of, but not limited to, the Spanish constitutional crisis derived from the political claims of Catalan pro-independence parties and institutions, perhaps the greatest political turmoil since the beginning of Spanish democracy in 1978 (in addition to the recognition demands of other territories such as the Basque Country). It was also a pressing issue for the Quebec and Scottish referendums on independence in 1995 and 2014 respectively, New Caledonia’s agreement with France regarding its political status, the Kurdish unilateral referendum on independence in Iraq in 2017, or the political status of Taiwan. These are a few examples of how relevant are pro-independence claims nowadays. What can the different theories of democracy and theories of justice have to say about the pressing issue of secession? This dossier invites scholars working on political philosophy to contribute to these and other related questions. Online Submissions: http://www.lastorresdelucca.org/index.php/ojs/about/submissions Deadline: April 24, 2020 Coordination: Sergi Morales-Gálvez The scientific scope of Las Torres de Lucca (International Journal of Political Philosophy) will be to comprehend the characteristics of political philosophy, in line with the interdisciplinary character that has operated in this field during the last several years. We welcome contributions from the areas traditionally linked directly to political philosophy (moral philosophy, philosophy of law, political theory), as well as from those that have been incorporated up to the present day (political economy, philosophy of history, psychology, neurophysiology and, to a lesser extent, other sciences) as long as their scope is focused on the treatment of public affairs and sheds light on contemporary political reflections. In the same way, the reference to classic problems should be brought to bear on contemporary questions. The journal publishes original articles in English and Spanish. Journal website: http://www.lastorresdelucca.org __ InterPhil List Administration: https://interphil.polylog.org InterPhil List Archive: https://www.mail-archive.com/interphil@list.polylog.org/ __
InterPhil: CFP: In the Wake of Red Power Movements
__ Call for Papers Theme: In the Wake of Red Power Movements Subtitle: New Perspectives on Indigenous Intellectual and Narrative Traditions Type: International Symposium Institution: Institute of Advanced Study, University of Warwick Location: Coventry (United Kingdom) Date: 15.–16.5.2020 Deadline: 15.3.2020 __ This symposium explores North American Indigenous intellectual and narrative traditions that were recovered, reclaimed, or (re-)invented in the wake of Red Power movements that emerged in the 1960s in the settler colonial societies of Canada and the USA. It asks: which new perspectives and visions have been developed over the last 50 years within Indigenous studies and related fields when looking at Indigenous land and land rights, Indigenous political and social sovereignty, extractivism and environmental destruction, oppressive sex/gender systems, and for describing the repercussions of settler colonialism in North America, especially in narrative representations? The symposium is guided by the idea that North American Indigenous intellectual and narrative traditions developed and recovered since the 1960s offer new and reclaimed ways of being, organizing, and thinking in the face of destruction, dispossession, and oppression; Indigenous ways of writing and righting are connected to ongoing social struggles for land rights, access to clean water, and intellectual and socio-political sovereignty; they are, as Maile Arvin, Eve Tuck, and Angie Morrill (2013) have pointed out, “a gift” from which most academic disciplines can benefit greatly. In the face of ongoing exploitations of Indigenous knowledges and resources, it is paramount that researchers who focus on Indigenous intellectual and narrative traditions, especially those who come from settler-colonial backgrounds, carefully examine their implications in settler-colonial ways of dispossession. It is in this context that the symposium encourages self-reflectivity and invites participants from all positionalities to include reflections on how to act, think, and write in a non-appropriative manner about the intellectual achievements of Indigenous academics, activists, artists from North America. What kind of challenges does an engagement with Indigenous intellectual and narrative achievements from North America pose, and how do these achievements enable their audience to think differently and to develop visions that go beyond settler colonial hegemonies that make themselves felt in customs, laws, property-relations, or gender roles? Possible topics include: - North American Indigenous intellectual and narrative traditions that emerged or were rediscovered over the last 50 years; - Indigenous representations of land and water, community-building, the other-than-human world; - connections and frictions among and within different Indigenous traditions and/or settler societies in North America; - Indigenous understandings of sex/gender; - methodologies for reading across ethnic divides, alliance-building tools in academia and activism. Keynote speakers: Dr. Mishuana Goeman Associate Professor of Gender Studies, UCLA Dr. Robert Warrior Distinguished Professor of American Literature & Culture, University of Kansas Please send your proposals (max. 300 words) plus a short bio (max. 150 words) by March 15, 2020 to: in_the_w...@outlook.com You will be notified by March 29, 2020, if your paper is accepted. For any questions, please refer to the organizer Dr. Doro Wiese, IAS, University of Warwick. Contact: Dr. Doro Wiese Institute of Advanced Study University of Warwick Zeeman Building Lord Bhattacharyya Way Coventry CV4 7AL United Kingdom Email: in_the_w...@outlook.com Web: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/ias/calendar/in-the-wake/ __ InterPhil List Administration: https://interphil.polylog.org InterPhil List Archive: https://www.mail-archive.com/interphil@list.polylog.org/ __
InterPhil: PUB: Epistemic Injustice
__ Call for Publications Theme: Epistemic Injustice Publication: Las Torres de Lucca. International Journal of Philosophy Date: Number 19 (July-December 2021) Deadline: 15.12.2020 __ Philosophical interest in the concept of epistemic injustice has kept growing since the publication of Miranda Fricker´s Epistemic Injustice: Power & the Ethics of Knowing (2007), where it is characterized as a phenomenon by which individuals are wronged in their capacity as knowers. Although the relationship between practices of knowing and oppression had been examined before by many others (notably within critical race, feminist epistemologies or decolonial philosophy), the publication of Fricker’s book initiates a series of productive discussions around issues concerning authority, credibility, justice, power, trust or testimony, bringing together different philosophical traditions such as epistemology, ethics and political theory. As it is known, one of the core issues is the distinction Fricker draws between testimonial and hermeneutical injustice. Both of them are dependent on socially shared identity concepts, many of which involve unfair prejudices. Testimonial injustice is a credibility deficit that a speaker suffers as a consequence of the hearer having a prejudice against her social identity. On the other hand, hermeneutical injustice occurs when there is a lack of collective interpretative resources required for a group to understand significant aspects of their social experience. However, some authors, such as José Medina and Rebecca Mason, have distanced themselves from this conceptual framework, especially regarding the definition of hermeneutical injustice, since it ignores the alternative interpretations that marginalized communities have developed for understanding their experiences. Others (Gaile Pohlhaus and Kristie Dotson, for instance) have pointed out new kinds of epistemic injustices, oppressions and exclusions. At present, many lines of investigation are being opened. New critical analysis of exclusionary practices and forms of oppression such as silencing, subordination, objectification, misrecognition, insensitivity, or misrepresentation of marginalized groups are gaining importance inside philosophy, favouring fruitful dialogues between epistemology, political philosophy and ethics. We invite contributing authors to consider issues related to the concept of epistemic injustice, in relation to both its initial versions and its critical current accounts. In this issue, we call for papers dealing with the following questions, among others: - How is epistemic injustice understood? - What are the distinctively epistemic forms of injustice? In what sense are they epistemic? - How is epistemic injustice related to non-epistemic forms of oppression and discrimination? How does feminism or race theory contribute to the understanding of epistemic injustice? - How can the concept of epistemic injustice be extended to different domains? - How do issues concerning epistemic injustice relate to other relevant epistemological matters such as testimony, virtue epistemologies or disagreement? - How is white ignorance related to epistemic injustice? - What are the alternatives to counteract epistemic injustices? - How do epistemologies of resistance challenge hegemonic knowledges? Online Submissions: http://www.lastorresdelucca.org/index.php/ojs/about/submissions Deadline: December 15, 2020 Coordination: Cristina Bernabeu, Alba Moreno y Llanos Navarro The scientific scope of Las Torres de Lucca (International Journal of Political Philosophy) will be to comprehend the characteristics of political philosophy, in line with the interdisciplinary character that has operated in this field during the last several years. We welcome contributions from the areas traditionally linked directly to political philosophy (moral philosophy, philosophy of law, political theory), as well as from those that have been incorporated up to the present day (political economy, philosophy of history, psychology, neurophysiology and, to a lesser extent, other sciences) as long as their scope is focused on the treatment of public affairs and sheds light on contemporary political reflections. In the same way, the reference to classic problems should be brought to bear on contemporary questions. The journal publishes original articles in English and Spanish. Journal website: http://www.lastorresdelucca.org __ InterPhil List Administration: https://interphil.polylog.org InterPhil List Archive: https://www.mail-archive.com/interphil@list.polylog.org/ __
