BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Philosophy events - ECPv6.16.4//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:/philevents
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Philosophy events
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/London
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:BST
DTSTART:20200329T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:GMT
DTSTART:20201025T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:BST
DTSTART:20210328T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:GMT
DTSTART:20211031T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:BST
DTSTART:20220327T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:GMT
DTSTART:20221030T010000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;VALUE=DATE:20210916
DTEND;VALUE=DATE:20210919
DTSTAMP:20260620T070457
CREATED:20210602T100328Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210916T180111Z
UID:10001304-1631750400-1632009599@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:All Work and No Play
DESCRIPTION:A workshop on the philosophy of work and time-allocation \n  \n16-18 September \, 2021 \nThe Future of Work and Income Research Network    (fwistandrews@gmail.com) \nCentre for Ethics\, Philosophy\, and Public Affairs \nDepartment of Philosophy\, University of 58�Թ� \nWorkshop to be held entirely online \nThursday 16th September \n\n\n\n10.30am\nWelcome and introdution to the Future of Work and Income Research Network\n\n\n11am – 12:30pm\nJonathan Wolff (Oxford University): Working at Home\, Socialising at Work\n\n\n2:30 – 4pm\nLisa Herzog (Groningen University): Bodies at Work\n\n\n\nFriday 17th September \n\n\n\n11am – 12:30pm\nDiana-Elena Popescu (Edinburgh University): Leisure for Every Body: Disability and the Four Day Workweek\n\n\n2:30 – 4pm\nJoe Ryle (4 Day Week Campaign): Has the time come for a four-day week?\n\n\n\nSaturday 18th September \n\n\n\n11am – 12:30pm\nOtto Lehto (KCL): The Technological Unemployment Hypothesis in the UBI Debate: A Critique\n\n\n12:30 – 2pm\nSimeon Goldstraw (Oxford University) Free Time Isn’t Working\n\n\n3 – 4:30pm\nBertrand Rossert (World Bank): Defining Work\n\n\n\n“8 hours labour\, 8 hours recreation\, 8 hours rest!” This was the slogan adopted by many labour movements in the nineteenth century\, when 16-hour working days were not uncommon. Marx believed that only part of the working day was required to supply workers’ consumption needs\, the rest going to support the consumption of idle capitalists. John Maynard Keynes predicted in 1930 that a fifteen-hour working week was a close possibility\, requiring only that work was spread more evenly across the population. \n  \nAlthough less extreme than Keynes’s vision\, some activists today are campaigning for a four-day working week. The campaign has won some victories\, with the Spanish government launching an experiment with mid-sized companies last year and the Scottish government promising to try something similar. Besides economic questions about labour productivity and marginal returns\, there are deep philosophical questions around the allocation of time to work. We hope to address these in this workshop. Some examples are: \n  \n\nHow do we distinguish labour\, recreation\, and rest?\nShould time spend recuperating between physically exhausting tasks count as rest or part of labour?\nShould activities undertaken to ‘decompress’ after mentally or emotionally taxing work count as recreation?\nAre there important differences between relaxation activities and leisure activities?\nIn his 1966 essay\, “The Abolition of Work”\, Bob Black distinguished work from play in terms of the latter being voluntary – but what is the relevant category of “voluntariness” here?\nWhat about the allocation of domestic and caring labour? How does this play into patterns of gender inequality and other forms of social imbalance?\nIs time the right measure of the balance between work\, leisure\, and rest? What about intensity\, satisfaction\, etc.?\nIs flexibility in working time always a blessing\, or can it be a hidden curse?\nHow should we think about the allocation of working time among the population? Can some groups “steal time” from others? What about the allocation of time across generations?\n\nFor More Information\nAlex Douglas (axd@st-andrews.ac.uk)
URL:/philevents/event/all-work-and-no-play/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Workshop
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20210916T100000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20210916T120000
DTSTAMP:20260620T070457
CREATED:20210628T152321Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210916T223810Z
UID:10001312-1631786400-1631793600@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Super Special Seminar
DESCRIPTION:
URL:/philevents/event/super-special-seminar-8/
CATEGORIES:Super Special Seminar series
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20210916T130000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20210916T143000
DTSTAMP:20260620T070457
CREATED:20210826T202308Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210916T223811Z
UID:10001377-1631797200-1631802600@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Epistemology Seminar: Jessica Brown “Group Evidence”
DESCRIPTION:Abstract: We routinely ascribe belief and knowledge to groups\, saying such things as that the government knew that the new strain of covid was especially transmissible\, or that the government believed that restrictions on inbound travel to the country weren’t necessary despite the new strain. Many take such ascriptions to be literally true\, and there has been much recent work on what it is for a group to have a belief\, or for a group belief to be justified or constitute knowledge. Just as in the case of individuals\, if groups have beliefs then whether they are justified or constitute knowledge partially depends on their evidence. So it’s important to address the question of what is a group’s evidence. Here\, I examine a range of different views about group evidence and argue for an inflationary account of group evidence on which a group’s evidence is not a simple function of the evidence of its members.
URL:/philevents/event/epistemology-seminar-liam-kofi-bright-lse/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20210916T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20210916T173000
DTSTAMP:20260620T070457
CREATED:20210830T171133Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20210916T180113Z
UID:10001381-1631808000-1631813400@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk – Kimberley Brownlee (University of British Columbia)
DESCRIPTION:TITLE: ‘Interactional Wrongs and Vices’\n\nABSTRACT: This paper explores a domain of action that we often regard as a minor moral matter\, the domain of ordinary interactions. Yet\, ordinary interactions are morally significant for two reasons: they are the primary vehicle through which 1) we show respect and disrespect for each other\, and 2) we either grease the wheels or put a spanner in the wheels of healthy human sociability. Interactional ethics concerns both our first-order conduct within a given interaction and our second-order management of our interactional lives. At both levels\, we can act well or badly and thereby do great good\, harm\, justice\, and injustice. This paper homes in on first-order and second-order interactional wrongs. It isolates distinct wrongs that we can do at each of the three key stages of an interaction – the initiation stage\, execution stage\, and conclusion stage – including\, notably\, engage in interactional outsourcing. It then examines specific second-order patterns of wrongdoing – interactional vices – that we can display as we manage our interactional lives.
URL:/philevents/event/ceppa-talk-kimberley-brownlee-university-of-british-columbia/
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR