From debbie.castle at sydney.edu.au Mon Aug 27 12:13:50 2018 From: debbie.castle at sydney.edu.au (Debbie Castle) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 02:13:50 +0000 Subject: [SydPhil] FW: Healing Fukushima: a documentary film presented by School of HPS and Dept Japanese Studies Message-ID: HEALING FUKUSHIMA A documentary film by Sulfikar Amir In the wake of a triple disaster caused by an earthquake, tsunami and nuclear accident, medical professionals in Fukushima are tossed into managing a cataclysm of the unknown. Caught off guard by the invisible, unquantifiable hazard of radiation and the scale of catastrophe, they are forced into learning how to handle radiation health risks faced by their patients and themselves. Healing Fukushima is a visual chronicle of the difficulties and hard choices made by medical first responders on the frontlines of a series of nuclear meltdowns at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station. It explores their unsung battles to develop proper systems of emergency radiation medicine and radiation risk awareness post-Fukushima. Interviews with the personnel involved highlight the courage and humanity of these local doctors and their colleagues in dealing with disaster of unimaginable proportions, which reflects how the Japanese society copes with the worst nuclear disaster to date. (Japanese with English subtitles; 69 minutes) Discussion with Director Sulfikar Amir and Screenwriter Shi Lin Loh at the conclusion of the screening Presented by the School of History and Philosophy of Science and Department of Japanese Studies Date: Wednesday 29th August Start: 6.00pm Where: Eastern Avenue Lecture Theatre 315 Camperdown Campus Free to attend. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anik.waldow at sydney.edu.au Tue Aug 28 09:23:21 2018 From: anik.waldow at sydney.edu.au (Anik Waldow) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 23:23:21 +0000 Subject: [SydPhil] Rethinking Autonomy Programme Message-ID: Workshop Programme: Rethinking Autonomy 10-11 September, 2018 CCANESA Board Room, Madsen Building (F09), University of Sydney Organiser: Anik Waldow (anik.waldow at sydney.edu.au) This workshop will explore a variety of non-Kantian conceptions of autonomy that consider affect and emotional responsiveness as constitutive elements in self-determining agency. To put into perspective the specific way in which deliberation and reflection matter to autonomous agency, we will ask to what extent these capacities are in themselves dependent on the existence of a specific set of emotional dispositions. While the focus of the workshop is put on the early modern context where the Cartesian conception of the self as a thinking thing provides the backdrop for discussions on autonomy, we will branch out from here to investigate the perspective of eighteenth-century female philosophers and their ideas on what it means to be a self-realizing thinker and agent. What is of particular interest in this context is the question of how education can be used to become a ?thinking thing? that satisfies the demands of self-realization. This theme complex leads over to reflections on the place of autonomously thinking individuals in civil society and their relationship to autonomy-inhibiting governmental practices. For the abstracts visit: https://sydney.edu.au/arts/our-research/centres-institutes-and-groups/intellectual-history.html Monday, 10 September 9.30-10.30: Deborah Brown (UQ): ?Individualism and Autonomy in Descartes? 10.30-11.00 Morning Tea 11.00-12.00 Ariane Schneck (Hamburg/Humboldt): ?Autonomy and (Self-)Love in Descartes? 12.00-1.00 Lisa Shapiro (Simon Fraser): ?Two Senses of Belonging: Descartes on Thinking? 1.00-2.00 Lunch 2.00-3.00: Catriona Mackenzie (Macquarie): ?Wollstonecraft on Autonomy and Equality? 3.00-4.00 Moira Gatens (Sydney): ?Spinoza?s Free Citizen Meets Wollstonecraft?s Feminist Republicanism, Or, Freedom from Bondage Through the Transformation of Affect (for Men too!)? 4.00-4.15 Coffee Break 4.15-5.15 Peter Anstey (Sydney): ?Political Liberty and the Separation of Powers? 6 pm Dinner at Thairiffic, 224 King Street, Newtown Tuesday, 11 September 9.00-10.00: Jacqueline Broad (Monash): ?Agency and Autonomy in Women?s Devotional Writings of the Early Modern Period? 10.00-11.00 Anik Waldow (Sydney): ?What is Humean Autonomy?? 11.00-11.30 Morning Tea 11.30-12.30 Stephen Gaukroger (Sydney): ?From Reason to Sensibility to Rationality? ANIK WALDOW | Associate Professor Department of Philosophy | School of Philosophical and Historical Inquiry THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY S404, Quadrangle Building A14 | The University of Sydney | NSW | 2006 | Australia T +61 2 9114 1245 | F +61 2 9351 3918 E anik.waldow at sydney.edu.au -- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From calendar-notification at google.com Tue Aug 28 12:59:53 2018 From: calendar-notification at google.com (Google Calendar) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 02:59:53 +0000 Subject: [SydPhil] Notification: Sebastian Sequoiah-Grayson (Sydney) @ Wed 29 Aug 2018 13:00 - 14:30 (AEST) (Seminars) Message-ID: <000000000000442f1d05747609cf@google.com> This is a notification for: Title: Sebastian Sequoiah-Grayson (Sydney) Title: Sensible epithetic volunteerism Abstract: If desires are propositional attitudes then the problem of free will collapses into the problem of epithumetic volunteerism. I argue that desires are propositional attitudes. I then argue for a sensible epithumetic volunteerism. The second argument is made via a new account of epithumetic actions and autoepithumetic states. When: Wed 29 Aug 2018 13:00 ? 14:30 Eastern Australia Time - Sydney Where: Sydney Uni, Muniment Room Calendar: Seminars Who: * Luara Ferracioli- creator Event details: https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/caFUCNLwM9ilAlLgUm4Phr?domain=google.com Invitation from Google Calendar: https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/VbkFCOMxNytRJRYBfvIVAj?domain=google.com You are receiving this email at the account sydphil at arts.usyd.edu.au because you are subscribed for notifications on calendar Seminars. To stop receiving these emails, please log in to https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/VbkFCOMxNytRJRYBfvIVAj?domain=google.com and change your notification settings for this calendar. Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to modify your RSVP response. Learn more at https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/kQEHCP7yOZtGOGgLi1D3vx?domain=support.google.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karola.stotz at gmail.com Tue Aug 28 13:13:20 2018 From: karola.stotz at gmail.com (Karola Stotz) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 13:13:20 +1000 Subject: [SydPhil] Dejan Simkovic Message-ID: ?Is (mono)theism an option for a Humean?? *Dejan Simkovic* When: Tuesday Sept 4, 1-2pm Where: Moot Court Hume is one of the great advocates of scepticism, and his sceptical arguments, together with his critique of the accepted views of the time, have challenged our epistemic standpoint in various spheres of life, including morality and religion. This negative aspect of Hume?s work was in the eyes of the intellectual public of Hume?s time a clear indication of Hume?s subversive and destructive intentions. As a result, Hume was, and is generally still considered to be an enemy of morality and religion. With the progress of Hume scholarship, however, the positive aspects of Hume?s work have started to be recognised. While Hume was undoubtedly a sceptic, and vigorously criticized the dominant views of his time, he also intended to advance, what he called, the ?science of man? and to anchor all other sciences, including ?Natural Religion? and ?Morals?, upon this foundation. Because of this effort, scholars have begun to diverge from the traditional, negative reading of Hume?s work albeit significantly more so with respect to Hume?s ethics than his approach to religion. We neither deny the force of the negative aspect of Hume?s ethics nor treat Hume as an enemy of morality. Despite the progress in our understanding of Hume?s arguments on religion, and even though Hume?s opus contains not only a critique of religion but also a variety of positive claims, scholars still perceive Hume?s work as damaging to religion. In this paper, I wish to join the effort of those who aim at departing from this negative view of Hume?s approach to religion. In the pursuit of this aim I focus on the Natural History of Religion to show that a careful reading of some long-neglected sections of that book, specifically sections 9 through 12, and section 14, reveals an unrecognized aspect of Hume?s approach to religion: namely, that Hume attacked neither religion in general nor monotheism per se in that book but a specific form of monotheism, a version that is the product of corruption of what Hume treats in NHR as the best available rational articulation of theism. What I am particularly keen to stress is that Hume hereby also establishes the distinction between what I will call the genuine monotheism, a tolerant and sociable form of monotheism that is useful to society because it has the capacity to promote reason and moral virtue, and a corrupted version of monotheism, which is a threat to society because it leads to, among other things, dogmatism, ignorance, intolerance and moral depravity. Correspondingly, Hume introduces a distinction between two types of monotheists: the intellectually and morally virtuous monotheist, and the opposite, the intellectually vicious and morally corrupt monotheist. NHR thus at the very least suggests that not all of Hume?s arguments on religion threaten to expel religion, or monotheism specifically, from social life. Please contact Karola (karola.stotz at mq.edu.au) for questions or if you like to give a talk yourself. -- Karola Stotz Senior Lecturer, TWCF Fellow Philosophy Department Macquarie University karola.stotz at mq.edu.au https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/5wkYCoVzGQiqMMwrU1Eq8a?domain=karolastotz.com [image: Macquarie University] Honorary Associate Unit for History and Philosophy of Science University of Sydney -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hps.admin at sydney.edu.au Tue Aug 28 15:42:42 2018 From: hps.admin at sydney.edu.au (HPS Admin) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 05:42:42 +0000 Subject: [SydPhil] HPS Research Series - Emeritus Professor Stephen Gaukroger - Science Fiction and the Revival of Wonder Message-ID: [https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/vbBmCVAGXPtw7BYqfGoipj?domain=gallery.mailchimp.com] SCHOOL OF HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Held in conjunction with the Sydney Centre for the Foundations of Science SEMESTER TWO 2018 RESEARCH SEMINAR SERIES Monday 3rd September [https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/_JkyCWLJY7i923VrHx5tHM?domain=gallery.mailchimp.com] EMERITUS PROFESSOR STEPHEN GAUKROGER SCHOOL OF HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY Science Fiction and the Revival of Wonder As scientific values became embedded in those of civilization in the nineteenth century, a new set of demands was made on science, and it needed to establish its legitimacy in such a role. The association of science and civilization, crucial to the standing of science in the modern era, would simply not be possible without popular science?popular natural history books, children?s science books, museums, science fiction?because science doesn?t have the resources to do this in its own right. In order to meet the expectations of its vastly expanded role that it had assumed from the end of the eighteenth century, one in which it was displacing religion as the key to understanding our place in the world for example, it was crucial that science be extended into the non-propositional realm, engaging with the world in terms of desires, expectations, anxieties, fears, hopes, goals, raw beliefs etc. Only popular science could do this, but it could never have just been a promotional exercise, however much scientists may have wished for this. It raises both expectations and anxieties about the standing of science in the modern era. WHERE: SEMINAR ROOM 446 NEW LAW ANNEX CAMPERDOWN CAMPUS WHEN: MONDAY 3RD SEPTEMBER START: 5.30PM All Welcome | No Booking Required | Free Next HPS Event: Book launch: Hans Pols Nurturing Indonesia 5.30 for 6pm THURSDAY 27TH SEPTEMBER. NICHOLSON MUSEUM Copyright ? *2016* *Unit for HPS, All rights reserved. Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences<*|UPDATE_PROFILE|*> or unsubscribe from this list<*|UNSUB|*> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From debbie.castle at sydney.edu.au Tue Aug 28 15:44:25 2018 From: debbie.castle at sydney.edu.au (Debbie Castle) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 05:44:25 +0000 Subject: [SydPhil] HPS Research Series - Emeritus Professor Stephen Gaukroger - Science Fiction and the Revival of Wonder Message-ID: [https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/ruoOCJyp0qhrROZlFVGn8O?domain=gallery.mailchimp.com] SCHOOL OF HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Held in conjunction with the Sydney Centre for the Foundations of Science SEMESTER TWO 2018 RESEARCH SEMINAR SERIES Monday 3rd September [https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/asCACK1qJZtElKOPCvqZjQ?domain=gallery.mailchimp.com] EMERITUS PROFESSOR STEPHEN GAUKROGER SCHOOL OF HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY Science Fiction and the Revival of Wonder As scientific values became embedded in those of civilization in the nineteenth century, a new set of demands was made on science, and it needed to establish its legitimacy in such a role. The association of science and civilization, crucial to the standing of science in the modern era, would simply not be possible without popular science?popular natural history books, children?s science books, museums, science fiction?because science doesn?t have the resources to do this in its own right. In order to meet the expectations of its vastly expanded role that it had assumed from the end of the eighteenth century, one in which it was displacing religion as the key to understanding our place in the world for example, it was crucial that science be extended into the non-propositional realm, engaging with the world in terms of desires, expectations, anxieties, fears, hopes, goals, raw beliefs etc. Only popular science could do this, but it could never have just been a promotional exercise, however much scientists may have wished for this. It raises both expectations and anxieties about the standing of science in the modern era. WHERE: SEMINAR ROOM 446 NEW LAW ANNEX CAMPERDOWN CAMPUS WHEN: MONDAY 3RD SEPTEMBER START: 5.30PM All Welcome | No Booking Required | Free Next HPS Event: Book launch: Hans Pols Nurturing Indonesia 5.30 for 6pm THURSDAY 27TH SEPTEMBER. NICHOLSON MUSEUM Copyright ? *2016* *Unit for HPS, All rights reserved. Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences<*|UPDATE_PROFILE|*> or unsubscribe from this list<*|UNSUB|*> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From calendar-notification at google.com Wed Aug 29 14:59:54 2018 From: calendar-notification at google.com (Google Calendar) Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 04:59:54 +0000 Subject: [SydPhil] Notification: Dominic Dimech @ Thu 30 Aug 2018 15:00 - 16:30 (AEST) (Current Projects) Message-ID: <0000000000004839d705748bd4cb@google.com> This is a notification for: Title: Dominic Dimech Reflections on Hume's Residual Scepticism The purpose of this presentation is twofold: to defend my reading of Hume as residually sceptical, and to explore the wider significance of this reading. According to my reading of Hume, we cannot read the Treatise as expressing a single, consistent position from beginning to end. Rather, Hume experiences a sceptical crisis in the text and he decides to alter his attitudes towards the justification of his beliefs ? becoming a moderate sceptic ? as a result of this. The textual upshot of this is that we have a nice explanation of why Hume seems so sanguine about philosophy (and human reasoning in general) in some parts of his texts, but seems so deeply sceptical in other parts. However, one might resist the benefits of such an explanation in different ways: maybe it is not so simple to claim that Hume becomes a sceptic after his crisis, since that crisis appears at the end of Book One, but Books Two and Three are most certainly not sceptical texts. Another worry is that the residually sceptical reading leaves Hume in an unstable philosophical position: it doesn?t seem obvious how an extreme sceptical crisis can lead to moderate scepticism. I defend my view in light of these problems and in doing so I explain what difference it makes to our understanding of the history of philosophy. When: Thu 30 Aug 2018 15:00 ? 16:30 Eastern Australia Time - Sydney Where: The Muniment Room, University of Sydney Calendar: Current Projects Who: * Kristie Miller- creator Event details: https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/sqquC4QZ1RF08An5TO4Gny?domain=google.com Invitation from Google Calendar: https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/7-pXC5QZ29FjlYz9FO8dS1?domain=google.com You are receiving this email at the account sydphil at arts.usyd.edu.au because you are subscribed for notifications on calendar Current Projects. To stop receiving these emails, please log in to https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/7-pXC5QZ29FjlYz9FO8dS1?domain=google.com and change your notification settings for this calendar. Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to modify your RSVP response. Learn more at https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/pWlyC6X13RtOWlgmhmZaCN?domain=support.google.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From calendar-notification at google.com Thu Aug 30 13:00:13 2018 From: calendar-notification at google.com (Google Calendar) Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2018 03:00:13 +0000 Subject: [SydPhil] Notification: Karen Jones (Melbourne) @ Wed 5 Sep 2018 13:00 - 14:30 (AEST) (Seminars) Message-ID: <00000000000019032e05749e4615@google.com> This is a notification for: Title: Karen Jones (Melbourne) Radical Consciousness In this talk I explore the epistemic potential of radical consciousness. Radical consciousness is defined by its structure not its content. It is that kind of consciousness, first identified by Sandra Bartky, in which ?certain features of social reality are [experienced as] intolerable, as to be rejected on behalf of a transforming project for the future.? It is the kind of consciousness that typically emerges through participation in political movements aimed at changing the world. I identify its profile as comprising a blend of hope and indignation. Radical consciousness can function as an epistemic accelerator and so can sometimes give rise to epistemic privilege that supports moral deference. When: Wed 5 Sep 2018 13:00 ? 14:30 Eastern Australia Time - Sydney Where: Sydney Uni, Muniment Room Calendar: Seminars Who: * Luara Ferracioli- creator Event details: https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/qQzcCMwvLQTOBYrBUwjsfA?domain=google.com Invitation from Google Calendar: https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/JpRLCNLwM9ilkpWki4WE_L?domain=google.com You are receiving this email at the account sydphil at arts.usyd.edu.au because you are subscribed for notifications on calendar Seminars. To stop receiving these emails, please log in to https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/JpRLCNLwM9ilkpWki4WE_L?domain=google.com and change your notification settings for this calendar. Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to modify your RSVP response. Learn more at https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/DqepCOMxNytR1k81Ikw_nf?domain=support.google.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From calendar-notification at google.com Fri Aug 31 15:00:03 2018 From: calendar-notification at google.com (Google Calendar) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 05:00:03 +0000 Subject: [SydPhil] Notification: David Glick @ Thu 6 Sep 2018 15:00 - 16:30 (AEST) (Current Projects) Message-ID: <0000000000007f34670574b410a8@google.com> This is a notification for: Title: David Glick Entanglement Across Time Recent experiments involving delayed-choice entanglement swapping seem to suggest that particles can become entangled after they?ve already been detected. This astonishing result is taken by some to undermine realism about entanglement. I present an alternative explanation of these experiments that invokes entanglement relations between particles at different times. I argue that such an explanation?radical though it may be?isn't incoherent and doesn't invite paradox. I compare this approach to a more deflationary realist strategy defended by Matthias Egg, which I argue faces problems in light of relativity. The upshot is that we should take seriously the possibility of entanglement across time and seek to develop a framework for quantum theory which allows for it. When: Thu 6 Sep 2018 15:00 ? 16:30 Eastern Australia Time - Sydney Calendar: Current Projects Who: * Kristie Miller- creator Event details: https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/gKRBCjZrzqH5K4KLcWC4WN?domain=google.com Invitation from Google Calendar: https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/-TkyCk8vAZtW8y8VTVRMPS?domain=google.com You are receiving this email at the account sydphil at arts.usyd.edu.au because you are subscribed for notifications on calendar Current Projects. To stop receiving these emails, please log in to https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/-TkyCk8vAZtW8y8VTVRMPS?domain=google.com and change your notification settings for this calendar. Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to modify your RSVP response. Learn more at https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/mG5HClxwB5Cn0w0JhyM-do?domain=support.google.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: