CALL FOR PAPERS: Trends in Logic XI, 2012 (Ruhr University Bochum)
The 11th Trends in Logic international conference will be held at Ruhr
University Bochum, Germany, from June 3-June 5, 2012 under the title
“Advances in Philosophical Logic”. It is organized by the chair of Logic and
Epistemology at the Department of Philosophy II of Ruhr University Bochum,
in co-operation with the journal Studia Logica,
http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/philosophy/trendsxi .
We invite submissions presenting substantial recent advances in formal
philosophical logic. The range of topics includes but is not limited to: Continue Reading »
Posted in CFP | Tagged applied logic, Argumentation, belief revision, epistemology, formal epistemology, logic, logic conferences, non-monotonic logic, paraconsistent logic, paradoxes, semantics, truth | Leave a Comment »
ANNOUNCEMENT AND CALL FOR PROPOSALS
The American Association of Philosophy Teachers
THE NINETEENTH INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP-CONFERENCE ON TEACHING
PHILOSOPHY
St. Edward’s University, Austin, Texas
July 25 – July 29, 2012
Proposals for interactive workshops and panels related to teaching and
learning philosophy at any educational level are welcome. We
especially encourage workshops and panels on the following topics:
• innovative and successful teaching strategies
• professional issues connected to teaching
• how work in other disciplines can improve the teaching of
philosophy
• engaging students outside the classroom
• innovative uses of instructional technologies
• the challenge of teaching in new settings
• methods to improve student learning
PROPOSAL GUIDELINES Continue Reading »
Posted in CFP, Teaching | Tagged CFP, improving student learning, instructional techniques for philosophy, interdisciplinary study, interdisciplinary teaching, nineteenth conference on teaching philosophy, teaching conferences, teaching philosophy, teaching strategies | Leave a Comment »
Psychology, Emotion, and the Human Sciences
A Symposium at the University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario Canada
20th to 21st of April, 2012.
Deadline for Submissions: 1 November 2011
In Alchemies of the Mind: Rationality and the Emotions [Cambridge, 1999], Jon Elster argues that “with an important subset of the emotions [for example, regret, relief, envy, malice, pity, indignation, …] we can learn more from moralists, novelists, and playwrights than from the cumulative findings of scientific psychology.” Elster then explores the work of both ancient and early modern moral philosophers in order to substantiate his argument.
This symposium will explore Elster’s assertions: what can contemporary ‘scientific psychology,’ barely 150 years old, teach us about the emotions that early modern literary and philosophical inquiry cannot? Does psychology [of various sorts] deserve its status as the discipline of feeling? What can contemporary philosophical work teach us about feeling and emotion? Are there viable ways of bringing historical and contemporary emotional inquiry into contact? What insight can various forms of inquiry bring to the increasingly prominent issue of affective education [the education of emotions, dispositions, and values]? What is the status of emotional inquiry across disciplines? Continue Reading »
Posted in CFP | Tagged affective education, Argumentation, contemporary psychology and sociology, CRRAR, emotion, history of psychology, Informal Logic, Jon Elster, literary studies, philosophy, psychology, the history of emotion, the scholarship of teaching and learning, University of Windsor | Leave a Comment »
Rhetoricians will appreciate the presence of an attentive, if quadrupedal, audience in addition to the speakers.
An interesting phone interview with Hugo Mercier popped up today on Point of Inquiry, the blog for the Center for Inquiry. The role of the confirmation bias, disagreement, and polarization are covered in this interesting discussion. There are some very familiar themes here for argumentation theorists. It’s well worth a listen. The clear and economical discussion of what can be complicated ideas here makes the podcast something potentially useful in advanced classes on reasoning too. The interview is about 40 minutes long. Click on the link below to listen.
Interview with Hugo Mercier
(Note: The file may take a moment to load depending upon your connection speed, so do be patient!)
Posted in Argumentation, Connections, Discussion, Teaching | Tagged argument theory of reasoning, argumentation theory and cognitive psychology, biases and heuristics, Chris Mooney, communication theory, confirmation bias, conversational analysis, Dan Sperber, deliberation, Hugo Mercier, interactional analysis, motivated reasoning, Point of Inquiry, reason-based choice, reasoning | Leave a Comment »
International Colloquium “Argumentation in Political Deliberation”
ArgLab – IFL
Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas da Universidade Nova de Lisboa
2 September 2011
Political deliberation, understood as a public debate aimed at forming political opinions and deciding what course of action to take, has traditionally been seen as a prime venue for public reasoning and argument. Aristotle considered political deliberation – next to forensic dispute and public oratory – as one of the three main genres of rhetoric. Today, different modes of political deliberation – from formal institutional procedures in parliaments, to public hearings, to citizens’ conferences, to televised debates, to informal online discussions among “ordinary citizens” – are at the centre of interest in argumentation theory, deliberative theory of democracy, and communication and media studies alike.
The goal of this colloquium is to bring together scholars from these interrelated disciplines to examine the role, shape and quality of argumentation in political deliberation. A theoretical and empirical focus of the presentations and discussions will be on the practices of argumentation. The questions addressed include: How can we best theorize, analyze and evaluate argumentation in the context of political deliberation? What is the impact of the contextual conditions in different deliberative activities on the shape and quality of public argument? What are the typical forms of deliberative argument and counterargument? To what extent is the “virtual public sphere” transforming the way we engage in public argument? Does it allow for inclusive participation and genuine argumentative debate between advocates of various political views? By addressing these questions, the colloquium hopes to provide a focused account of the multifaceted argumentative practices in political deliberation.
The colloquium is part of a project Argumentation, Communication and Context sponsored by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT: PTDC/FIL–FIL/10117/2009) and carried out at ArgLab, Universidade Nova de Lisboa.
For more information, visit the colloquium web page.
Posted in Announcements, Argumentation, Pragma-dialectics, Seminar/Workshop/Program Announcements | Tagged ArgLab, political argumentation, political deliberation, political discourse, political rhetoric, public sphere, strategic maneuvering | Leave a Comment »
This is actually a pretty accurate representation of my mental picture of how these things work.
Just a quick update to let everyone know that I’ve done some things to make RAIL easier to follow on different platforms. I’ve set up a long-overdue Twitter account: @RAILBlog and I’ve created a Google Plus page you can follow as well. The G+ page can be found under “RAIL Blog“–creative, yes? Once I figure out how to do it I’ll get all these things all synced up for you all, but for the time being at least they now exist. 🙂
Posted in About RAIL | Tagged Google Plus, RAIL, RAIL blog, RAILCT, Twitter | 2 Comments »
AMERICAN DIALECTIC
Now accepting submissions in all areas of philosophy.
American Dialectic takes an exciting new approach to scholarly publication by promoting greater philosophical engagement between readers and authors. Lead articles are published at the beginning of each term and are followed throughout by edited responses written by our readers. By publishing articles, questions, and responses together, American Dialectic creates an active place for the dialectical exchange of ideas in print, and ultimately fosters the continued intellectual development of contributors, respondents, and readers alike.
We hope that this unique publishing mechanism will encourage critical thinking, active participation, and renewed enthusiasm for scholarly discourse in philosophy and related fields. To start reading or make a submission visit:
www.AmericanDialectic.org
Note: Those desiring more information about AD might want to check out the write up of the journal that I did here. SP
Posted in CFP, Discussion | Tagged American Dialectic, online journals, online philosophy journals, philosophical discourse, philosophy, philosophy journals | Leave a Comment »
Informal Logic vol. 31 no. 2
Volume 31, number 2 of Informal Logic is now available for your reading pleasure. Particularly recommended in this issue is Geoff Goddu’s 2010 AILACT Essay Prize-winning article on the process/product ambiguity. I had the good fortune to see this work in an earlier phase at ISSA last summer and I’m very happy to see it in print here. It’s a valuable article not only for it’s methodological challenge to what is for many in the study of argumentation a foundational notion, but because it spurs us to think more carefully about the metaphysics of argument in general. The paper and its author well deserve the recognition of the AILACT prize.
Posted in Announcements, Discussion, Informal Logic, Pragma-dialectics, Rhetoric | Tagged argument diagramming, argument schemes, Argumentation, artificial intelligence, Cathal Woods, diagramming objections, Geoff Goddu, Informal Logic, intellectual empathy, Maureen Linker, process-product distinction, responding to prejudice, Tangming Yuan, Tim Kelly | Leave a Comment »
FEMMSS 4: Call for Proposals –
Paper proposals are invited for the fourth conference of the Association for Feminist Epistemologies, Methodologies, Metaphysics and Science Studies (FEMMSS) to be held at The Pennsylvania State University, May 10-12, 2012.
We welcome new participants and perspectives from across the academy and outside it that provide feminist discussion on any topic in epistemologies, methodologies, metaphysics, or science studies. Note the following broad themes of recent and ongoing interest:
Continue Reading »
Posted in CFP | Tagged climate change, feminism and logic, feminism and rhetoric, feminism and science, feminism and the environment, feminist argumentation, feminist philosophy, FEMMSS, philosophy of science, scientific discourse, social justice and argumentation, womens studies | Leave a Comment »
Puzzle piece, via Wikimedia Commons
Don Lazere’s short but punchy piece in the Chronicle on the beleaguered state of critical thinking education in the American academy is well worth a read.
While I find myself agreeing with much of what he says, I think he misses one of the principal actors in the play: the increasing role of corporate influence in and on the structure and culture of American higher education. Increasingly, administrators and board members are not professional academics but professional bureaucrats and managers who see their primary task as generating revenue. This leads to a mentality that sees terms like ‘critical thinking’ as buzzwords, bogus assessment exercises, fodder for mission statements or worse, “branding” campaigns. The perils therein are familiar enough and rants plentiful enough that I’ll leave it there.
What interests me the most about Lazere’s short piece is how it fits with what has really been an explosion of formal methods in the last thirty or so years. Indeed, formal logic has changed so much that it is now virtually unrecognizable to those of us who remember the time when advances in modal logic were considered “cutting edge” to most in philosophy. From today’s perspective, the basic course in predicate calculus looks a lot like “baby logic”. ‘Critical thinking’, as Lazere points out, doesn’t seem to have much real purchase at all anymore:
Continue Reading »
Posted in Connections, Critical Thinking, Teaching | Tagged American universities, baby logic, Chronical of Higher Education, colleges, critical thinking, critical thinking education, Donald Lazere, education, education in America, formal logic, general education, Informal Logic, liberal arts, Teaching, teaching critical thinking, teaching logic | 2 Comments »
« Newer Posts - Older Posts »
RAIL 