The Early Modern Philosophy Calendar

This website is maintained by Stephen H. Daniel at Texas A&M University as a service to scholars working in the history of early modern philosophy. It brings together information about calls for papers, event schedules, and contacts about presentations, conferences, and seminars dealing with research in late 16th, 17th, and 18th century philosophy.

To have an event listed, send the appropriate information to Steve Daniel (sdaniel@tamu.edu). Events posted on various mailing lists and websites (e.g., philosop, philos, MWSeminar, Facebook Early Modern Philosophy Resources, Montreal EM Roundtable, philevents) are incorporated into this page. If no deadline is listed for calls for papers, that means either that the deadline has passed or presentations were by invitation only.

Due to COVID-19, most in-person conferences for the next few months have been cancelled. Most have moved to an on-line format, and some have not made public announcements about their plans. I recommend you check with organizers to see how their plans have changed.


Submission Deadlines:



October 27, 2020
Princeton-Bucharest Seminar in Early Modern Seminar (online): Reason, Passions and Law in Hobbes and Spinoza
1 PM Princeton time (EST) / 7 PM Bucharest time (GMT+2) / 5 PM London, 6 PM Paris

Claudia Dumitru (Princeton): "Equality and Private Judgment in Hobbes’s State of Nature"
In the absence of any intersubjective standard, in the Hobbesian state of nature “every man’s own reason is to be accounted, not only the rule of his own actions, which are done at his own peril, but also for the measure of another man’s reason, in such things as do concern him” (De cive II.1, fn). This talk examines an argument from epistemic symmetry that Hobbes sketches in favor of this position in Elements of Law and, with some modifications, in the Leviathan. I place particular emphasis on the role equality plays as a premise in this argument and on the relationship between equality and Hobbes’s conception of right reason.

Dan Garber (Princeton): "Spinoza’s Hobbesian Affects"
Spinoza’s philosophy is often read through the lens of Descartes. Nor is this wrong. However, emphasizing the Cartesian background to his thought hides another very different strand in his philosophy, one that is deeply influenced by another contemporary, Thomas Hobbes. Though Hobbes’s influence is generally acknowledged in Spinoza’s political philosophy, it was much broader than that. In this paper I would like to look at some other ways in which Spinoza’s philosophy shows the influence of Hobbes. In particular, I will argue that while Spinoza’s account of the emotions (affects) may have started out as Cartesian, the theory of affects in the Ethics is much closer to views that Hobbes advocated.

Salvatore Carannante (Pisa): “'On the divine law': Facets of law in Spinoza’s TTP IV”
Focusing on the Chapter 4, On the divine law, of the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, the talk is aimed at exploring the various facets (natural, moral, civil) of the concept of law, seen as the intersection of different and relevant aspects of Spinoza’s philosophy. Special attention will be paid to (1) the manifold definition of law (2) the strict connection between these dense pages of the TTP and the metaphysics of the Ethics; (3) the key role likely played by Averroist sources in Spinoza’s reflection about the ‘divine law’.

Zoom link available here.
Website.


October 29, 2020
Leuven Online Seminar in Classical German Philosophy
Book Launch: Karin de Boer (KU Leuven): Kant’s Reform of Metaphysics: The Critique of Pure Reason Reconsidered
Speakers: Stefanie Buchenau (Paris-8), Brian Chance (Oklahoma), Paul Franks (Yale), Eric Watkins (UC San Diego)
5.00-6.30 pm CET
Scholarly debates on the Critique of Pure Reason have largely been shaped by epistemological questions. Challenging this prevailing trend, Kant's Reform of Metaphysics is the first book-length study to interpret Kant’s Critique in view of his efforts to turn Christian Wolff's highly influential metaphysics into a science. Karin de Boer situates Kant's pivotal work in the context of eighteenth-century German philosophy, traces the development of Kant's conception of critique, and offers fresh and in-depth analyses of key parts of the Critique of Pure Reason, including the Transcendental Deduction, the Schematism Chapter, the Appendix to the Transcendental Analytic, and the Architectonic. The book not only brings out the coherence of Kant's project, but also reconstructs the outline of the 'system of pure reason' for which the Critique was to pave the way, but that never saw the light. To register and receive the Zoom link, please click here.
Contact Stephen Howard.


November 3, 2020
Online Seminar on Gassendi and Descartes
Delphine Bellis (U Paul Valéry, Montpellier, CRISES, RdS): "Le statut du sensible dans la Disquisitio metaphysica"; and Sophie Roux (ENS, PSL, RdS): "Connaissance des choses physiques et connaissance des choses mathématiques dans la controverse Descartes-Gassendi"
4:00-6:00 p.m.
Contact: Delphine Bellis for email link.


November 3, 2020
Princeton-Bucharest Seminar in Early Modern Seminar (online)
Igor Agostini (Salento) & Hanoch Ben-Yami (Central European U): joint session on Descartes
1 PM Princeton time (EST) / 8 PM Bucharest time (GMT+2)
Zoom link available here.
Website.


November 4-6, 2020
Wolff's German Ethics: New Approaches and Perspectives
Martin Luther Universität Halle-Wittenberg
Halle, Germany
Speakers: Stefano Bacin (Milan), Corey Dyck (Western), Ursula Goldenbaum (Emory), Paul Guyer (Brown), Dieter Hüning (Trier), Timothy Rosenkoetter (Dartmouth), Paola Rumore (Turin), Clemens Schwaiger (Don Bosco)
    The 300th anniversary of the publication of Christian Wolff’s Vernünfftige Gedancken von der Menschen Thun und Lassen (‘Deutsche Ethik,’ 1720) is an excellent occasion to take a fresh look at the text. This is especially true given Wolff’s practical philosophy is still somewhat neglected by scholars of many varieties, at least compared to his theoretical philosophy. This conference aims at remedying this deficiency by exploring systematically pertinent issues in Wolff’s ‘German Ethics,’ such as the question of how perfection relates to happiness, the role of pleasure in (moral) motivation, and Wolff’s conception of normativity and ‘natural obligation.’ In this context, questions concerning the relation of Wolff’s ethics to that of his predecessors and contemporaries, such as Leibniz, are also of interest. Wolff owes his conception of perfection, for example, to Leibniz. The conference has the further goal of providing historically and systematically robust interpretations of Wolff’s practical philosophy in order to (1) better understand the contours of his philosophy in relation to the larger 18th-century philosophical landscape; and (2) shed light on issues in contemporary practical philosophy, e.g. the normativity of practical reasons and the difference between motivating and justifying reasons.
    Call for Papers: In addition to the above invited presentations, scholars and students of all levels who are working on topics directly related to Wolff’s Deutsche Ethik are invited to submit a proposal which will be considered for inclusion in the conference program. Please send an abstract of approximately 500 words to Michael Walschots by January 31st, 2020.
Website.


November 5, 2020
London Spinoza Circle: Steven Nadler (Wisconsin-Madison): "The Specter of Spinozism"
3:30pm to 5pm (London time). The seminar will be held via Zoom. If you're not already on the London Spinoza Circle mailing list, contact Clare Carlisle to receive the Zoom link, plus a copy of Prof. Nadler's paper which will be circulated in advance of the seminar.


November 5, 2020
Online Lecture: Wiep van Bunge (Erasmus U Rotterdam): "Secularisation in the Dutch Republic: The Irrelevance of Philosophy"
16.00-18.00 CET
Institute of Philosophy, Jagiellonian University
Kraków, Poland
The eighteenth century witnessed the complete confessionalisation of the Dutch population. As a consequence, it remains to be seen what secularisation actually might mean in the context of the Dutch Enlightenment and which part was played by Dutch philosophers. In this paper/lecture it will be argued that in the Dutch Republic philosophy hardly contributed to the abandonment of Christian views and practices. The early Radical Enlightenment, spearheaded by Spinoza, soon petered out during the first half of the eighteenth century. In sharp contrast to their seventeenth-century predecessors, most Dutch eighteenth-century philosophers, including those who belonged to the powerful school of thought expounding Newtonianism, as a rule were hesitant to address theological and political issues. During the 1770s and 1780s Dutch Wolffians played an active part in the furious debates inspired by the disintegration of the Dutch Republic, but they were careful not to question the main tenets of Dutch Reformed orthodoxy. Frans Hemsterhuis was the only Dutch philosopher from the second half of the century who drew an audience beyond the Republic, most notably in Germany. A high ranking civil servant in The Hague, he was a close witness to the crisis engulfing the Republic, but he preferred to concentrate on aesthetics and went out of his way not to get involved in any theological disputes. The lack of interest among Dutch philosophers for Kant’s “Copernican Revolution” appears to confirm they were largely in agreement with the rise of a new, widely shared nationalism, in which the recognition of the essentially Protestant nature of the Dutch nation played a crucial part. By the same token, Hemsterhuis’ Philhellenism appears to suggest that to the extent that Dutch elite culture during the early modern age was ready to abandon Christianity, this was not so much due to the impact of any particular philosophy as to the continuing attraction exerted by the example set by Antiquity. Ever since the late sixteenth century Dutch classicists had been suspected to be no longer genuinely committed to Christianity and it seems no coincidence that the leading early nineteenth-century Dutch philosopher, the Utrecht professor Philip Willem van Heusde, was mainly concerned to elaborate the Protestant character of his own, “Socratic” philosophy.
Website.
Contacts: Hasse Hämäläinen and Anna Tomaszewska.


November 7, 2020
Leibniz Society of North America Conference (online, spread out through February)
University of Illinois, Chicago
    10:00-11:20  Evangelian Collings (Pittsburgh): “Leibniz on the Order and Artifice in Reproduction”; commentator Larry Jorgensen (Skidmore)
    11:30-12:50  Arnaud Pelletier (U libre Bruxelles): "“First Experiences and Ingredience in Leibniz's Late Metaphysics”; commentator Paul Lodge (Oxford)
Website.
Contact: John Whipple to receive the Zoom link and to be added to the email list to receive pre-circulated papers.


November 10, 2020
Princeton-Bucharest Seminar in Early Modern Seminar (online)
Graham Clay & Michael Jacovides: joint session on Hume
1 PM Princeton time (EST) / 8 PM Bucharest time (GMT+2)
Zoom link available here.
Website.


November 10, 2020
Online Seminar on Gassendi and Descartes
Jean-Charles Darmon (ENS, PSL, RdS): "Le “style” de Descartes selon Gassendi: Eléments pour une analyse rhétorique de la Disquisitio metaphysica"
4:00-6:00 p.m.
Contact: Delphine Bellis for email link.


November 11-13, 2020
The Architectonic Role of the Highest Good in Kant’s Philosophy (online)
Central European Time
KU Leuven
November 11: The Architectonic Function of the Highest Good
    14.00–14.40  Stephen Palmquist (Hong Kong Baptist): “Why Is the Highest Good Rarely Mentioned in Kant’s Religion? An Architectonic Explanation”
    14.40–15.20  Luigi Filieri (Johannes Gutenberg Mainz): “Good as the Highest: Reason and its Unity in the Dialectic of the first Critique
    15.30–16.30  Lea Ypi (London Sch Economics): “The Practical Use of Ideas as Key to Kant’s Architectonic of Pure Reason”
    16.30–17.10  Courtney Fugate (American U Beirut): “Problems with the Highest Good”
November 12: The Highest Good at the Crossroads of Religion, Theology and Ethics
    16.00–16.40  Noam Hoffer (Ben Gurion): “The Highest Good and the Unity of Kant's Moral and Theoretical Conceptions of God”
    16.40–17.20  Shterna Friedman (UC Berkeley): “The Unity of the Highest Good: Justice and Teleology”
    17.30–18.30  Luca Fonnesu (Pavia): “The Crisis of the Highest Good”
    18.30–19.10  Federica Basaglia (Konstanz): “Highest Good, Radical Evil and Religion: Why Does Actual Morality Leads Us Inevitably to Religion?”
November 13: Arguments for the Highest Good
    16.00–16.40  Nataliya Palatnik (Wisconsin-Milwaukee): “On Kant’s Moral Idea of the Immortality of the Soul”
    16.40–17.20  Luciano Perulli (KU Leuven): “Kant’s Theory of the Highest Good: Ethics or Critique of Practical Reason?”
    17.30-18.30  Pauline Kleingeld (Groningen): “The Duty to Promote the Highest Good”
    18.30–19.10  Andrew Chignell (Princeton): “Three Kinds of Moral Argument for the Highest Good”
Papers will be circulated one week before the conference. To receive the papers, you must log into the Website.
Contacts: Luciano Perulli (KU Leuven) and Luigi Filieri (Johannes Gutenberg-U Mainz).


November 16-18, 2020
Schol’Art Congress: “Other ways of thinking literature and the arts: the scholastic path (1500-1700)”
UC Louvain
Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
In the early modern period (16th-17th centuries), the theoretical reflections on letters and arts regularly drew inspiration from the specific field of scholastic philosophy (that is, logic, ethics, physics and metaphysics), which was then taught at all universities as a propaedeutic to the higher faculties (medicine, law and theology). By “theoretical reflections on letters and arts”, we are referring e.g. to the vast amount of treatises related to poetics, rhetoric, symbolics, art theory, (religious) images and other such topics; to the historiographical writings constituting the history of literature and arts; to the dedicatory letters and theoretical prefaces to literary texts; to the commentaries on ancient texts such as Aristotle’s Poetics, Horatius’ Ars poetica, Pliny’s chapters on painting; …. We take into account the texts composed in the 16th and 17th centuries, either in Latin or in one of the modern languages. Using the methods, concepts or language of scholastic philosophy often enabled the authors of such texts to develop a rational and systematic discourse on literature and the visual arts, in order either to define the latter, to describe their various subgenres, to reflect on their modes of production and reception, or to evaluate the quality of specific works with regard to the truth or verisimilitude of their representation of the world. In practice, the presence of scholastic philosophy in such theoretical texts can take various forms, involving from case to case:
    • The scholastic conception of the hierarchy of arts and the tree of disciplines
    • The scholastic way of reasoning (induction, deduction, syllogisms, pro and contra debates, opening presentation of the counterarguments…), either applied to the object or observed inside it (for instance, the interpretation of epigrams as a deductive genre)
    • The scholastic way of defining and describing the res (“matter and form” definition, “genre and difference” definition…) and the verba (identification of the various senses of equivocal words), and the corollary distinction between debates on things and debates on words;     • The scholastic conceptions (in physics and medicine) of the faculties of the soul (with all the related concepts : internal senses, imagination, memory, patient and agent intellect, species and conceptus, cognition and appetition, affects, vital and animal spirits…) as a way to explain the mental processes involved in artistic/literary creation and reception
    • Scholastic axioms commonly taught in the schools, or authoritative quotations supporting the expressed viewpoint
    • But also, as a counterexample, the “dry” and intricate scholastic language and the controversial or denigrated scholastic theories
    The congress aims at conducting an inventory and an analysis of those borrowings and influences, and at illustrating them with concrete case studies. We will pay particular attention to the phenomena of transformation, translation, simplification or complexification affecting the scholastic contents once applied to the theory of letters and arts. Moreover, we will appreciate papers providing information on the scholastic curriculum of the authors and on the intellectual context of their writings.
    We welcome 30-minute papers, in French or English. Please send an abstract of maximum 300 words and a short biography (50-100 words) by 30 November 2019 to Aline Smeesters. The abstracts will be reviewed by a committee. Notification of acceptance will be sent by 15 December 2019.
Website.
Contact: Aline Smeesters.


November 17, 2020
Online Seminar on Gassendi and Descartes
Rodolfo Garau (Herzog August Bibl & ERC Group Early Modern Cosmology, GA n. 725883, U Ca’ Foscari, Venezia): "Souls, Senses, and Animals: On Some Psychological and Zoological and Psychological Aspects of the Gassendi-Descartes Debate"
4:00-6:00 p.m.
Contact: Delphine Bellis for email link.


November 17, 2020
Princeton-Bucharest Seminar in Early Modern Seminar (online)
1 PM Princeton time (EST) / 8 PM Bucharest time (GMT+2)
    Filip Buyse: “Spinoza and Johannes Müller: How the Dutch Philosopher Inspired the German Father of Contemporary Physiology”
    Benjamin Goldberg: “Notions of Experience in Early Modern Anatomy and Pharmacy”
Zoom link available here.
Website.


November 18-20, 2020
Medicine in the Philosophy of Descartes: Lights and Shadows
Domus Comeliana (in person, online): CET Rome/Amsterdam/Berlin/Paris time
Via Cardinale Pietro Maffi 48
Pisa, Italy
Wednesdy, 18 November
    15.00: Welcome Address: Three Sources in the Hole
    15.15: Stefano Palagiano (Urbino): “Medical Perspectives in Francis Bacon’s Sylva Sylvarum
    15.45: Simone Guidi (ILIESI-CNR Roma): “Epigenesis and Generative Power in Descartes’ Late Scholastic Sources”
    16.30: Jil Muller (Strasbourg): “Ambroise Paré and René Descartes on Sensations in Amputated Limbs”
    17.00: Fabrizio Baldassarri (ICUB-Bucharest): “On Something Descartes Did Not Study: Texts and Diagrams”
    17.45: Annie Bitbol-Hespériès (Paris): “Anatomical and Philosophical Issues on Hearts and Brains from the writing of L’Homme to its posthumous publications”
Thursday, 19 November
    14.00: Tawrin Baker (Notre Dame): “Descartes’ Images of the Eye and the Anatomical, Optical, and Philosophical Visual Traditions”
    14.30: Mattia Mantovani (Leuven): “Reading Descartes en Physicien: The Case of Vopiscus Fortunatus Plempius, 1632-1664”
    15.15: Franco Aurelio Meschini (U Salento – Centro Cartesiano): “Metaphysical Diseases: On the Mind-Body Composition in Descartes”
    16.30: Jan Forsman (Tampere): “Madness is somewhere between Chaos and Having a Dream: Madness & Dream in Descartes’ First Meditation”
    17.00: Clément Raymond (Lyon 3): “From the Animal Instinct to the Mind’s Acknowledgement of the (in)commoda”
    18.00: Gideon Manning (Claremont Graduate): “Descartes’s Cartesian Medicine: Past, Present and Future”
Friday, 20 November
    09.30: Maria Conforti (La Sapienza, Roma): “se fusse meno cartesiano lo stimarei molto: anti-Cartesian motifs in Italian Medicine”
    10.30: Fabiola Zurlini (Studio Firmiano, Macerata): “Cartesian Medicine in the Court of Queen Christina of Sweden”
    11.00: Daniel Samuel (Warburg Inst, U London): “A British Response to the Passions of the Soul
    12.00: Carmen Schmechel (Freie U Berlin): “Fermentation in Cartesian Physiology: An Iatromechanistic Process”
    12.30: Fabio Zampieri (Padova): “Sceptical Mechanism in the 17th- and 18th-century medicine: Di Capua and Boerhaave”
    14.00: Andrea Strazzoni (Basel): “The First Teaching of Cartesianism at Utrecht: The Lost Academic Dictations of Henricus Regius”
    15.00: Aaron Spink (Ohio St): “Pierre-Sylvain Régis, the Pineal Gland, and the Soul’s Simplicity”
    15.30: Stefano Gulizia (U Statale di Milano): “Anti-Cartesian Tales of Animals: The Paracelsian Torpedo of Johann Ludwig Hannemann (1703-1710)”
    16.30: Laurynas Adomaitis (Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa): “Beyond Mechanical Life: Biological Processes in the 17th Century”
    Santorio Plenary Lectures
        17.15-17.45  Sebastien Kroupa (Cambridge): "Georg Joseph Kamel (1661–1706): Natural Knowledge in Transit Between the Philippines and Europe"
        17.45-18.30  Matteo Pace (Columbia): "Of Poets and Physicians' Literature and Medical Thought in Thirteenth-Century Italy"
Website.
Contact: Fabrizio Baldassari.
To participate online, contact this site or Fabrizio Baldassari.


November 24, 2020
Online Seminar on Gassendi and Descartes
Gianni Paganini (Accad Lincei & U Studi Piemonte Orientale, Vercelli): "Doute, critère et certitude dans la Disquisitio metaphysica"
4:00-6:00 p.m.
Contact: Delphine Bellis for email link.


November 26, 2020
Przemyslaw Gut (Catholic U Lublin): "Spinoza’s Critique of Religious Fanaticism"
Institute of Philosophy, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland
16:00-18:00 CET
    The aim of the paper is to present and analyze Spinoza’s critique of religious fanaticism as it is delivered for most part in chapter 20 of Theologico-Political Treatise and in Appendix to the first part of his Ethics. I argue that Spinoza represents a revealing case study of the origins, nature and consequences of fanaticism. The paper consists of two parts. In the first I attempt to answer the question what Spinoza understood by religious fanaticism and what view he held on the nature and origin of religious fanaticism. In the second part I attempt to answer the question what measures, according to Spinoza, should be taken to effectively combat, or at least downgrade, religious fanaticism.
    Both in Appendix to the first part of his Ethics and in the Preface to Theologico-Political Treatise Spinoza makes clear that religious fanaticism is not just a cause of individual disaster but it forms also a grave social and political problem against which state and its institutions need be on their guard. This explains why Spinoza on several occasions stressed that religious fanaticism represents dramatic threat to almost all values we treasure. What is the exact nature and source of religious fanaticism?
    On my interpretation, religious fanaticism has – according to Spinoza – two main components. The first, which we might call the positive aspect of fanaticism, consists in excessive confidence in one’s own religious outlook. The second, which we might call the negative aspect of fanaticism, consists in contempt towards all those who do not share one’s own religious outlook. I claim that, for Spinoza, the first component is caused above all by the combination of two factors: on the one hand, deeply rooted prejudice the essence of which is a teleological (anthropomorphic) view of nature and, on the other hand, superstition whose essence is anxiety and fear of losing what we love. These two factors alone, the former of which states that everything that God created, God created for humankind’s benefit whereas the latter says that only God is able to alleviate human fears, according to Spinoza, make people susceptible to excessive confidence in their own religious outlook. The second component of fanaticism is in turn first and foremost caused by a strong conviction that one has been ‘elected’ or ‘chosen’ by God to teach others. And if one has been elected by God and called in this way, this means that one is not only entitled but also obliged to persuade others to accept this particular religious outlook.
    What measures should be taken to downgrade religious fanaticism. Spinoza devoted a lot of space to these issues. To show the complementary character of the paths along which he went while establishing the means thanks to which we can prevent fanaticism or, at least, limit its scope – I divide those means into three groups related to the field of reflection within which they were established. The first group comprises the means coming from purely philosophical reflection. The second group comprises the means coming from reflection on the Scripture. The third group comprises the means coming from considerations regarding social and political issues.
Website.
Contacts: Hasse Hämäläinen and Anna Tomaszewska.


November 26, 2020
Leuven Online Seminar in Classical German Philosophy
Sonja Schierbaum (Würzburg): "Crusius on Judgment, Moral Action, and the Role of Consciousness"; respondent Andree Hahmann (Siegen)
5.00-6.30 pm CET
To register and receive the Zoom link, please click here.
Contact Stephen Howard.


December 1, 2020 (deadline)
Belgrade Philosophical Annual: Hume's Legacy (Issue 34, 2021)
Guest Editors: Angela M. Coventry (Portland St), Peter J.E. Kail (Oxford), Dejan Šimkovic (Notre Dame Australia)
Invited Contributors: Tamas Demeter (Hungarian Acad Sci/Inst Philosophy), Emilio Mazza (IULM U Milan), Jonas Olson (Stockholm), Hsueh Qu (Natl U Singapore), Anik Waldow (Sydney)
    Scottish thinker David Hume made seminal contributions across topics in philosophy such as mind, epistemology, metaphysics, aesthetics, morals, religion, history, economics and politics. His works were influential in his own time and still impact contemporary philosophy. The aim of the special issue is to explore the many dimensions of Hume’s legacy from his contemporaries to present times. Submission of papers is invited on (but not limited to) themes such as:
    • Hume and his Contemporaries: the early reception of Hume’s thought in the eighteenth-nineteenth centuries
    • Hume and Contemporary Philosophy: how Hume’s thought relates to contemporary arguments and/or theories, how current philosophical research supports and/or opposes Hume’s work
    • Trends, Problems and Prospects for Hume’s Philosophy: challenges to standard or dominant ways of interpreting Hume’s work or place in the history of philosophy, future directions for Hume scholarship
All submissions should be directed to the editors of the special issue. All inquiries can be directed to the editors of the special issue or to the journal editor S. Perovic. Submitted papers should be prepared for anonymous review. All other relevant information should be sent in a separate document containing author’s name and affiliation, the title of the paper, short abstract of not more than 250 words, and 4-5 keywords. All documents should be in a *.doc, *.docx, or *.pdf format. References to Hume’s works should follow the Hume Studies convention for citing Hume. Please consult the relevant sections of the Hume Studies Style Guide. Submissions should not be longer than 10000 words, including notes. Only those whose submissions have been accepted will receive notifications.
Contact: Dejan Šimkovic.


December 1, 2020
Online Seminar on Gassendi and Descartes
Dan Garber (Princeton): "“Labore quodam quasi chymico”: Gassendi on Descartes on Knowledge of Self"
4:00-6:00 p.m.
Contact: Delphine Bellis for email link.


December 5, 2020
Leibniz Society of North America Conference (online, spread out through February)
University of Illinois, Chicago
    10:00-11:20  Jen Nguyen (Harvard): “Leibnizian Distance”; commentator Julia Jorati (UMass Amherst)
    11:30-12:50  Jun Young Kim (Illinois, Chicago): “A Combinatorial Theory of Compossibility”; commentator Yual Chiek (St. John’s)
Website.
Contact: John Whipple to receive the Zoom link and to be added to the email list to receive pre-circulated papers.


December 8, 2020
Online Seminar on Gassendi and Descartes
Carla Rita Palmerino (Radboud, Nijmegen): "A will to reason and a reason to will: Descartes and Gassendi on Knowledge and Error"
4:00-6:00 p.m.
Contact: Delphine Bellis for email link.


December 10, 2020
Leuven Online Seminar in Classical German Philosophy
Book launch: Karen Ng (Vanderbilt): Hegel's Concept of Life
Speakers: Benjamin Berger (Haverford Coll), Manja Kisner (Bergische U Wuppertal)
5.00-6.30 pm CET
To register and receive the Zoom link, please click here.
Contact Stephen Howard.


December 15, 2020
Online Seminar on Gassendi and Descartes
Mogens Laerke (CNRS, IHRIM, Maison française d’Oxford): "Idées innées et notions communes dans la Disquisitio metaphysica"
4:00-6:00 p.m.
Contact: Delphine Bellis for email link.


December 16-19, 2020
International Machiavelli Society Conference
Università Roma Tre
Rome, Italy
Papers will be accepted in English and Italian. Abstracts of 200 words or less (for presentations of no more than twenty minutes) shuold be sent to Machiavelliconference2020@gmail.com no later than February 29th, 2020. Decisions will be announced by April 15th.
    Presenters include: A. Ardito, A. Arienzo, J. Barthas, F. Bausi, E. Benner, R. Black, G. Borrelli, A. Brown, A. Campi, G. Cappelli, P. Carta, C. Celenza, M. Clarke, E. Cutinelli-Rendina, F. Del Lucchese, F. Erspamer, R. Esposito, G. Ferroni, C. Figorilli, J.-L. Fournel, M. Gaille, C. Galli, M. Geuna, G. Giorgini, A. Guidi, L. Hamilton, J. Hankins, M. Jurdjevich, V. Kahn, S. Landi, A. Lee, G. Lettieri, H. Mansfield, G. Marramao, J-J. Marchand, J. McCormick, L. Mitarotondo, V. Morfino, A. Petrina, A. Quondam, F. Raimondi, A. Robiglio, G. Sasso, G. Sciara, M. Simonetta, P. Stoppelli, N. Urbinati, C. Varotti, M. Vatter, M. Viroli, Y. Winter, M. Youssim, J. Zancarini, C. Zuckert, C. Zwierlein
Website.
Contacts: Sofia Bonicalzi>/a> and Anna Carocci.


December 17, 2020
Lecture Series: Religious Rationalism in the Late 17th Century and in the Enlightenment
Institute of Philosophy, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland
Ian Leask (Dublin City U): TBA
Website.
Contacts: Hasse Hämäläinen and Anna Tomaszewska.


December 17, 2020
Leuven Online Seminar in Classical German Philosophy
Discussion of pre-circulated paper: Joel Klein (U Fed Paraná, Curitiba): "Contextualizing Kant's Distinction between Phenomena and Noumena in the Critique of Pure Reason"
5.00-6.30 pm CET
To register and receive the Zoom link, please click here.
Contact Stephen Howard.


January 8, 2021
International Hobbes Association (online, Microsoft Teams)
Session One, chair Alex Chadwick (Groningen; Assoc Ed. Hobbes Studies)
    10:00-10:45  Valerie Williams (Emmanuel Coll): "Why Mothers? An Exploration of the Role of Natural Maternal Dominion in Hobbes's Leviathan"
    10:45-11:30  Avshalom M. Schwartz (Pol Sci, Stanford University): “Poets and Prophets: Plato and Hobbes on the Immaterial Threats to Political Stability”
    11:30-12:15  Esben Korsgaard Rasmussen (Theology, Copenhagen): "Hobbes and the Crisis of Exemplarity"
    12:15-1:00  Ryan Quandt (Claremont Grad U): "Hobbes on Interpreting Scripture"
Session Two, chair Michael Byron (Kent St)
    3:00-3:45  Ben Jones (Rock Ethics Inst, Penn State) and Manshu Tian (Northwestern): "Hobbes and Philosophical Anarchism"
    3:45-4:30  Marcus Adams (SUNY Albany): “Hobbes’s Mechanico-Perspectivalist Epistemology”
    4:30-5:15  Elad Carmel (Ben-Gurion U Negev): "Hobbes's American Reception"
    5:15-6:00  Stacy Kohls (Syracuse): "Answering the Foole: Prudence, Reasonableness and Compliance within the Hobbesian Tradition"
IHA website.
Contact: Michael Byron (Kent St).


January 14, 2021
Lecture Series: Religious Rationalism in the Late 17th Century and in the Enlightenment
Institute of Philosophy, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland
Maeve Cooke (University College Dublin): "Habermas, the Promise of Enlightenment and Religion"
Website.
Contacts: Hasse Hämäläinen and Anna Tomaszewska.


January 16, 2021
Leibniz Society of North America Conference (online, spread out through February)
University of Illinois, Chicago
Contact: John Whipple to receive the Zoom link and to be added to the email list to receive pre-circulated papers.
    10:00-11:20  Stephen Puryear (North Carolina St): “Leibniz's Conceptualism about Composition”; commenator Brandon Look (Kentucky)
    11:30-12:50  Dylan Flint (Ohio St): “God Can Do Otherwise: A Defense of Act Contingency in Leibniz’s Theodicy”; commentator Chloe Armstrong (Lawrence)
Website.


February 2021
Lecture Series: Religious Rationalism in the Late 17th Century and in the Enlightenment
Institute of Philosophy, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland
Laura Anna Macor (Verona): "J.J. Spalding and Kant on the 'Bestimmung des Menschen'."
Website.
Contacts: Hasse Hämäläinen and Anna Tomaszewska.


February 6, 2021
Leibniz Society of North America Conference (online, spread out through February)
University of Illinois, Chicago
Contact: John Whipple to receive the Zoom link and to be added to the email list to receive pre-circulated papers.
    10:00-11:20  Julia Borcherding (Cambridge): “The Many Ways of Mirroring God: Leibniz on the imago Dei Thesis”; commentator Marleen Rozemond (Toronto)
    11:30-12:50  Sören Hand (U libre Bruxelles): “Leibniz's Mediation between Hobbes and Plato in Leibniz’s Philosophy of Law”; commentator Ursula Goldenbaum (Emory)
Website.


February 27, 2021
Leibniz Society of North America Conference (online, spread out through February)
University of Illinois, Chicago
Contact: John Whipple to receive the Zoom link and to be added to the email list to receive pre-circulated papers.
    10:00-11:20  Stefano Papa (Vienna): “Descriptive Completeness and Circular Multitudes”; commentator Samuel Levey (Dartmouth)
    11:30-12:30  LSNA Business Meeting
Website.


March 25, 2021
Lecture Series: Religious Rationalism in the Late 17th Century and in the Enlightenment
Institute of Philosophy, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland
Wouter Hanegraaff (U Amsterdam): TBA
Website.
Contacts: Hasse Hämäläinen and Anna Tomaszewska.


April 15-16, 2021
The Making of the Modern International Realm: economy and international political theory from T. Hobbes to J. Bentham
European School of Political and Social Sciences
Catholic University of Lille (France)
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) are usually portrayed as two central philosophers of the British modern political and legal thought. With David Armitage’s Foundations of Modern International Thought, they also appear as leading figures in the making of the modern international political thought. In Armitage’s intellectual history, the couple “Hobbes-Bentham” delimits chronologically the formation period of the modern international political thought (1629-1832). In his attempt to justify his assumption, Armitage explains that he heavily relies on “a series of prior aetiological narratives, mostly within the disciplines of international law and International relations, had also found them there" (p. 9). These narratives have led to the assumption that the divide between the internal and the external, the domestic and the foreign have participated to the foundations of modern international thought during that period. This account is a well-received description of modern international thought where Hobbes and Bentham both incarnate major figures in conducting central developments in modern international thought.
    However, this account tends to undermine the changes that occurred in the making of the international realm both conceptually and historically. The attempt of this workshop is to focus on the British tradition from Hobbes to Bentham (including John Locke, David Hume, Adam Smith) in order to understand, through the articulation between economy and political theory, its unique contribution to modern international thought. Indeed, what sort of relations, developments, connections, continuities and ruptures take place in the fields of political theory, economy and international theory in the time period that stretches between intellectually active periods of Thomas Hobbes (from 1629 onwards) and Jeremy Bentham (1832)? We ask, for example, what sort of relations can we see between the conceptualizations of property rights and free markets? Is there a continuity on the conceptualization of sovereign state, war, colonization and expansion? How do they think about economic interactions and interdependence in the aftermath of the birth of the Westphalian world?
    Abstracts may address one or more of the following areas. Contributions which do not fall under these categories--but nevertheless address the theme of the conference--are also welcome:
    First axis: proto-theories of globalization in modern international thought:
        International commerce and competition in David Hume, Adam Smith and Jeremy Bentham
        Jealousies, glory, vanity in David Hume, Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham
        Rich countries and Poor Countries economic exchange in David Hume, Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham
        International private companies
        International commerce, peace and war
        International commerce, national bankruptcy
        International law, international treaties, commercial treaties
        Distance, global trade, local economy, imperial conquests
        Colonies
        Critics of empire
        Critics of mercantilism
    Second axis: Ruptures or continuity between early modern (Hobbes, Locke) & modern international thought (Hume, Smith, Bentham)?
        Domestic economy and international economy
        Work, labour, population control, colony settlement, property
        Property rights, land, market regulation, law
        Taxes policy, bounties, balance of trade, controlling foreign trade and money
        Economic theories, modern political economy, commerce
        State theories, liberal internationalism, cosmopolitanism
        Banks, paper-money, financial plans and policies
        Free trade, freedom of movement, borders
        International theory, laws of nations, international law
Paper proposals of maximum 800 words should be sent by December 20, 2020 to: Benjamin Bourcier or Mikko P. Jakonen.
Keynote speaker: David Lieberman, James W. and Isabel Coffroth Professor of Jurisprudence at the Berkeley Law Faculty, University of California.
Each paper will be attributed 45 minutes. The format will be 30 minutes presentation followed by 15 minutes of questions and discussion.
The organizers of the workshop cannot provide financial travel support for speakers. For the participants, the organizers will provide catering, restaurant and possible financial support (hostel) for the two days of the conference.
Website.


April 29, 2021
Lecture Series: Religious Rationalism in the Late 17th Century and in the Enlightenment
Institute of Philosophy, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland
Steven Palmquist (Hong Kong Baptist U): TBA
Website.
Contacts: Hasse Hämäläinen and Anna Tomaszewska.


May 14, 2021
Diego Lucci (American U Bulgaria / U Hamburg): "Locke’s Reasonable Christianity: A Religious Enlightener’s Theology in Context"
Abstract: John Locke’s religious interests, concerns, and views permeate his oeuvre and are expressed openly in his later theological writings, which represent the culmination of his studies. In The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695) and other public as well as private texts, Locke explained his religious ideas in an unsystematic and, at times, ambiguous way. However, an accurate analysis of Locke’s public writings and theological manuscripts reveals that his religion was a unique, heterodox, internally coherent version of Protestant Christianity. Locke had good knowledge of the theological debates and controversies of the time, and his religious thought denotes many similarities with heterodox theological currents such as Socinianism and Arminianism. Nevertheless, he always made sure that his religious views were consistent with, and indeed grounded in, the Scriptures, since he adhered to the Protestant doctrine of sola Scriptura. The main elements of Locke’s Christianity are an original historical method of biblical interpretation, a moralist soteriology based on a theistic and rationalist ethics and revolving around the fundamentals of Christianity (i.e., repentance for sin, obedience to the divine moral law, and faith in Jesus the Messiah), a mortalist position concerning death and resurrection, and a non-Trinitarian Christology. Due to Locke’s heterodoxy, and particularly to his moralism, mortalism, and disregard of the Trinity, his religious views attracted criticism from different quarters but, in the long run, had an impact on the Enlightenment search for a “reasonable” religion and, also, on the development of several Protestant movements (e.g., Unitarianism, Methodism, and various Baptist churches). Therefore, his legacy as a theologian, albeit largely neglected by historiography, eventually proved to be as significant as his contributions in the fields of epistemology and political theory.
Website.
Contacts: Hasse Hämäläinen and Anna Tomaszewska.


May 2021
Lecture Series: Religious Rationalism in the Late 17th Century and in the Enlightenment
Institute of Philosophy, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland
Gianni Paganini (U Piemonte Orientale): "Hypotheses and Liberty of Philosophizing in Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion"
Website.
Contacts: Hasse Hämäläinen and Anna Tomaszewska.


May 31-June 4, 2021
International Berkeley Conference: "De Motu: Text, Context and Perspectives"
Aix-Marseille University
Maison de la Recherche
Aix-en-Provence, France
    One of George Berkeley’s most notable contributions to the philosophy of science, De Motu (1721), appeared between two productive periods in Berkeley’s life: ten years after the early period (1709-1713), and ten years before the second period of active publication (1732-1744). To celebrate the 300th anniversary of this event, we are now inviting distinguished scholars to a conference on De Motu, its importance in the history of philosophy, by enlightening its context and how it influenced later works, as well as its significance in the history and philosophy of science. As Popper notices, De Motu is a significant early attempts to evaluate some of Newton’s physics major concepts, and it allows us to trace perspectives from Berkeley to contemporary epistemological and scientific doctrines.
    The conference is sponsored by the International Berkeley Society and the Centre Gilles Gaston Granger (UMR 7304). It is organized by Bertil Belfrage and Pascal Taranto. Proposals (500 words maximum), can be written in French or English and submitted (together with a short bio-bibliography) no later than November 30. Acceptation of the proposal will be communicated by the scientific committee on 15 January 2020. Presentations are limited to 30 minutes and 10 minutes of discussion. Fees (30 €) include coffee breaks, lunch and dinners. The travel and accommodation expenses of the participants will not be covered. Submission of proposals should be addressed to: Bertil Belfrage and Pascal Taranto.


June 9-11, 2021
2021 John Locke Conference
Instituto per la Storia del Pensiero Filosofico e Scientifico Moderno (CNR)
Naples, Italy
Speakers include: Mark Goldie (Churchill Coll, Cambridge), Paschalis M. Kitromilides (Nat Kapodistrian U Athens), Maria Montserrat Herrero Lopez (U Navarra, Pamplona).
The aim of the third official International Conference of the John Locke Society is to encourage studies and researches on any topic of John Locke’s philosophy, fostering interaction among scholars from different disciplines. Papers concerning any aspect pertaining to Locke’s thought are welcomed. A section of the JLC will be devoted to Locke in the Mediterranean area between the XVIII and XIX Century. Abstracts (maximum 750 words) should be sent no later than 31 December 2019 to the 2021 John Locke Conference. Final papers should be no longer than 5000 words. The final programme will be published by February 2021. Further information regarding the conference, accommodation options and other practical matters will be available at that time.
Website.
Contacts: Roberto Evangelista or Luisa Simonutti.


July 5-9, 2021
Hume Society Conference
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana
Bogotá, Colombia
We invite papers in all areas of Hume studies but especially welcome submissions bearing some relation to the conference themes:
    Hume on Aesthetics
    Hume on the Essays
    Hume on Imagination
    Sympathy, Happiness and the Virtues
Papers should be no more than thirty minutes reading length (4000 words) and should be submitted with an Abstract (200 words). All self-references should be deleted for anonymous review. Papers and Abstracts must be submitted in English using this form. Papers should not have been published by the date of the conference. Authors may submit their papers as either MS Word documents or in rich text format (RTF). While you are there, please also use the adjacent form to let us know whether you are willing to review or comment on a paper, or to chair a session at the conference. Offers made on this form are considered provisional, and do not entail any firm commitment on your part, but they will serve as a starting point when we begin to make arrangements. Hume Society Young Scholar Awards are given to qualifying graduate students whose papers are accepted through the normal anonymous review process. Deadline for submissions is November 15, 2019. Sending instructions for submissions will be announced soon.
Website.
Contact: Amyas Merivale.


July 12-Aug. 6, 2021
National Endowment for the Humanities Institute on David Hume in the 21st Century
Portland State University
Portland, Oregon
    Applications are invited for a 4-week Summer Institute designed to study multidisciplinary perspectives on the work of eighteenth-century Enlightenment giant, David Hume. The Institute features a rotating faculty of twelve eminent scholars. While we will explore Hume’s impact in epistemology, ethics, history, and economics, a notable feature is its focus on the implication of Hume’s thought in non-traditional areas. Faculty will address Hume’s approach in relation to Eastern thought, the status of women (including early modern woman philosophers' responses to Hume), race, the status of animals, and the environment.
    Our goals are: (1) By examining a variety of Hume's contributions, we hope to give faculty and graduate student participants an expansive context and diverse resources to facilitate their own teaching and research projects on the Institute's themes. (2) By studying topics of both traditional and contemporary interest, we aim to offer participants a sample of the engagement of a classical Enlightenment theory with present issues. The Institute is designed to include both formal sessions and informal interactions. We plan to meet on weekdays between July 13 and August 7, from 9 until noon, for presentations by guest faculty of the Institute followed by question-and-answer sessions. The readings include primary works with some secondary, contemporary essays or book excerpts on the topic for the day. In the afternoons, we will offer the opportunity for small interactive group sessions, so that participants with common interests can share ideas on pedagogy and research. College and university teachers, and advanced graduate students with an interest in Hume, are encouraged to apply. Applications accepted beginning January 1; application deadline March 1; applicants notified March 27; applicants' acceptance deadline April 3.
    The co-directors are Angela M. Coventry (Portland State) and Elizabeth S. Radcliffe (William & Mary). Guest faculty include: Deborah Boyle (College of Charleston), Marina Frasca-Spada (Cambridge), Jay L. Garfield (Smith), Don Garrett (NYU), Paul Russell (Lund University and UBC), Geoffrey Sayre-McCord (UNC-Chapel Hill), Margaret Schabas (UBC), Lisa Shapiro (Simon Fraser), Mark Spencer (Brock), Andrew Valls (Oregon State), and Carl Wennerlind (Barnard). College and university teachers, and advanced graduate students with an interest in Hume, are encouraged to apply. Those employed by museums, libraries, historical societies, and other organizations are also eligible. A stipend of $3,300 will help to defray the cost of traveling to and participating in the 4-week Institute (stipends are taxable income). For more information, including how to apply, see the Institute website.
Website.
Contact: Elizabeth Radcliffe.


July 15-17, 2021
Conference: "Law and Morality in Kant"
Alte Mensa
Göttingen, Germany
Wednesday, 14 July
    18:00  Rainer Forst (Frankfurt a.M.) Noumenale Entfremdung. Gesellschaftskritik nach Kant und Marx
Thursday, 15 July
    9:00-9:30  Welcome and Introduction
    9:30-10:45  Christoph Horn (Bonn) Legal and Political Normativity in Kant: Beyond Derivation and Separation
    11:00-12:15  Marcus Willaschek (Frankfurt a.M.) Kant on Moral Universality and the Normative Foundations of Right
    14:00-15:15  Sorin Baiasu (Keele) Kant’s Right as Normatively Independent. Three Arguments Considered and Rejected
    15:30-16:45  Bernd Ludwig (Göttingen) The Direct Route from the Categorical Imperative to the General Principle of Right
    17:15-18:30  Paul Guyer (Brown) The Morality of Right: A Restatement
Friday, 16 July
    9:30-10:45  Philipp-Alexander Hirsch (Göttingen) Legal Coercion as a Moral Problem? Kant on the Enforcement of Rights and the Limits of Autonomy
    11:00-12:15  Kate Moran (Boston) & Jens Timmermann (St. Andrews) Should Criminals Be Punished for Their Folly? On the Ethical Foundations of Kant’s Legal Philosophy
    14:00-15:15  Ralf Bader (Oxford) Morality, Legality, and Luck
    15:30-16:45  Martin Brecher (Mannheim) Wrong, but Permitted? Kant’s Notion of Permissive Law
    17:15-18:30  Arthur Ripstein (Toronto) Two Types of Wrongdoing
Saturday, 17 July
    9:30-10:45  George Pavlakos (Glasgow) (The Morality of) External Freedom: Relational, Non-Coercive and Fundamental
    11:00-12:15  Japa Pallikkathayil (Pittsburgh) What is External Freedom?
    14:00-15:15  James P. Messina (New Orleans) Two Conceptions of Freedom in Kant’s Political Philosophy
    15:30-16:45  Alice Pinheiro Walla (Bayreuth) Bridging the Gap: Ethical and Juridical Duties in Case of Lacking Political Institutions
    17:15-18:30  Katrin Flikschuh (London) Exactitude and Indemonstrability in Kant's Doctrine of Right: On the Limits of Kant’s Legal Philosophy
    18:30  Closing Remarks
For further information on the conference go to http://www.uni-goettingen.de/de/619428.html. If you have any questions please get in touch with us at law-and-morality@uni-goettingen.de. Register by sending your name and affiliation. Deadline for registration is 30 June 2021.
Contact: Philipp-Alexander Hirsch.


Aug. 23-27, 2021
Global Jonathan Edwards Congress 2021
Rationality and Spirituality: Retrieving Jonathan Edwards for Understanding Religion and Spirituality in Human Experience Today
Leuven Center of Christian Studies
Evangelische Theologische Faculteit
Leuven, Belgium
The Global Jonathan Edwards 2020 Congress seeks to create academic space for a multidisciplinary discussion that retrieves and leverages the robust nature of Edwards’s insights into a religious experience that is both rational and spiritual for the benefit of the humanities, church, and society. Keynote speakers:
    • Andreas J. Beck (ETF Leuven)
    • Willem van Vlastuin (VU Amsterdam)
    • Crawford Gribben (Queen's U Belfast)
    • Amanda Porterfield (Florida St)
    • Lisanne Winslow (Northwestern U)
    • Kenneth P. Minkema (Yale)
    • Tibor Fabiny (Károli Gáspár University, Reformed Church, Hungary)
    • Michael McClymond (Saint Louis U)
    • David W. Kling (U Miami)
Paper proposals should be maximum 300 words and fall within the theme of the congress. They can be submitted by email to papers@jedcon.be. Please attach two separate Word documents in one email: (a) your paper proposal (including a bibliography of no more than five consulted sources) with all references to the author removed); and (b) your last name, first name, Email address, institutional address, the title of your abstract, the topic under which your paper falls, as well as a short CV (1 page max.). Deadline: TBA, but probably around February 15, 2021. We will review all submitted paper proposals and you will receive a response within two months. If your proposal is accepted, you will be invited to present your paper at the congress. Your presentation will be limited to approximately twenty minutes.
Website.
Contact: Philip J. Fisk.


September 8-10, 2021
Naturalizing Religion in the Scottish Enlightenment
University of Antwerp
Prinsstraat 13
Antwerp, Belgium
Speakers: Lauren Kopajtic (Fordham), Paul Russell (Lund U/U British Columbia)
    A distinctive mark of 18th century Scottish philosophy is a delineation between religion as founded in reason, and religion as a natural phenomenon. This conference’s aim is to focus on the second approach in order to better understand how Scottish Enlightenment thinkers sought to explain religion and its origins by appealing to psychological and sociological mechanisms. Additionally, this conference seeks to discuss the relation between the two ways to study religion (that is, from inquiry into the abstract relation of things on the one hand, and from matter of fact and human nature on the other). Is one approach better than the other? Can religion be reduced to psychological or social mechanisms? Papers on the general study of human nature, the human mind, morality, and changing conceptions of the self in the Scottish Enlightenment are also welcome.
Sub-topics: The Scottish Enlightenment and:
    • the science of human nature; natural beliefs; morality; the self
    • Context and history of the study of religion
    • Natural religion and naturalized religion
    • Natural histories of religion
Send abstracts of maximum 500 words (no later than 17 May 2021) to issp@usiouxfalls.edu. Conference price (lunches, breaks and conference dinner included). Registration before/after 10 January 2021: regular: €120/€150; ISSP members: €110/€130; graduate students, retirees and unwaged: €100/€120
Registration and information.
Website.
Contact: Hannah Lingier.


November 12-13, 2021
NYU Conference: Nature, Mind, Freedom — A Conference in Celebration of Béatrice Longuenesse
New York University, Kimmel Center, Room 914
60 Washington Square South, New York, NY
Friday, November 12
    9:30–11:10  Allen Wood (Indiana U); commentator Colin Marshall (U Washington); chair Paul Guyer (Brown)
    11:25–1:05  Patricia Kitcher (Columbia); commentator Karl Schafer (UC Irvine); chair Sally Sedgwick (Boston U)
    2:55–4:35  Gary Hatfield (U Pennsylvania); commentator Nick Stang (Toronto); chair Michael Friedman (Stanford)
    4:50–6:30  Hannah Ginsborg (UC Berkeley); commentator Stefanie Grüne (Cologne); chair Karl Ameriks (Notre Dame)
Saturday, November 13
    9:30–11:10  Rolf-Peter Horstmann (Humboldt U Berlin); commentator Scott Jenkins (Kansas); chair Fred Neuhouser (Barnard C)
    11:25–1:05  Richard Moran (Harvard); commentator Nick Riggle (U San Diego); chair Chris Prodoehl (NYU)
    2:55–4:35  Tyler Burge (UCLA); commentator Anja Jauernig (NYU); chair Christopher Peacocke (Columbia)
    4:50–6:30  Béatrice Longuenesse (NYU); chair Don Garrett (NYU)