This Weds Jan 19th Neil Turnbull will present a paper as part of this year's staff-student seminar series. The title of the paper is:
Philosophers and Players: Narcissism and the Philosophical Life
This paper will discuss the role of 'madness' in western philosophy and whether 'the madness of philosophers' poses critical questions for the development of western philosophy as a whole.
The seminar will take place in room 215, 1-3pm (as last time).
Hopefully there will be quite a few undergraduate students attending this one.
Neil
Monday, 17 January 2011
Sunday, 16 January 2011
What is Life?
Radical Orthodoxy: A Journal of Theology, Philosophy and Politics is an internationally peer reviewed journal dedicated to the exploration of academic and policy debates that interface between theology, philosophy and the social sciences. The editorial policy of the journal is radically non-partisan and the journal welcomes submissions from scholars and intellectuals with interesting and relevant things to say about the nature and trajectory of the times in which we live. The journal intends to publish papers on all branches of philosophy, aesthetics - including literary, art and music criticism - as well as pieces on ethical, political, social, economic and cultural theory.
The journal will be published four times a year; each volume comprising of standard, special, review and current affairs issues. The journal will also attempt to pursue an innovative editorial policy by publishing pieces both longer and shorter than those typically published in mainstream academic journals (along with those of standard length).
The first issue of the journal will appear on-line in autumn 2011: a double special issue on the theology, philosophy and politics of ‘life’. In recent years, a new vitalist metaphysical discourse has attempted to rearticulate classical philosophical and theological problems in terms of a metaphysical language of process. However, some important questions need to be asked of new vitalist philosophies. For example, what is the relationship between new vitalism and orthodox naturalism and biologism? What, exactly, is the precise nature of the relationship between ‘new’ and ‘old’ vitalisms? Is new vitalism simply a reworking of the positivist dream of ‘a unified science’, or does it represent something of break with scientific metaphysics? What other vitalisms, either social or theological, can contest the wider intellectual legitimacy of new vitalist discourses? This inaugural issue will explore such questions through an assessment of the nature and significance of ‘life’ for contemporary philosophical, theological and social scientific debates. In particular, the journal will welcome submissions on the following subjects:
Life and creativity
Everyday life
Life and the gift
Grace and nature
Thomism and vitalism
Life and phenomenology
Michel Henry
The historical significance of ‘Deleuzianism’
Nihilism and eliminative materialism
Bio-politics
The philosophy of biology
The theology, philosophy, politics of the neurosciences
Life and cybernetics
Deadline for submissions is Aug 31st 2011. Please send all submissions to the either the editor, Neil Turnbull, or the managing editor, Eric Lee at editor@radicalorthodoxy.org.
The journal will be published four times a year; each volume comprising of standard, special, review and current affairs issues. The journal will also attempt to pursue an innovative editorial policy by publishing pieces both longer and shorter than those typically published in mainstream academic journals (along with those of standard length).
The first issue of the journal will appear on-line in autumn 2011: a double special issue on the theology, philosophy and politics of ‘life’. In recent years, a new vitalist metaphysical discourse has attempted to rearticulate classical philosophical and theological problems in terms of a metaphysical language of process. However, some important questions need to be asked of new vitalist philosophies. For example, what is the relationship between new vitalism and orthodox naturalism and biologism? What, exactly, is the precise nature of the relationship between ‘new’ and ‘old’ vitalisms? Is new vitalism simply a reworking of the positivist dream of ‘a unified science’, or does it represent something of break with scientific metaphysics? What other vitalisms, either social or theological, can contest the wider intellectual legitimacy of new vitalist discourses? This inaugural issue will explore such questions through an assessment of the nature and significance of ‘life’ for contemporary philosophical, theological and social scientific debates. In particular, the journal will welcome submissions on the following subjects:
Life and creativity
Everyday life
Life and the gift
Grace and nature
Thomism and vitalism
Life and phenomenology
Michel Henry
The historical significance of ‘Deleuzianism’
Nihilism and eliminative materialism
Bio-politics
The philosophy of biology
The theology, philosophy, politics of the neurosciences
Life and cybernetics
Deadline for submissions is Aug 31st 2011. Please send all submissions to the either the editor, Neil Turnbull, or the managing editor, Eric Lee at editor@radicalorthodoxy.org.
Wednesday, 12 January 2011
Kojeve Reading Group
This term Fred Aspbury will be leading a staff-student reading group.
We will be reading Alexandre Kojeve's seminal text 'An Introduction to the Reading of Hegel'.
This is a very important text in the history of 20th century western philosophy - Satre, Merleua-Ponty and Lacan - amongst others - all being significantly influenced by it. It was also used in the latter part of the last century to justify the western triumphalism the followed the collapse of the Berlin Wall.
These sesssions should appeal to all those who are thinking of continuing with philosophy in some form after graduation.
The first session will take place on Weds Feb 16th, 1-2.30 pm, in 215.
Hopefully we will see quite a few of your there.
Neil
We will be reading Alexandre Kojeve's seminal text 'An Introduction to the Reading of Hegel'.
This is a very important text in the history of 20th century western philosophy - Satre, Merleua-Ponty and Lacan - amongst others - all being significantly influenced by it. It was also used in the latter part of the last century to justify the western triumphalism the followed the collapse of the Berlin Wall.
These sesssions should appeal to all those who are thinking of continuing with philosophy in some form after graduation.
The first session will take place on Weds Feb 16th, 1-2.30 pm, in 215.
Hopefully we will see quite a few of your there.
Neil
Monday, 10 January 2011
Hair Today?
I have been thinking about the political significance of the rise of image culture and its effects on politics.
And it struck me, is a politician disadvantaged for being 'bald'? There is a famous anecdote about the British politican Micheal Heseltine that claims that a 'signifcant percentage' of his constituents voted for him because he had 'a great head of hair'!!
Add this to the fact that Blair, with a full head of hair, beat three bald Tory leaders and you can see that Cameron might be in trouble. At the moment Cameron is as visually strong as Miliband (and sounds much better, as he is intonationally and rhetorically superior to Miliband). But he may be in trouble on the hair front - and here Miliband clearly has the advantage.
Might baldness decide the next election?
Neil
And it struck me, is a politician disadvantaged for being 'bald'? There is a famous anecdote about the British politican Micheal Heseltine that claims that a 'signifcant percentage' of his constituents voted for him because he had 'a great head of hair'!!
Add this to the fact that Blair, with a full head of hair, beat three bald Tory leaders and you can see that Cameron might be in trouble. At the moment Cameron is as visually strong as Miliband (and sounds much better, as he is intonationally and rhetorically superior to Miliband). But he may be in trouble on the hair front - and here Miliband clearly has the advantage.
Might baldness decide the next election?
Neil
Monday, 20 December 2010
Philosophy and Popular Culture
The last post made me think about the relationship between philosophy and popular political culture today.
Clearly, most western societies are societies implicitly goverened by what might be termed 'market populism'. This is a populism based around the values of consumption and the habits associated with 'materialist acquisition'.
To date, philosophical discourse has been rather bad at challenging the hegemony of these values and habits. The question for me here is twofold. Firstly, should philosophy adapt to this cultural reality or should it attempt to challenge it? Given the outcome of this choice, how should philosophy achieve its ends?
Cheers
Neil
Clearly, most western societies are societies implicitly goverened by what might be termed 'market populism'. This is a populism based around the values of consumption and the habits associated with 'materialist acquisition'.
To date, philosophical discourse has been rather bad at challenging the hegemony of these values and habits. The question for me here is twofold. Firstly, should philosophy adapt to this cultural reality or should it attempt to challenge it? Given the outcome of this choice, how should philosophy achieve its ends?
Cheers
Neil
Friday, 10 December 2010
Tuition Fees - Recent Demonstrations
Hi all
Given the publicity given to the recent student demonstrations I think that we probably need to address some of the wider philosophical and political issues associated with these events.
Please keep the conversation civil!
The real issue for me here isn't really about education at all - rather, the transfer of debts accrued by one generation onto another.
Therefore, it is important not to get too bogged down in the minutiae of the policy dimensions of the debate - for example, about the whether the university teaching grant was cut too much, or whether something else might have been cut instead. The question is why the cuts have had to be made at all and who we call to account for this.
In this way, we must feel some sympathy for the next generation of students - a generation that is likely to be somewhat less affluent and have fewer opportunities than than the one preceeding it.
However, it is less easy to feel sorry for the majority of demonstrating students in narrow political terms. Most voted liberal democrat at the last election (alongside a number of academic staff, it must be said) and so politically these students have, in a sense, 'got what they deserved'.
This phenomenon - to vote lib dem as an expression of 'disaffected radicalism' - began in 2005; when a numerous students and academic staff voted lib dem as a protest against the Iraq war. This significantly reduced the labour majority and put the Tories within striking distance of government. This trend was repeated in 2010 - giving us in the end the new Tory-Lib dem coalition.
Why did this happen? Self interest? A loose concern with 'lib demish' humanitarian issues such a 'ecology' etc?. Perhaps a combination - I don't think that we can dismiss this phenomenon as simply a symptom of intellectual confusion and/or self-preoccupation. The best explanation for me is that it simply became 'fashionable' to do so.....
Overall, this is a hard lesson in economic and political realities for a new generation of people depolicitised by markets and distracted by the media.
Welcome to the real world!
Neil
Given the publicity given to the recent student demonstrations I think that we probably need to address some of the wider philosophical and political issues associated with these events.
Please keep the conversation civil!
The real issue for me here isn't really about education at all - rather, the transfer of debts accrued by one generation onto another.
Therefore, it is important not to get too bogged down in the minutiae of the policy dimensions of the debate - for example, about the whether the university teaching grant was cut too much, or whether something else might have been cut instead. The question is why the cuts have had to be made at all and who we call to account for this.
In this way, we must feel some sympathy for the next generation of students - a generation that is likely to be somewhat less affluent and have fewer opportunities than than the one preceeding it.
However, it is less easy to feel sorry for the majority of demonstrating students in narrow political terms. Most voted liberal democrat at the last election (alongside a number of academic staff, it must be said) and so politically these students have, in a sense, 'got what they deserved'.
This phenomenon - to vote lib dem as an expression of 'disaffected radicalism' - began in 2005; when a numerous students and academic staff voted lib dem as a protest against the Iraq war. This significantly reduced the labour majority and put the Tories within striking distance of government. This trend was repeated in 2010 - giving us in the end the new Tory-Lib dem coalition.
Why did this happen? Self interest? A loose concern with 'lib demish' humanitarian issues such a 'ecology' etc?. Perhaps a combination - I don't think that we can dismiss this phenomenon as simply a symptom of intellectual confusion and/or self-preoccupation. The best explanation for me is that it simply became 'fashionable' to do so.....
Overall, this is a hard lesson in economic and political realities for a new generation of people depolicitised by markets and distracted by the media.
Welcome to the real world!
Neil
Thursday, 9 December 2010
The Infinite Monkey Cage
See below for a recommendation from Rob Humphries (final year Philosophy student:
The radio 4 show The infinite monkey cage has broken from it's usual scientific subject matter to deliver a show on philosophy
(LINK: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00wdfd4/The_Infinite_Monkey_Cage_Series_3_Philosophy/)
Always nice to see a popular rationalist hero (in this case Dr. Brian Cox) get grilled by a philosopher or two. I think Julian Baginni is on the panel.
The radio 4 show The infinite monkey cage has broken from it's usual scientific subject matter to deliver a show on philosophy
(LINK: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00wdfd4/The_Infinite_Monkey_Cage_Series_3_Philosophy/)
Always nice to see a popular rationalist hero (in this case Dr. Brian Cox) get grilled by a philosopher or two. I think Julian Baginni is on the panel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
