BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Arche - ECPv6.18.3.1//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:Arche
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Arche
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/London
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:BST
DTSTART:20200329T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:GMT
DTSTART:20201025T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:BST
DTSTART:20210328T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:GMT
DTSTART:20211031T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:BST
DTSTART:20220327T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:GMT
DTSTART:20221030T010000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211101T093000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211101T110000
DTSTAMP:20221019T145722Z
CREATED:20210628T115246Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20221019T145722Z
UID:10017513-1635759000-1635764400@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Medieval Logic Seminar: Walter Segrave\, Insolubles
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/medieval-logic-seminar-2021-09-20/2021-11-01/
LOCATION:A virtual seminar by Zoom\, The University\, St Andrews\, KY16 9L\, United Kingdom
CATEGORIES:Medieval Logic Research Group
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211101T150000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211101T170000
DTSTAMP:20211026T103252Z
CREATED:20210628T115741Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211026T103252Z
UID:10017556-1635778800-1635786000@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Metaphysics Seminar Thomas Randriamahazaka (University of St Andrews)
DESCRIPTION:Title: On Beall and Camrud’s defence of the combinatorial argument for FDE\n\nAbstract: In their 2020 paper “FDE all the way up”\, Beall and Camrud aim to defend a particular combinatorial argument for the paraconsistent and paracomplete logic FDE against a natural objection. The argument\, roughly\, states that\, since logic must consider all possibilities\, it is not enough to have the ‘True’ and the ‘False’ in the correct set of truth-values but there also must be all combinations of these two fundamental truth-values\, namely ‘Both True and False’ and ‘Neither True Nor False’. Including those combinatorial truth-values yields FDE. The objection Beall and Camrud consider consists in the idea that it must be possible to iterate the processus of combining truth-values. The gist of Beall and Camrud’s defence is that iterating the operation of ‘taking combinations of truth-values’ do not change the logic after one gets to FDE.  In this talk\, I argue that their defence fails because the formal definition of the operation of ‘taking combinations of truth-values’ that they use\, namely Priest’s positive plurivalence\, fails to deliver FDE when applied to the two-valued matrix of classical logic. Indeed\, I argue\, one must stay consistent in what notion of ‘taking combinations of truth-values’ one uses throughout the combinatorial argument and the defence against the objection. One can find\, to my knowledge\, two such notions in the literature: Priest’s positive plurivalence and Priest’s general plurivalence. Depending on which one uses\, one find oneself with a combinatorial argument (immune to the natural objection) for Priest’s logic LP or Oller’s logic AL. The conclusion of the talk takes the form of a challenge: to defend the combinatorial argument for FDE against the natural objection\, one must find a notion of ‘taking combinations of truth-values’ which (a) produces the four-valued matrix of FDE when applied to the two-valued matrix of classical logic and (b) always produces FDE as a logic when iterated starting from the four-valued matrix of FDE. The notion used by Beall and Camrud in their paper satisfies (b) but fails to satisfy (a). By contrast\, I put forward in the talk a natural proposal which satisfies (a) but fails to satisfy (b). This leaves me quite skeptical that the challenge can be met and that any such combinatorial argument for FDE can survive the natural objection.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/metaphysics-seminar-5-2021-11-01/
LOCATION:A virtual seminar by Zoom\, The University\, St Andrews\, KY16 9L\, United Kingdom
CATEGORIES:Metaphysics and Logic group
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211102T120000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211102T140000
DTSTAMP:20211028T081206Z
CREATED:20210629T131101Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211028T081206Z
UID:10017628-1635854400-1635861600@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Language & Mind Seminar: Daniel Garibay Garcia (St Andrews)
DESCRIPTION:Deborah Tollefsen’s “Can Groups Assert that P?”
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/language-and-mind-s1-2021-09-21-2021-11-02/
CATEGORIES:Language and Mind Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211102T150000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211102T170000
DTSTAMP:20211012T095922Z
CREATED:20210628T155228Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211012T095922Z
UID:10017614-1635865200-1635872400@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Conceptual Engineering Seminar - Kevin Scharp (University of St Andrews) -
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/conceptual-engineering-seminar-4-2021-11-02/
CATEGORIES:Conceptual Engineering Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211103T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211103T180000
DTSTAMP:20211028T182214Z
CREATED:20210629T133355Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211028T182214Z
UID:10017642-1635955200-1635962400@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Feminist Philosophy and Social Theory Seminar: Lara Jost
DESCRIPTION:For this session\, Lara Jost will lead a discussion of the second chapter of Myisha Cherry’s new book ‘The Case for Rage: Why Anger is Essential to Anti-Racist Struggle’. \nTitle: Fitting Fury and Frightful Rage\, Myisha Cherry\nAbstract: Chapter 2 argues that Lordean rage is an appropriate response to racial injustice and is more likely to correctly represent racial injustice than the other variations of rage. The chapter claims that this apt and correct Lordean rage is morally and politically valuable because it not only registers racial injustice but it appreciates justice. Lordean rage says that racial justice is worth having. It also not only marks disvalue\, but it is a way to respond to the value that racial minorities in the United States have. The chapter also explores ways to escape strategic traps set by others to make the outraged doubt their anger and give it up.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/philosophy-and-social-theory-seminar-2021-11-03/
CATEGORIES:Philosophy & Social Theory Arché Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211104T100000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211104T120000
DTSTAMP:20221019T145737Z
CREATED:20210628T145602Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20221019T145737Z
UID:10017601-1636020000-1636027200@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Super Special Seminar
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/super-special-seminar-6/2021-11-04/
CATEGORIES:Super Special Seminar series
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211104T130000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211104T143000
DTSTAMP:20210826T125940Z
CREATED:20210629T142950Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210826T125940Z
UID:10017694-1636030800-1636036200@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Epistemology Seminar: Corine Besson (Sussex) "Carroll’s Regress\, Guidance and Explicit Representation"
DESCRIPTION:Abstract: What is the nature of one’s justification to use a logical principle such as Modus Ponens in reasoning? It is widely agreed amongst epistemologists of logic that such justification cannot be internalist. One key reason offered for this view is that internalist accounts of justification are susceptible to Carroll-style regresses. In this talk\, I examine this claim and argue that internalist accounts of justification are not open to such regresses. I further argue that the sorts of externalist accounts of the justification of logical principles typically put forward as alternatives are inadequate.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/epistemology-seminar-3-2021-11-04/
CATEGORIES:Epistemology Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211108T093000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211108T110000
DTSTAMP:20221019T145722Z
CREATED:20210628T115246Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20221019T145722Z
UID:10017514-1636363800-1636369200@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Medieval Logic Seminar: Walter Segrave\, Insolubles
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/medieval-logic-seminar-2021-09-20/2021-11-08/
LOCATION:A virtual seminar by Zoom\, The University\, St Andrews\, KY16 9L\, United Kingdom
CATEGORIES:Medieval Logic Research Group
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211108T150000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211108T170000
DTSTAMP:20211101T151256Z
CREATED:20210628T115741Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211101T151256Z
UID:10017557-1636383600-1636390800@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Metaphysics Seminar Frederik Andersen (University of St Andrews)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Logical Akrasia \n\nAbstract: The aim of this paper is two-fold. First\, it introduces the concept logical akrasia (by analogy to epistemic akrasia). Second\, it discusses how logical akrasia relates to the standards of epistemic rationality\, and in particular\, how logical akrasia might pose a challenge to the tenability of the controversial fixed point thesis.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/metaphysics-seminar-5-2021-11-08/
LOCATION:A virtual seminar by Zoom\, The University\, St Andrews\, KY16 9L\, United Kingdom
CATEGORIES:Metaphysics and Logic group
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211109T120000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211109T140000
DTSTAMP:20211104T174716Z
CREATED:20210629T131101Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211104T174716Z
UID:10017629-1636459200-1636466400@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Language & Mind Seminar: Stefano Pugnaghi
DESCRIPTION:Breckenridge & Magidor: ‘Arbitrary Reference’
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/language-and-mind-s1-2021-09-21-2021-11-09/
CATEGORIES:Language and Mind Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211109T150000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211109T170000
DTSTAMP:20211012T100007Z
CREATED:20210628T155228Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211012T100007Z
UID:10017615-1636470000-1636477200@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Conceptual Engineering Seminar - Elisabetta Lalumera (University of Bologna)
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/conceptual-engineering-seminar-4-2021-11-09/
CATEGORIES:Conceptual Engineering Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211110T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211110T180000
DTSTAMP:20211105T114224Z
CREATED:20210629T133355Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211105T114224Z
UID:10017643-1636560000-1636567200@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Feminist Philosophy and Social Theory Seminar: Colin Troesken
DESCRIPTION:Colin Troesken will lead a discussion of Anne Eaton’s paper ‘A Lady on the Street but a Freak in the Bed’: On the Distinction Between Erotic Art and Pornography (abstract below). \nPlease be aware that the paper includes examples of the sorts of erotic art under discussion. As usual\, the discussion leader will provide a short summary of the paper and we encourage those who have not had time to read the paper in full to still participate in the discussion. \n\n\nTitle: ‘A Lady on the Street but a Freak in the Bed’: On the Distinction Between Erotic Art and Pornography \n\n\nAbstract: How\, if at all\, are we to distinguish between the works that we call ‘art’ and those that we call ‘pornography’? This question gets a grip because from classical Greek vases and the frescoes of Pompeii to Renaissance mythological painting and sculpture to Modernist prints\, the European artistic tradition is chock-full of art that looks a lot like pornography. In this paper I propose a way of thinking about the distinction that is grounded in art historical considerations regarding the function of erotic images in 16 th -century Italy. This exploration suggests that the root of the erotic art/pornography distinction was—at least in this context—class: in particular\, the need for a special category of unsanctioned illicit images arose at the very time when print culture was beginning to threaten elite privilege. What made an erotic representation exceed the boundaries of acceptability\, I suggest\, was not its extreme libidinosity but\, rather\, its widespread availability and\, thereby\, its threat to one of the mechanisms of sustaining class privilege.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/philosophy-and-social-theory-seminar-2021-11-10/
CATEGORIES:Philosophy & Social Theory Arché Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211111T100000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211111T120000
DTSTAMP:20221019T145737Z
CREATED:20210628T145602Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20221019T145737Z
UID:10017602-1636624800-1636632000@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Super Special Seminar
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/super-special-seminar-6/2021-11-11/
CATEGORIES:Super Special Seminar series
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211111T130000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211111T143000
DTSTAMP:20211108T093512Z
CREATED:20210629T142950Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211108T093512Z
UID:10017695-1636635600-1636641000@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Epistemology Seminar: Alessandra Tanesini (Cardiff) "The alleged epistemic significance of silence\, silencing\, and the conversational norm of no silent rejections (NSR)"
DESCRIPTION:Abstract: In this talk I examine\, and rebut\, Goldberg’s (2020) arguments in favour of a conversational norm that would defeasibly entitle linguistic agents to presume that silence indicates assent (NSR). Using evidence from conversational analysis I show that Goldberg is wrong to claim that our linguistic communities de facto conform to this norm in conversation. Instead\, I argue that norms similar to NSR are temporarily enacted by means of exercitive speech acts. If this is right\, and contra Goldberg\, silencing is the function served by these norms rather than a product of NSR’s misapplication. Finally\, I argue that because of the bounded nature of human rationality\, we would not wish a system of human communication aiming at the epistemic goals of persuasion and the sharing of information to have NSR as one of its norms.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/epistemology-seminar-3-2021-11-11/
CATEGORIES:Epistemology Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211111T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211111T173000
DTSTAMP:20211108T093424Z
CREATED:20211108T093424Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211108T093424Z
UID:10017713-1636646400-1636651800@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Epistemology Seminar (joint with CEPPA): Jennifer Lackey (Northwestern) "Epistemic Reparations and the Right to be Known"
DESCRIPTION:Abstract: In this paper\, I provide an account of the epistemic significance of the phenomenon of “being known” and the relationship it has to reparations that are distinctively epistemic. Drawing on a framework provided by the United Nations of the “right to know\,” I argue that victims of gross violations and injustices not only have the right to know what happened\, but also the right to be known—to be a giver of knowledge to others about their own experiences. I show how such victims can suffer epistemic wrongs by being rendered invisible\, vilified or demonized\, or systematically distorted\, and that these ways of not being known demand epistemic reparations. While there are traditional reparations that are epistemic in nature\, such as memorialization and education\, I argue that there is a prior and arguably more important epistemic reparation—knowing victims of gross violations and injustices in the sense of bearing witness. I conclude by sketching an epistemological picture to underwrite this notion of epistemic reparations\, one that significantly expands the traditional picture by including epistemic duties that are imperfect in nature and concern actions in addition to beliefs.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/epistemology-seminar-joint-with-ceppa-jennifer-lackey-northwestern-epistemic-reparations-and-the-right-to-be-known/
CATEGORIES:Epistemology Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211115T093000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211115T110000
DTSTAMP:20221019T145722Z
CREATED:20210628T115246Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20221019T145722Z
UID:10017515-1636968600-1636974000@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Medieval Logic Seminar: Walter Segrave\, Insolubles
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/medieval-logic-seminar-2021-09-20/2021-11-15/
LOCATION:A virtual seminar by Zoom\, The University\, St Andrews\, KY16 9L\, United Kingdom
CATEGORIES:Medieval Logic Research Group
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211115T150000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211115T170000
DTSTAMP:20211111T174751Z
CREATED:20210628T115741Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211111T174751Z
UID:10017558-1636988400-1636995600@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Metaphysics Seminar Thomas Ferguson (City University of New York)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Intensional Subject-Matter in Subsystems of Analytic Implication \nAbstract: Although one tends to think of truth or falsity as the predominant semantic feature with which logic is concerned\, a number of logics exist that give the feature of topic or subject-matter equal weight. Just as we expect compositional truth conditions to extend to the entirety of a formal language\, the promise of such topic-sensitive logics requires that conditions on subject-matter are defined over the full language. Past treatments of the subject-matter of intensional connectives (like intensional conditionals) have been relatively coarse and carry with them a number of counterintuitive features. A natural place to start is by examining Kit Fine’s 1986 semantics for Parry’s logic of analytic implication\, in which the conditionals play either no role—or a degenerate\, token role—in the determination of subject-matter. In this talk\, I will present axiomatizations for subsystems of Parry’s analytic implication in which the subject-matter of the intensional conditional allows a fine degree of control. Given the proximity between Fine’s 1986 semantics and Berto’s semantics for topic-sensitive intentional modals (TSIMs)\, the framework can be immediately exported to TSIMs. I will conclude by discussing how to derive accounts of the subject-matter of other intensional conditionals\, modal operators\, and TSIMs themselves in this context.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/metaphysics-seminar-5-2021-11-15/
LOCATION:A virtual seminar by Zoom\, The University\, St Andrews\, KY16 9L\, United Kingdom
CATEGORIES:Metaphysics and Logic group
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211116T120000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211116T140000
DTSTAMP:20211110T160101Z
CREATED:20210629T131101Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211110T160101Z
UID:10017630-1637064000-1637071200@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Language & Mind Seminar: David Bain (Glasgow)
DESCRIPTION:Pain\, Painfulness\, and Evaluation\n\nIn this talk\, I survey the increasingly rich\, contemporary debate about the nature of pain and its unpleasantness.  Along the way\, I highlight some of the advantages of my evaluativist view\, and\, against the messenger-shooting objection\, I argue that evaluativism can accommodate the non-instrumental badness of unpleasant pain.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/language-and-mind-s1-2021-09-21-2021-11-16/
CATEGORIES:Language and Mind Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211116T150000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211116T170000
DTSTAMP:20211012T100049Z
CREATED:20210628T155228Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211012T100049Z
UID:10017616-1637074800-1637082000@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Conceptual Engineering Seminar - James Hampton (University of London)
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/conceptual-engineering-seminar-4-2021-11-16/
CATEGORIES:Conceptual Engineering Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211118T100000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211118T120000
DTSTAMP:20221019T145737Z
CREATED:20210628T145602Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20221019T145737Z
UID:10017603-1637229600-1637236800@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Super Special Seminar
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/super-special-seminar-6/2021-11-18/
CATEGORIES:Super Special Seminar series
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211118T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211118T173000
DTSTAMP:20211102T233019Z
CREATED:20210629T142950Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211102T233019Z
UID:10017696-1637251200-1637256600@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Epistemology Seminar (joint with CEPPA and FPST): Linda Martín Alcoff (CUNY) "Extractivist epistemologies"
DESCRIPTION:Abstract: This paper (which is very much a work in progress) will develop the concept of extractivist epistemology as a way to think through the effect of colonialism on knowing practices. Extractivist epistemologies work analogously to extractivist capitalism: seeking an epistemic resource of some sort—such as a piece of pharmacological knowledge held by an indigenous community or rural healer concerning the medicinal potential of a given plant\, or an artifact from an indigenous funeral site. The extractivist approach to knowledge treats this epistemic resource as a piece of knowledge that can be separated from the social context and identities of its origin without epistemic loss. In so doing\, extractivist practices change the items that are abstracted. I will show how this is this is an epistemic problem and not simply an ethical problem.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/epistemology-seminar-3-2021-11-18/
CATEGORIES:Epistemology Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211122T093000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211122T110000
DTSTAMP:20221019T145722Z
CREATED:20210628T115246Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20221019T145722Z
UID:10017516-1637573400-1637578800@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Medieval Logic Seminar: Walter Segrave\, Insolubles
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/medieval-logic-seminar-2021-09-20/2021-11-22/
LOCATION:A virtual seminar by Zoom\, The University\, St Andrews\, KY16 9L\, United Kingdom
CATEGORIES:Medieval Logic Research Group
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211122T150000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211122T170000
DTSTAMP:20211116T153209Z
CREATED:20210628T115741Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211116T153209Z
UID:10017559-1637593200-1637600400@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Metaphysics Seminar Lorraine Keller (Saint Joseph’s University)
DESCRIPTION:Title: The Access Problem for Act-type Theories of Propositions \nAbstract: Recent work on propositions has seen the rise of act-type theories\, according to which propositions are types of cognitive acts that derive their representational and truth-conditional properties from the token cognitive acts of agents. Act-type theories have been gaining traction as part of a rejection of what is called the ‘Fregean conception’\, a “traditional” conception of propositions according to which they are intrinsically representational\, mind- and language-independent abstracta\, while cognitive attitudes such as belief and doubt derive their representational properties from their relation to propositions. Act-type theorists present two main objections to the Fregean conception: \n\n(i) The Explanation Problem: by construing propositions as non-derivatively representational and deriving the representation of the cognitive attitudes from the representation of propositions\, Fregean theories turn truth-apt mental representation into an unsolvable mystery.\n(ii) The Access Problem: by construing propositions as mind- and language-independent abstracta\, Fregean theories make our cognitive access to them an additional unsolvable mystery.\n\nHowever\, in their attempt to evade the difficulties that plague the Fregean conception\, act-type theorists run into problems of their own—mainly centering around the crucial notion of predication. Peter Hanks has argued that the notion of predication at the heart of Scott Soames’ theory cannot explain representation and is incoherent (Hanks 2015: 36-39). And in a recent paper\, Indrek Reiland endorses Hanks’ criticism of Soames\, but argues that Hanks’ attempt to address objections to his own notion of predication is unsuccessful (Reiland 2019). Reiland offers a modified version of Hanks’ view that allegedly succeeds where Hanks’ proposed solution fails. I argue that the way Reiland modifies his view leads to a particularly acute version of the Access Problem. I then point out that this is a problem for Hanks and Soames as well\, and that\, by examining the way in which their theories face the Access Problem\, we can see that they are also unable to solve the Explanation Problem.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/metaphysics-seminar-5-2021-11-22/
LOCATION:A virtual seminar by Zoom\, The University\, St Andrews\, KY16 9L\, United Kingdom
CATEGORIES:Metaphysics and Logic group
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211123T120000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211123T140000
DTSTAMP:20211117T171432Z
CREATED:20210629T131101Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211117T171432Z
UID:10017631-1637668800-1637676000@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Language & Mind Seminar: Nick Allen (St Andrews)
DESCRIPTION:Pluralist Meta-ethical Constructivism and Feminist Social Construction: \n\nMeta-ethical Constructivism holds that ethics is grounded upon shared values between agents in a society. In this sense a Constructivist thinks there are correct moral procedures dictated from the ‘moral point of view’ (Street\, 2008/2010)\, the following of which both gives answers to moral questions and justifies the moral values we receive as answers (Darwall et.al.\, 1992). From this\, a moral semantics view can follow in which moral terms are ‘explained by identifying the kinds of inferences (for example\, about means and ends) one must be making in order to count as employing normative concepts at all.’ (Street\, 2010) \nDespite basing their accounts on moral practice\, the correct moral procedures and moral point of view which constructivism evinces are considered to be monological. That is\, there is one correct moral point of view and one set of correct moral procedures for justifying moral values. \nI will argue that this is a mistake\, and that an alternative\, pluralist version of meta-ethical constructivism is both available and preferable. This pluralist meta-ethical constructivism is built out of an altogether different understanding of construction: feminist social construction. \nThe resultant view has both independent support and is able to overcome some challenges which face traditional constructivism\, most notably what I call “the thick/thin dilemma”.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/language-and-mind-s1-2021-09-21-2021-11-23/
CATEGORIES:Language and Mind Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211123T150000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211123T170000
DTSTAMP:20211012T100140Z
CREATED:20210628T155228Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211012T100140Z
UID:10017617-1637679600-1637686800@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Conceptual Engineering Seminar - Ishani Maitra (University of Michigan)
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/conceptual-engineering-seminar-4-2021-11-23/
CATEGORIES:Conceptual Engineering Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211124T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211124T180000
DTSTAMP:20211119T115616Z
CREATED:20210629T133355Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211119T115616Z
UID:10017644-1637769600-1637776800@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Feminist Philosophy and Social Theory Seminar: Jade Fletcher
DESCRIPTION:Jade Fletcher will be giving a presentation titled ‘Social Structures\, Ideology and Bad Sex‘ at 4-6pm Wednesday. If you would like to attend please email Emilia Wilson (ew58@st-andrews.ac.uk) for the link.\n\n\n\nTitle: Social Structures\, Ideology\, and Bad Sex\n\nAbstract: This paper is concerned with providing an explanatory framework for thinking about a particular type of ethically bad sex. I argue that much of the current literature on bad sex\, which takes consent to be the lens through which bad sex should be viewed\, is unable to adequately capture an interesting set of cases of bad sex. I argue that we should make sense of what has gone wrong in these cases in terms of unjust social structures creating the conditions for bad events.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/philosophy-and-social-theory-seminar-2021-11-24/
CATEGORIES:Philosophy & Social Theory Arché Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211125T100000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211125T120000
DTSTAMP:20221019T145737Z
CREATED:20210628T145602Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20221019T145737Z
UID:10017604-1637834400-1637841600@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Super Special Seminar
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/super-special-seminar-6/2021-11-25/
CATEGORIES:Super Special Seminar series
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211125T130000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211125T143000
DTSTAMP:20211108T103525Z
CREATED:20210629T142950Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211108T103525Z
UID:10017697-1637845200-1637850600@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Epistemology Seminar: Timothy Williamson (Oxford) "Knowledge by sight and knowledge by proof"
DESCRIPTION:Abstract: Knowledge by sight is a standard paradigm of a posteriori knowledge. Knowledge by mathematical proof is a standard paradigm of a priori knowledge. However\, I will argue that the two types of knowledge have so much in common that the a priori – a posteriori distinction cannot go very deep.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/epistemology-seminar-3-2021-11-25/
CATEGORIES:Epistemology Seminar
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211129T093000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211129T110000
DTSTAMP:20221019T145722Z
CREATED:20210628T115246Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20221019T145722Z
UID:10017517-1638178200-1638183600@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Medieval Logic Seminar: Walter Segrave\, Insolubles
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/medieval-logic-seminar-2021-09-20/2021-11-29/
LOCATION:A virtual seminar by Zoom\, The University\, St Andrews\, KY16 9L\, United Kingdom
CATEGORIES:Medieval Logic Research Group
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20211129T150000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20211129T170000
DTSTAMP:20211120T065925Z
CREATED:20210628T115741Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20211120T065925Z
UID:10017560-1638198000-1638205200@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Metaphysics Seminar Francesca Poggiolesi (Univeristy of Paris)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Explanatory (or Grounding) Proofs: Philosophical Framework\, Core Ideas\, Results \nAbstract: When it comes to the question of what proofs serve for\, since the antiquity two possible answers have been identified: on the one hand\, a proof can serve to show that something is true\, on the other hand\, a proof can also serve to explain why something is true. The first type of proofs are called “proofs-that”\, whilst the latter “proofs-why” or “explanatory proofs”. A great part of the logic of the XX century has been dedicated to the formalization and the development of proofs-that\, leaving untouched the analysis of proofs-why.  In this talk we will try to fill this gap and explore the realm of explanatory proofs. We will offer a formalization of explanatory proofs and we will attempt to show what type of results can be obtained with such a formalization.
URL:https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/arche/event/metaphysics-seminar-5-2021-11-29/
LOCATION:A virtual seminar by Zoom\, The University\, St Andrews\, KY16 9L\, United Kingdom
CATEGORIES:Metaphysics and Logic group
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR