BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Philosophy events - ECPv6.16.3//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: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:20241107T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20241107T173000
DTSTAMP:20260614T051551
CREATED:20241008T171115Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20241107T123920Z
UID:10002197-1730995200-1731000600@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in-person & online) – Patrick Tomlin (Warwick University)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Killing vs Headaches: Wide Proportionality and Limited Aggregation \nAbstract: Philosophers who have discussed ‘limited aggregation’ have focussed discussion on cases in which we must choose which of two groups to save – for example\, whether we should save one person’s life\, or save some enormous number of people from a mild headache. According to one influential view\, which I call the Relevance View\, we should save one person’s life in this case\, since headaches are irrelevant to death. In this paper\, I want to examine what this implies for a different set of cases – cases in which we might inflict harm on some in order to save others from harm. Translating the relevance view from ‘whom-to-save’ to ‘harming-to-save’ cases\, I show\, is not straightforward. We need to consider up to four different ‘relevance rules’\, and to consider the relationships between them. I will further argue that considering the Relevance View in these cases reveals something important about two fundamental principles of preventive morality —  that the proportionality principle is logically prior to\, and constrains the operation of\, the necessity principle \nLocation: Edgecliffe G03
URL:/philevents/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-online-patrick-tomlin-warwick-university/
LOCATION:Edgecliffe 104
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20241114T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20241114T173000
DTSTAMP:20260614T051551
CREATED:20241016T122310Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20241114T125310Z
UID:10002214-1731600000-1731605400@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (online) – John Barugahare (Makerere University)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Global Health Equity through Decolonizing Health Research Ethics in Africa: Leveraging Kwame Nkrumah’s Analysis of Neocolonialism. \nAbstract:Background: The foundational contention of this paper is that\, arguably\, the ultimate ethical goal of conducting health research among humans is to provide them with better health opportunities. Because of growing perceptions that ongoing international collaborative health research between the Global North and Africa is colonial in nature\, there is worry that this goal will not be easily met. Hence\, there is an urgent need to decolonize international collaborative health research in Africa. Using Kwame Nkrumah’s analysis of his seminal work on ‘Neocolonialism: the last stage of imperialism’\, the aim of this paper is to reflect on the potential of the current dominant trend in decolonizing health research ethics in Africa to meet the ultimate goal of decolonization. Methods: This is a purely argumentative paper based on Kwame Nkrumah’s views on neocolonialism and decolonization. The paper also uses other secondary sources to corroborate and demonstrate its argument. Results: There is a growing consensus that international collaborative health research is colonial in nature and hence a need to decolonise it. The paper argues that Nkrumah’s analysis of neocolonialism implies that the ultimate goal of decolonizing health research in Africa should be to mitigate and ultimately stop the exploitation of African people in international collaborative health research. Discussion: The paper shows that the outcomes of most decolonizing efforts\, though necessary\, are not enough. Unless conscientiously pursued\, these efforts risk failure at meeting Nkrumah’s ultimate goal of decolonization and arguably are becoming a subtle method for facilitating\, sustaining and entrenching the ultimate goal of neocolonialism—the exploitation of African peoples. Conclusion: The mission of decolonizing health research ethics in Africa needs to clearly demonstrate the potential to mitigate and ultimately end maximin exploitation in health research and be critical enough to avoid the risk of instead facilitating neocolonialism unconsciously. \nJohn Barugahare\, Ph.D.\, is a senior lecturer and Head\, Department of Philosophy at Makerere University\, Kampala – Uganda. He teaches moral philosophy\, human rights and applies these in health care and health-related research. His major interest is in ethics international collaborative research. He is also interest in guiding the development of bioethics in Africa. Lately\, he is exploring concepts and perspectives in the decolonization discussion\, and how these can help shape our understanding of the major ethical issues in international collaborative health research\, hoping to suggest ways these can be eased. \nLocation: online & livestreamed from Edgecliffe G03
URL:/philevents/event/ceppa-talk-online-john-barugahare-makerere-university/
LOCATION:Edgecliffe 104
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20241120T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20241120T180000
DTSTAMP:20260614T051551
CREATED:20241021T122317Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20241120T132308Z
UID:10002222-1732118400-1732125600@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:Bradley Hillier-Smith’s ‘The Ethics of State Responses to Refugees’ Book Launch
DESCRIPTION:You are warmly invited to the book launch for Bradley Hillier-Smith’s brand-new book The Ethics of State Responses to Refugees (abstract below). The author will be interviewed by Kieran Oberman (LSE)\, after which we will all be in the opportunity to ask questions and celebrate the new book with some well-deserved drinks. All welcome!\n\nBradley Hillier-Smith: The Ethics of State Responses to Refugees\n Edgecliffe 104\, 20th November from 4pm – 6pm\, followed by drinks. For those unable to join in person\, the Teams link is here.\n\nAbstract for The Ethics of State Responses to Refugees\nAt a time of intense philosophical and political debates on how states ought to respond to refugees\, this book provides an account of what an ethical response to refugees would be. It does this by developing an understanding of the moral duties that states have towards refugees. The first half of the book analyses state practices used in response to refugees\, to understand the negative duties of states not to harm or violate the rights of innocent refugees. The second half analyses morally significant features of contemporary refugee displacement\, to understand the positive duties of states to alleviate the distinctive harms and injustices that refugees face. The two halves together thereby outline the negative and positive duties of states towards refugees which together constitute the elements of an ethical response. The book then demonstrates this ethical response is not only urgently required but is also within reach.\n\nAbout Kieran Oberman: Kieran Oberman is an Associate Professor in Philosophy at the LSE whose research and numerous publications specialise in the ethics of border control\, immigration\, migration ethics\, the freedoms and rights of migrants\, and obligations towards refugees among other topics in global justice.\n\nhttps://www.routledge.com/The-Ethics-of-State-Responses-to-Refugees/Hillier-Smith/p/book/9781032833675
URL:/philevents/event/bradley-hillier-smiths-the-ethics-of-state-responses-to-refugees-book-launch/
LOCATION:Edgecliffe 104
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20241121T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20241121T173000
DTSTAMP:20260614T051551
CREATED:20241022T122322Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20241121T132310Z
UID:10002225-1732204800-1732210200@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in-person & online) – James Hutton (Delft)
DESCRIPTION:Title: Emotion-Based Environmental Ethics: The Radical Implications of Taking Wonder Seriously \nAbstract:\nIn environmental ethics\, we find many competing theories of environmental value\, but little discussion of the epistemological grounds for believing one theory rather than another. Building on the framework of moral empiricism (which I’ve developed elsewhere)\, I propose an “Emotion-Based” methodology for environmental ethics. The Emotion-Based methodology requires treating our emotional experiences as defeasible intuitions about value\, wrongness\, etc. – accepting their contents\, unless we have substantive reason not to. I offer some rationales for adopting the Emotion-Based methodology\, exploiting analogies with other domains of knowledge. In the final part of the talk\, I zoom in on the emotion of wonder. Wonder\, I argue\, presents its object as valuable for its own sake. If we take seriously the full range of our experiences of wonder\, we face pressure to adopt a pluralist view of environmental value\, on which some nonsentient beings (e.g. trees) and collective entities (i.e. ecosystems) are valuable for their own sake. Thus\, while moral empiricism is an abstract view about the conditions for moral knowledge\, it turns out to have fairly radical first-order implications for environmental ethics.\nLocation: Edgecliffe G03
URL:/philevents/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-online-james-hutton-delft/
LOCATION:Edgecliffe 104
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20241128T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20241128T173000
DTSTAMP:20260614T051551
CREATED:20241029T124052Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20241128T132309Z
UID:10002235-1732809600-1732815000@www.st-andrews.ac.uk
SUMMARY:CEPPA Talk (in-person & online) – Katrin Flikschuh (LSE)
DESCRIPTION:Title: The Idea of Ancestry in African Philosophy \nAbstract: This paper concerns itself with the rationality of belief in ancestral existence. Although belief in ancestral existence remains widespread globally\, I shall focus on a-thinned out version of African forms of this belief. ‘Thinned-out’ in that I am not interested in this or that substantive version of the belief among different African peoples; nor am I interested in the particular cultural practises that attend or attest to the belief. I am interested in the general form of the belief\, and in the more general conception of the natural world in general which one would have to endorse for belief in ancestral existence to count as rational. In one sense\, the aims of this paper are quite modest: I merely aim to get clearer\, myself\, on what strikes me as an intuitively attractive belief. In another sense\, the paper is quite ambitious: the belief would seem to require Western readers to suspend routine metaphysical and scientific assumptions about the natural order. In putting pressure on these routine assumptions\, I shall touch on discussions around free will and consciousness as phenomena that share some of the features of ancestral existence. Considered comparatively\, belief in ancestral existence may be no less rationally defensible than belief in free will or (non-reductive) consciousness. \nLocation: Edgecliffe G03
URL:/philevents/event/ceppa-talk-in-person-online-katrin-flikschuh-lse/
LOCATION:Edgecliffe 104
CATEGORIES:CEPPA Talk
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR