BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//CEPPA - ECPv6.15.17.1//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:CEPPA
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for CEPPA
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: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
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:BST
DTSTART:20230326T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:GMT
DTSTART:20231029T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:BST
DTSTART:20240331T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:GMT
DTSTART:20241027T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:BST
DTSTART:20250330T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:GMT
DTSTART:20251026T010000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20221215T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20221215T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20221207T201729Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20221213T060843Z
UID:10000379-1671120000-1671125400@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (online only) – Tyler Cowen (George Mason University)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Teams (online only) \nTitle: The Philosophy of Effective Altruism \nAbstract: What are the strengths and weaknesses of Effective Altruism as both a moral philosophy and practical guide to action? Is it best thought of as an optimizing approach? How important is existential risk\, especially relative to maximizing economic growth? How does the new form of Effective Altruism differ from standard utilitarianism?
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-online-only-tyler-cowen-george-mason-university/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
ORGANIZER;CN="Luca Stroppa":MAILTO:ls330@st-andrews.ac.uk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230119T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230119T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20221114T204445Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230109T112159Z
UID:10000378-1674144000-1674149400@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) - Tom Simpson (Oxford)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe G03 \nTitle: ‘Should political discrimination be unlawful?’
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-tom-simpson-oxford/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230126T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230126T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20221207T203247Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230112T163428Z
UID:10000380-1674748800-1674754200@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (online only) – Lea Ypi (LSE)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Teams (online only) \nTitle: Kant the Racist? \nAbstract: This paper examines Kant’s thoughts on race considering his analysis of teleology. It explains how Kant analysed the development of human races in connection to his account of the development of “germs” and “dispositions” in the human species. It further explains how that theory changed with the introduction of Kant’s analysis of reflective judgment. The paper argues that the important shifts in Kant’s analysis of teleology after the third Critique had crucial implications for Kant’s assessment of the development of human races and limit the scope of the charges of racism his theories have recently received.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-online-only-lea-ypi-lse/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
ORGANIZER;CN="Johannes Nickl":MAILTO:jmn20@st-andrews.ac.uk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230202T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230202T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20221207T203751Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230126T170728Z
UID:10000381-1675353600-1675359000@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) – Christoph Schuringa (Northeastern University London)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe G03 \nTitle: Karl Marx and the Actualization of Philosophy \nAbstract: Marx’s Eleventh Thesis on Feuerbach famously states that ‘The philosophers have thus far merely interpreted the world; the point is to change it.’ In this talk\, I begin to clear away some obstacles that stand in the way of an appreciation of the sense in which Marx thinks philosophy is to be practical. What emerges is an improved understanding of the Eleventh Thesis\, which can then be aligned with Marx’s call for the ‘actualization of philosophy’. Philosophy will turn out to have been\, all along\, praxis; contemplation will show up as privative with respect to philosophy actualized.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-christoph-schuringa-northeastern-university-london/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230309T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230309T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20220704T090838Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230301T123757Z
UID:10000352-1678377600-1678383000@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) – Sigrún Svavarsdóttir (Tufts)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe G03 \nTitle: “On Seeking Objective Grounds for Moral Evaluation” \nAbstract: The paper argues that to do justice to questions of objectivity that arise within and about moral discourse\, we must take into account that this discourse is embedded within a somewhat conventionally regimented practice that comprises attempts to guide attitude and action by way of justifying\, criticizing\, validating\, or excusing them. The appropriate condition of objectivity rules out a specific narrow kind of response-dependence that would run counter to this kind of guiding role for moral verdicts. The relevant condition is identified (the discourse- and practice-independence condition or\, for short\, the DP-independence condition).
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-sigrun-svavarsdottir-tufts/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230323T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230323T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20221207T204535Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230313T150600Z
UID:10000382-1679587200-1679592600@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (online only) – Edwin Etieyibo (University of the Witwatersrand)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Teams (online only) \nTitle: Disharmony as a Political Vice \nAbstract: In this presentation\, I examine two important concepts\, those of harmony and disharmony by drawing on some thoughts including in three areas of African philosophical ideas and understanding. While I take harmony as virtuous or at least valuable or desirable\, I take disharmony as vicious or at least dis-valuable or not desirable. I discuss the desirability of harmony and non-desirability of disharmony and the African Union as exemplification of political practice in Africa in advancing the view that disharmony is a vice\, in general and a political vice\, in particular\, insofar as it undermines the proper practice of politics in Africa.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-online-only-edwin-etieyibo-university-of-the-witwatersrand/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
ORGANIZER;CN="Joe Millum":MAILTO:jrm39@st-andrews.ac.uk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230406T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230406T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20221207T205231Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230403T120413Z
UID:10000383-1680796800-1680802200@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (online only) – Catherine Elgin (Harvard)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Teams (online only) \nTitle: Epistemic Dynamics \nAbstract: Epistemic agents are finite and fallible.  Our range is limited and some of what we accept is\, no doubt\, flawed.  To achieve our epistemic and practical objectives\, we devise methods and practices that foster correction\, refinement\, and expansion of our current epistemic commitments. Traditional epistemology maintains that epistemic acceptability requires non-fortuitously justified true belief\, where non-fortuitousness insures that the justification and the truth maker align. If so\, reflective equilibrium is at best indicative of acceptability.  I argue otherwise.   Reflective equilibrium is constitutive of epistemic acceptability.  Because a network of cognitive commitments in reflective equilibrium is as reasonable as any available alternative in the epistemic circumstances\, it is worthy of acceptance.  That does not make it perfect or permanently acceptable.  Such a network is susceptible of and probably in need of improvement.  But it is the best we can currently do and provides a suitable platform for improvement.  I argue that such a network should be designed to foster\, not merely to allow for\, further gains.  It should support epistemic leveraging.  That requires that it enable critical reflection about its own ends and means\, enabling epistemic agents to recognize opportunities for and obstacles to improvement. \nCo-hosted with ECT.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-online-only-elgin/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
ORGANIZER;CN="Viviane Fairbank":MAILTO:vf45@st-andrews.ac.uk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230413T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230413T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20221207T205510Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230406T051645Z
UID:10000384-1681401600-1681407000@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) – Daniel Muñoz (UNC Chapel Hill)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe G03 \nTitle: Values as Vectors \nAbstract: Often\, two things seem tied in value\, though slightly improving one would not break the tie. How can we model such ‘insensitivity to sweetening’? A leading answer is that overall values\, rather than being like precise numbers\, must be imprecise\, giving rise to a special nontransitive value relation\, which Chang calls parity. But parity is notoriously hard to pin down\, and imprecise values are neither necessary nor sufficient for modeling sweetening. I propose instead to model overall values as many-dimensional vectors. The result is a fresh and flexible framework for the stranger side of ethics—as well as an elegant definition of parity as a tie between things of nonfungible value.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-munoz/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230420T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230420T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20221207T205805Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230407T084853Z
UID:10000385-1682006400-1682011800@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) – Bart Streumer (University of Groningen)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe G03 \nTitle: “Superspreading the Word”.\n\nAbstract: Quasi-realists are expressivists who say much of what realists say. To avoid making their view indistinguishable from realism\, however\, they usually stop short of saying everything realists say. Many realists therefore think that something important is missing from quasi-realism. I will argue that quasi-realists can undermine this thought by defending a version of quasi-realism that I will call super-quasi-realism. This version seems indistinguishable from realism\, but I will argue that this is a mistaken impression that arises because we cannot believe super-quasi-realism.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-bart-streumer-university-of-groningen/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230427T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230427T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20221207T210146Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230420T200550Z
UID:10000386-1682611200-1682616600@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) – Jordan MacKenzie (Virginia Tech)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe G03 \nTitle: Humorlessness and Moral Recognition \nAbstract: We’re often quick to point fingers at people who fail to find humor in themselves. And our accusations have a moral tinge: we decry people for being sanctimonious buzzkills\, and command them to  ‘get over themselves’. But are these moralized reactions justified? And what\, if anything\, justifies them? In this paper I argue that humourlessness often is a moral failing. This is because humorlessness often involves a disrespectful failure or refusal to engage with other peoples’ perspectives. I’ll then explore what implication this account has for accusations of humorlessness in oppressive social contexts\, and I’ll argue that one of the harms of oppression is that it makes having a sense of humor towards oneself morally risky.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-jordan-mackenzie/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
ORGANIZER;CN="Ben Sachs":MAILTO:bas7@st-andrews.ac.uk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230504T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230504T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20221209T070749Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230325T134455Z
UID:10000388-1683216000-1683221400@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) – Eric Martin (Baylor)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe G03 \nTitle: Scientism and Humanities Education \nAbstract: In this talk I discuss a pedagogical implication of scientism. Because scientism elevates science and derogates what is deemed non-scientific\, the arts and humanities become\, on such a view\, less valuable parts of university curricula. I survey some of the current data on declining study of the humanities and explain how scientism may contribute to a trend disparaging the arts and humanities\, suggesting some problems with this view.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-eric-martin-baylor/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230511T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230511T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20221207T210436Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230504T103852Z
UID:10000387-1683820800-1683826200@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) – Guy Fletcher (Edinburgh)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe G03 \nTitle: All’s Well that Ends Well? \nAbstract: Distinguish how well someone’s life is going at a particular point — their momentary well-being — from how well their life went as a whole\, their lifetime well-being. How are these related? \nThe simplest answer is that lifetime well-being is just aggregate momentary well-being. Theories that deny this are forms of holism about lifetime well-being. Recent discussions of holism\, inspired by David Velleman\, have focused mainly on one particular species of it\, the so-called “shape of a life” hypothesis. This is the claim that having an “uphill” distribution of momentary well-being contributes to lifetime well-being and does so over and above the instrumental effects that such a distribution might have upon momentary well-being. In this paper I discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the shape of a life hypothesis before introducing an alternative view\, one which avoids those weaknesses\, and argue for its independent plausibility.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-guy-fletcher-edinburgh/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
ORGANIZER;CN="Luca Stroppa":MAILTO:ls330@st-andrews.ac.uk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230705T130000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230705T143000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20230602T084044Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230609T123417Z
UID:10000393-1688562000-1688567400@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Special MPRG (in person) - Mark Oppenheimer (Johannesburg Bar)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe 104 \nTitle: Should hate speech be against the law? \nAbstract: Hate speech has become increasingly prevalent\, fuelled by social media\, political polarization\, and the rise of extremist groups. It can have a profoundly negative impact on individuals and communities\, causing harm\, inciting violence\, and perpetuating discrimination. However\, hate speech is notoriously difficult to define and regulate. We will discuss real life court cases involving offensive flags\, demands for an end to gay marriage\, and songs calling for the slaughter of ethnic minorities. Along the way we will uncover the value of freedom of expression and determine whether it should ever be limited. \n 
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/special-mprg-in-person-mark-oppenheimer-johannesburg-bar/
LOCATION:Edgecliffe 104
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230914T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230914T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20230602T084940Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230907T152733Z
UID:10000394-1694707200-1694712600@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (online) - Frances Kamm (Rutgers)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Teams (online only) \nTitle: Superogation \nAbstract: This paper considers the relation between supererogation and duties (also here referred to as obligations) from a nonconsequentialist point of view. It first considers whether supererogation may sometimes take precedence over positive and negative duties and how this relates to personal costs (including efforts) required to perform one’s duty. It then considers how acquiescence to having large costs imposed on one (even permissibly) can be supererogatory. Finally\, it considers how what are usually duties can become supererogatory and how what is usually supererogatory can become dutiful. The relation between these topics and the trolley problem and the so-called “all or nothing problem” are examined.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-online-frances-kamm-rutgers/
LOCATION:Microsoft Teams
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
ORGANIZER;CN="Joel Joseph":MAILTO:jj73@st-andrews.ac.uk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230921T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230921T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20230907T101014Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230918T091823Z
UID:10000427-1695312000-1695317400@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person)  – Simon Hope (Stirling)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe G03 \nTitle: Climate Change as a Philosophical Problem \nCommentator: Quân Nguyen (Edinburgh) \nAbstract: \nThe paper this talk belongs to speaks to two main points. One is that the onrushing climate catastrophe renders the modern liberal value of personal autonomy unintelligible as a concept to live by. Originally\, that was the only point I planned to argue for: I would then conclude that because Kant never once predicates autonomy of individuals\, selves\, or persons\, Kant’s practical philosophy is immune to this difficulty and offers a better approach to climate ethics and justice. But – here is the second point – it then struck me how this conclusion only follows if you already accept Kant’s practical philosophy. If instead you think it mere empty formalism\, well\, rising sea levels won’t make it less so. This got me trying to think about how normative disorientation arising from the unintelligibility of ethical concepts can trap us in a particularly dire reflective predicament. I’ll try to outline this predicament\, and say something about how we might get out of it. \n 
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-simon-hope-stirling/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20230928T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20230928T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20230921T201156Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230925T142045Z
UID:10000434-1695916800-1695922200@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA TALK (in person) - Carl Mildenberger (Universität Zürich)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe G03 \nTitle: The Quest for Additionality \nAbstract: Many people aim to make the world a better place by spending their money in certain ways. The school of “effective altruism” teaches that\, if one donates one’s money wisely\, one can have a positive impact. Currently\, many people want to make us believe that if one invests one’s money wisely\, one will also have a positive impact. I argue that\, for virtually everybody\, this latter promise cannot come true.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-carl-mildenberger-zurich/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20231005T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20231005T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20230602T085741Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231002T124622Z
UID:10000396-1696521600-1696527000@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (online) - Paulina Sliwa (Vienna) & Tom McClelland (Cambridge)
DESCRIPTION:Title: On seeing women as objects: objectification and affordance perception \nLocation: Teams (online only)\, the talk will be streamed from Edgecliffe G03 \nAbstract: Objectification is a central topic in feminist philosophy theorising. But what is it for someone to objectify another person? A common theme is that objectification involves treating and viewing the other person as an object. Thus\, consider the following quotes: \n‘A man\, for example\, who objectifies women will view them and treat them as having a nature which makes them what he desires them to be…’ (Haslanger\, p.73) \n‘The most subtle and deniable way sexualized evaluation is enacted – and arguably the most ubiquitous – is through gaze\, or visual inspection of the body .… when objectified\, women are treated as bodies – and in particular\, as bodies that exist for the use and pleasure of others.’ (Fredrickson and Roberts\, p.175) \nIn a classic paper\, Nussbaum has unpacked the various aspects of “treating someone as an object”. What has received less attention is the role of perception in objectification. It is striking that in describing what objectification involves\, the language of “seeing”\, of “gaze”\, of “looking” is central. Is this purely metaphorical talk? Or is there something literally visual going on? \nOur aim in this paper is to answer this question: can we make sense of  objectification as a phenomenon with a genuinely visual component? We suggest that the notion of affordance perception – the idea that we perceive possibilities for action – allows us to do so. We draw out some consequences for the moral psychology of objectification as well as for the act of looking as a tool of oppression.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-online-paulina-sliwa-vienna/
LOCATION:Microsoft Teams
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
ORGANIZER;CN="Johannes Nickl":MAILTO:jmn20@st-andrews.ac.uk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20231012T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20231012T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20231002T145119Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231010T142023Z
UID:10000435-1697126400-1697131800@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (In person) - Joel Joseph (St Andrews)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Eliminative Harming without Intentions \nLocation: Edgecliffe G03 \nAbstract: Consider the following pair of cases  \nRoughshod. You are driving to the hospital for an emergency life-saving operation. If you do not make it in time\, you will die. However\, Victim is lying in the only road that will get you there in time. Although Victim is not physically obstructing your path\, they are too heavy for you to move aside. You can therefore save yourself only by driving over Victim en route to the hospital\, thereby killing her.  \nObstruction. The case is similar to Roughshod. However\, this time you cannot simply drive over Victim on your way to the hospital. This is because her presence in the road is physically obstructing your path. You can therefore save yourself only by getting out of your car and detonating a bomb next to Victim that will blow her to smithereens\, thereby clearing the road ahead.  \nIt seems impermissible to kill Victim in either case. However\, many find it intuitively plausible that killing Victim in Obstruction is harder to justify killing than it is in Roughshod. The Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE) is the only discussed explanation of the moral difference between these two cases. However\, many non-consequentialists find DDE implausible.  \nIn this paper\, I argue that we can distinguish morally between Roughshod and Obstruction without appealing to DDE. I first argue that DDE does not get to the heart of the intuitive moral difference between Roughshod and Obstruction. I then offer an alternative explanation of the moral difference between Roughshod and Obstruction that is extensionally superior to DDE. Finally\, I argue that endorsing my account over DDE is not only theoretically significant\, but that it also has implications for the morality of abortion that differ importantly from DDE. 
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-joel-joseph-st-andrews/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20231026T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20231026T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20230907T101801Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231002T124833Z
UID:10000428-1698336000-1698341400@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) – Alexander Douglas (St. Andrews)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe G03 \nTitle: Positive interest rates block green transitions\, and there is no compelling reason not to fix the interest rate at zero \nCommentator: Carl Mildenberger (Zurich)
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-alexander-douglas-st-andrews/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20231102T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20231102T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20230602T090158Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231031T111128Z
UID:10000398-1698940800-1698946200@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (online) - Orri Stefánsson (Stockholm)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Chance Prioritarianism \nLocation: Teams (online only)\, and streamed from Edgecliffe G03 \nAbstract: I will defend what we could call survival chance prioritarianism\, according to which the moral value of improving someone’s chance of surviving (some period) is greater the more likely the person was to die before the improvement. I motivate this view by showing that it justifies some common moral judgements that ex post views cannot accommodate\, but I suggest that we should resist generalising the view to all chances (so\, we should resist ex ante prioritarianism) and I give some reason for resisting survival chance egalitarianism. Finally\, I defend the view against some natural objections
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-online-orri-stefansson-stockholm/
LOCATION:Microsoft Teams
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20231109T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20231109T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064751
CREATED:20230602T090331Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231106T141622Z
UID:10000399-1699545600-1699551000@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (online) - Lara Buchak (Princeton)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Risk\, Ambiguity\, and Ethical Decision-Making \nAbstract: I argue that it can be rational to defer to an authority about what to believe or what to do even when doing so goes against one’s own reasoning. Indeed\, such deference is rational in typical cases in which individuals treat others as authorities: for example\, experts in a domain\, interpersonal advisors\, and religious traditions. I explain the interplay between authority\, reason\, and disagreement\, and how rational faith gives rise to epistemic communities and governs their encounters with each other. \nLocation: Teams (online only) and streamed from Edgecliffe G03.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-online-lara-buchak-princeton/
LOCATION:Microsoft Teams
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
ORGANIZER;CN="Jessica Brown":MAILTO:jab30@st-andrews.ac.uk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20231116T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20231116T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064752
CREATED:20230907T102813Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231113T103917Z
UID:10000431-1700150400-1700155800@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) – Cristina Richie (Edinburgh)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe G03 \nTitle: Green Bioethics: Environmental Sustainability and Health Care \nCommentator: Joseph Millum (St Andrews) \nAbstract: Health care is ubiquitous in the industrialized world. Yet\, every medical development\, technique\, and procedure impacts the environment. By 2017\, the National Health Service’s Health\, and Social Care sectors had a carbon output (CO2) of 27.1 million tons. Carbon dioxide emissions contribute to climate change\, climate-change related health hazards\, and perpetuate environmental racism. In response\, the NHS has implemented a Carbon Reduction Strategy\, but this is a largely superficial approach to reducing the carbon emissions of the medical industry\, because it focuses on health care structures like buildings and transportation. The doctor-patient relationship and health care delivery are indeed the most carbon intensive part of the medical industry\, and indeed the scope of biomedical ethics. Thus\, Green Bioethics synthesizes environmental ethics and biomedical ethics to move towards sustainable\, just health care delivery in practice and policy.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-cristina-richie-edinburgh/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20231123T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20231123T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064752
CREATED:20230920T221438Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231121T121239Z
UID:10000433-1700755200-1700760600@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) – Oskari Sivula (Turku)
DESCRIPTION:Location: Edgecliffe G03 \nTitle: Is the future a utility monster? \nAbstract: I will revisit Nozick’s utility monster thought experiment and draw an analogy between imagined utility monsters and the long-term future. I argue that the far future can be seen as a real-life utility monster. This is the case if the three premises that form the basis of long-termism are true: 1) the future is vast\, 2) morally speaking\, the future matters\, and 3) current people can (in expectation) positively impact the far future. Following that\, I consider a couple of apparent disanalogies between the original utility monster and the far future utility monster. Lastly\, I discuss some possible reactions to the argument made.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-barry-maguire-edinburgh/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20231214T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20231214T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064752
CREATED:20230602T090519Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231128T193827Z
UID:10000400-1702569600-1702575000@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (online) - Matthew Liao (NYU)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Threshold Deontology: Some Lessons from Vagueness \nAbtract: Threshold Deontology is the view that the positive consequences of an act do not normally override moral constraints\, but when the positive balance of the consequences of an act is sufficiently great\, it may be morally permitted\, and possibly required to engage in an act that is otherwise morally prohibited. While many people find Threshold Deontology attractive\, there are a number of issues regarding its nature and its structure that are under explored.  For instance\, suppose that there is a threshold above which a moral constraint against killing an innocent person becomes overridden.  Where is this threshold?  How do we identify it?  In addition\, what happens after one crosses this threshold?  Does one become a full-on act-consequentialist?  Drawing on the literature on vagueness\, I shall argue that there is a sharp threshold for killing and that it is difficult for us to know where this threshold lies because in a certain range of cases\, our moral faculty is not sufficiently reliable to be able to weigh competing moral values.  I shall also explain why one does not become a consequentialist once one crosses the threshold for killing. \nLocation: Teams (online only)
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-online-matthew-liao-nyu/
LOCATION:Microsoft Teams
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
ORGANIZER;CN="Enrico Galvagni":MAILTO:eg240@st-andrews.ac.uk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20240118T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20240118T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064752
CREATED:20230602T090653Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240104T164052Z
UID:10000401-1705593600-1705599000@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (online) - Selim Berker (Harvard)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Is There Anti-Fittingness?” \nAbstract: The permissible and the forbidden are privative opposites: each is a lack of the other. The good and the bad are\, by contrast\, polar opposites: badness is anti-goodness\, not non-goodness. What about the fitting and the unfitting\, the appropriate and the inappropriate\, the apt and the inapt\, the warranted and the unwarranted? Is unfittingness non-fittingness or anti-fittingness\, inappropriateness non-appropriateness or anti-appropriateness? In this talk I will argue that each of these “aptic” categories—as I call them—stands in a privative rather than a polar relation to its opposite. More generally\, there is no coherent notion of anti-fittingness\, no inversely charged flipside to aptness\, to be found. In order to establish these claims\, a taxonomy of different types of oppositeness will be proposed\, and several tests for distinguishing distinct varieties of opposites will be developed. What will emerge is a better appreciation of the structural characteristics of fittingness and the other aptic categories\, as well as an argument for taking up the nature of oppositeness as a serious philosophical topic that is ripe for further exploration. \nLocation: Teams (online only)
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-online-selim-berker-harvard/
LOCATION:Microsoft Teams
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20240125T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20240125T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064752
CREATED:20230711T085210Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240108T171624Z
UID:10000407-1706198400-1706203800@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) - Thom Brooks (Durham)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Justice and the Problem of Alienation \nAbstract: I will focus on why alienation is a problem for many of our major theories of justice (discussing political liberalism\, capabilities approach and republicanism) and what might be done about it. \nLocation: Edgecliffe G03
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-thom-brooks-durham/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20240201T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20240201T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064752
CREATED:20240104T145621Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240109T141826Z
UID:10000439-1706803200-1706808600@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) - Jonathan Birch  (LSE)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Debating proportionality at the edge of sentience \nAbstract: Can octopuses feel pain and pleasure? What about crabs\, shrimps\, insects or spiders? How do we tell whether a person unresponsive after severe brain injury might be suffering? When does a fetus in the womb start to have conscious experiences? Could there even be rudimentary feelings in miniature models of the human brain\, grown from human stem cells? And what about AI? These are questions about the “edge of sentience”\, and they are subject to enormous\, disorienting uncertainty. The stakes are immense\, and neglecting the risks can have terrible costs. We need to err on the side of caution in these cases\, yet it’s often far from clear what ‘erring on the side of caution’ should mean in practice. When are we going too far? When are we not doing enough? My forthcoming book The Edge of Sentience: Risk and Precaution in Humans\, Other Animals\, and AI constructs a precautionary framework designed to help us reach ethically sound\, evidence-based decisions despite our uncertainty. This talk will introduce some of the main ideas\, zooming in on the role I think citizens’ assemblies can appropriately play in assessing proportionality. \nLocation: Edgecliffe G03 \n 
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-jonathan-birch-lse/
LOCATION:Edgecliffe G03\, The Scores\, St Salvator's Quad\, KY16 9AL
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20240208T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20240208T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064752
CREATED:20240104T145953Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240205T120221Z
UID:10000440-1707408000-1707413400@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) - Mark Rowlands  (Miami)
DESCRIPTION:Title: World on Fire: Climate\, Extinction\, Pandemic \nLocation: Edgecliffe G03 \n 
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-mark-rowlands-miami/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20240215T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20240215T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064752
CREATED:20240104T150205Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240212T114147Z
UID:10000441-1708012800-1708018200@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) - Andreas Mogensen (Oxford)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Welfare and Felt Duration \nAbtract: How should we understand the duration of a pleasant or unpleasant sensation\, insofar as its duration modulates how good or bad the experience is overall? Given that we seem able to distinguish between subjective and objective duration and that how well or badly someone’s life goes is naturally thought of as something to be assessed from her own perspective\, it seems intuitive that it is subjective duration that modulates how good or bad an experience is from the perspective of an individual’s welfare. However\, I argue that we know of no way to make sense of what subjective duration consists in on which this claim turns out to be plausible. Moreover\, some plausible theories of what subjective duration consists in strongly suggest that subjective duration is irrelevant in itself. \nLocation: Edgecliffe G03 \n 
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-andreas-mogensen-oxford/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20240222T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20240222T173000
DTSTAMP:20260405T064752
CREATED:20240104T150314Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20240219T104221Z
UID:10000442-1708617600-1708623000@ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in person) - Luca Stroppa (St Andrews & Turin)
DESCRIPTION:This talk is part of our series on Climate Ethics \nTitle: The Ranked Range View \nLocation: Edgecliffe G03 \nAbstract: The bad effects of climate change will affect\, and be affected by\, the number of people who will exist\, and their quality of life. Thus\, when evaluating our climate policies and actions\, we need to know which population is best to choose when the number of people and their quality of life varies. However\, several powerful arguments show that no theory ranking populations can respect some set of very compelling adequacy conditions (the most famous being to avoid the so-called “Repugnant Conclusion”. In this talk\, I introduce the Structured Range View\, a theory for ranking populations that respects all adequacy conditions\, except one\, called “Non-Anti-Egalitarianism”. I however argue that the way the Structured Range View violates “Non-Anti-Egalitarianism” in unproblematic. We should accept the Structured Range View when choosing between populations. (If I have time) I conclude by sketching the impact of the Structured Range View on climate policies.
URL:https://ceppa.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-luca-stroppa-st-andrews-turin/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR