PHILOSOPHY Colloquia: 4:15, Wilson Hall, Rm. 214

Fall 2009 (TBA)

Sept. 10   Philosophy Colloquium, 4:15,
Al Hajek, Australian National University
"Most Counterfactuals Are False"
Oct. 8  

Philosophy Colloquium, 4:15,
Larry Temkin, Rutgers University
"Exploring Transitivity"

Spring 2009

Jan. 15   Emily Austin, Washington University
"Epicurus and the Politics of Fearing Death."
Jan. 22   Sarit Smila, Washington University
"Special Relationships, Care, and the Acquisition of Virtue"
March 2   Joint Colloquium - Philosophy, JINES, Religious Studies, Classics, and History
Patricia Crone, Istitute for Advanced Studies in Princeton
"From Late Antiquity to the Islamic World: Who Were the Godless Empiricists?"
March 5   Steven Darwall, Yale University
"But it would be wrong"
March 26   E. J. Lowe, Durham Univesity, UK
"Why My Body is not Me: The Unity Argument for Emergentist Self-Body Dualism"
April 2   John Norton
"Philosophy & Einstein's discovery of the theories of relativity"
April 6 **note day change   Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Dartmouth
Contrastivism & Degrees of Freedom"

Fall 2008

Oct. 2   Fred Adams, University of Delaware
Title: TBA
Oct. 8  

Dan Levitin, 11:15-12:45, Psych 216 A & B **note special time & location

Oct. 23   Jim Hankinson, Univ. of Texas
"Opposition, refutation and 'undecidable dispute': the methodology of Pyrrhonian argument"
Nov. 20   John Greco, SLU
Evidentialism about Knowledge
Abstract: I argue against a position that I call "evidentialism about knowledge." Part 1 articulates the position as a supervenience thesis: roughly, that the facts about epistemic normativity supervene on the facts about evidence.  A corollary of this thesis is that all knowledge requires good evidence. The remainder of the paper puts forward a dilemma for evidentialism about knowledge.  Specifically, any version of evidentialism must be either internalist or externalist about what counts as good (i.e. knowledge-producing) evidence.  But internalist versions of evidentialism are false and externalist versions are unmotivated.  More exactly, once we adopt externalism about what counts as good evidence, we lose any motivation for thinking that all knowledge requires evidence.  On the contrary, it seems that basing one's beliefs on good evidence is just one way to acquire knowledge among many.
Dec. 4   Emily Crookston, Wash U
"Solving the Problem of Political Obligation: the Anarchist Challenge and the Natural Duty to Consent."

Spring 2008

Jan. 17th   PNP Colloquium, 4:15, Wilson Hall, Rm. 214
Rick Grush, UCSD
"What am I? An exploration of some relationships between the mind and the brain"
Jan. 31st   Colloquium, 4:15, Wilson Hall, Rm. 214
Mazviita Chirimuuta, Cambridge
“Does ‘evolved to see red’ imply ‘ought to see red’?”
Feb. 7th     Colloquium, 4:15, Wilson Hall, Rm. 214
Frederick Eberhardt, Carnegie Mellon
Title: TBA
Feb. 14th   Colloquium, 4:15, Wilson Hall, Rm. 214
Jacob Beck, Harvard
Title: TBA
March 6th   PNP Colloquium, 4:15, Wilson Hall, Rm. 214
Paul Teller, University of CA, Davis
"Some Dirty Little Secrets About Truth"
March 27th   PNP Colloquium, 4:15, Wilson Hall, Rm. 214
Lindley Dardin, (Univ. of Maryland) Clark Way-Harrison visiting Professor
Title: TBA
April 10th   PNP Colloquium, 4:15, Wilson Hall, Rm. 214
Cory Wright, PNP Post-Doc
Title: TBA

April 24th   Colloquium, 4:15, Wilson Hall, Rm. 214
David Kaplan,
PNP Post-Doc
Title: TBA
May 1st   Philosophy Colloquium, 4:15, Wilson Hall, Rm. 214
David Robb, Davidson College
Title: TBA