Past events
Calendar archives
-
Jonathan Martineau (Concordia) and Jonathan Duran Folco (Saint Paul) @ Salle 309, UdeM, mode hybride
12 h 00 – 13 h 30
Lunchtime Lecture titled “Algorithmic Capital, Experience of Time, and Virtue Ethics.” Jonathan Martineau (Concordia University) and Jonathan Duran Folco (Saint Paul University) will present their book Le Capital Algorithmique (Écosociété 2023).To participate via Zoom, click here. -
Jens Gillessen (Philipps-Universität Marburg, Allemagne) @ Salle 309, UdeM, mode hybride
12 h 00 – 13 h 15
While in Montreal to participate in the Moral Theory and the Challenge of Future People conference, Jens Gillessen (Philipps-Universität Marburg) will offer us a presentation entitled “Probable Burdens in Moral Contractualism”.
To participate via Zoom, click here.
-
Moral Theory and the Challenge of Future People @ Seminar room of the Bieler School of Environment, McGill University
27 Oct – 28 Oct All day
Emil Andersson (McGill University) and Iwao Hirose (McGill University), for the research team in Value Theory and the Philosophy of Public Policy at McGill University, will host a two-day conference on the moral challenge of future people, broadly construed.
Program:
9:00 am Welcome (Friday, October 27)9:15 am Jens Gillessen (Marburg): “Moral Contractualism and Potentially Future People”10:30 am Break10:45 am Ingrid V. Albrecht (Lawrence): “Partiality and Future People”12:00 Lunch2:00 pm Michal Masny (Berkely): “Extension and Replacement”3:15 pm Break3:30 pm Anja Karnein (Binghamton): ”Cooperation Across Time”9:00 am Welcome (Saturday, October 28)9:15 am Per Algander (Umeå): “The Intuition of Neutrality and Deontic Stability”10:30 am Break10:45 am Beth Hupfer (High Point): “From Bednets to Rocket Ships: Efficiency in the Long-Term and Neglect for the Present”12:00 Lunch2:00 pm Giacomo Floris (York): “Intergenerational Moral Inequality and the Long-Term Future”3:15 pm Break3:30 pm Emil Andersson (McGill): “On Skepticism about Intergenerational Legitimacy”Registration:
This workshop is open for everyone. But registration is required as the space is limited. To register, please send an email, no later than October 20, to Emil Andersson: emil.andersson@mail.mcgill.caPresentation:
As John Rawls once remarked, the question of justice between generations “subjects any ethical theory to severe if not impossible tests”. One of the difficulties is, of course, to correctly determine what our duties of justice towards future people are. But for social contract theory, where justice is understood as the fair terms of cooperation among the participants of a joint practice, the more fundamental challenge is to make sense of the very idea of intergenerational cooperation. If justice requires some form or reciprocal cooperation, can our duties to future people really be duties of justice at all? Rather than a mere problem of extension, the case of future people puts the social contract approach as such into question.
However, though modern moral philosophy has confirmed the severity of the challenge, it has also shown that it goes well beyond the topic of intergenerational justice. In particular, the fact that our actions affect who will be born, and how many people there will be, raises deep questions for moral theory as such. It has proven to be extremely difficult to find a normative theory that not only successfully deals with the non-identity problem, but at the same time also avoids implausible results such as the repugnant conclusion. Thus, the challenge of future people not only raises difficult theoretical problems for the main approaches to moral theory – deontological as well as teleological ones – but also puts many of our most deeply held intuitions into question. An appreciation of the moral significance of future people may also lead to radical conclusions regarding what our most pressing political problems are, and what we ought to do.
-
“Consent, Pelvic Exams, and Medical Training” @ Leacock 232, McGill University
14 h 30 – 17 h 00
Medical students often learn to perform pelvic exams on anesthetized patients before gynecological surgeries. In some cases, explicit consent is not sought. Why is this happening? How should we respond?
This event will include a screening of the documentary film ‘At Your Cervix’ and a panel discussion, organized by Phoebe Friesen, at McGill University.
Register here.
View the trailer for ‘At Your Cervix’ here.
-
Charles Girard (Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3) @ Room 309, 3rd floor, UdeM - hybrid mode
12 h 00 – 13 h 30
Charles Girard (Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3) will give us a presentation devoted to freedom of expression entitled Paroles contre paroles. Les conflits internes à la liberté d’expression.
Commentator: Christian Nadeau; Chair: Marc-Antoine Dilhac.
To participate by Zoom, it’s here.
-
“Affective Injustice in Psychiatry” @ Room 309, 3rd floor, UdeM
12 h 00 – 13 h 15
Zoey Lavallee and Anne-Marie Gagné-Julien will give us a presentation for CRÉ’s lunch series “Les midis de l’éthique”.
More information to come.
To attend on Zoom, it’s here.
-
Artūrs Logins (Université Laval) @ Room W-5505, 5th floor, Pavillon Thérèse-Casgrain (W), UQÀM
10 h 00 – 12 h 00
Artūrs Logins (Université Laval) will give a presentation titled “Inquiry and Reasons” in the GRIN conferences series,
*The conference will also be presented on Zoom.
Abstract
Knowledge, certainty, and understanding are all plausible candidates for constituting
aims of genuine inquiry. However, a mere pluralist account of aims (and corresponding norms) of inquiry that lacks a more fundamental theoretical motivation is somewhat arbitrary. The aim of this paper is to provide further motivation for a pluralist approach. The key aspect of our proposal is to focus on the possession of sufficient reasons to believe as an overarching aim of theoretical inquiry. -
A look back on the Montreal Declaration on Animal Exploitation @ Palais des congrès, Montréal
13 h 00 – 13 h 45
On October 4, 2022, the Montreal Declaration on Animal Exploitation was launched, a text signed by more than 500 moral and political philosophers denouncing our use of animals. The philosophers Martin Gibert, Valéry Giroux and François Jaquet, who are the instigators, will present their approach and make an initial assessment during a round table held on the occasion of the 2023 edition of the Montreal Vegan Festival. The event organized by the Groupe de recherche en éthique environnementale et animale (GRÉEA), in partnership with the Festival, will take place on October 1, 2023, at the Palais des congrès in Montréal.
-
-
Anat Rosenthal (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev) @ Room 1135, 11th floor, McGill - hybrid mode
15 h 00 – 16 h 30
Anat Rosental (Department of Health Policy and Management, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev) will give us a presentation entitled “Now what? Global health between COVIDs”.
To register and participate either in person of via Zoom, please click here.
Abstract
Almost four years into COVID-19, the dust is settling on the impact of the pandemic on global health theory and practice, and the lessons (not)learned. Drawing from ongoing research projects, and personal observations and frustrations, this paper reflects on global health as an analytical framework and worldview through the lens of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on notions of the global community, history’s lessons, and solidarity.
-
Wlodek Rabinowicz (Lund University) @ Salle/Room Leacock 927, McGill University
10 h 00 – 12 h 00
Goodness and Numbers
Conférence par/Conference by Wlodek Rabinowicz (Lund University)
*La conférence sera aussi présentée sur Zoom. /The conference will also be presented on Zoom.
Meeting ID: 266 439 5811Passcode: 454185Abstract/Résumé:
You can save either David or Peter and Mary. Is there a compelling reason to save more people rather than fewer? Taurek (1977) (in)famously denied it. One might attempt to establish that is better if more people survive. This would settle the issue for consequentialists, but even non-consequentialists might find it relevant to the question at hand. The standard worry, however, is that such an axiological claim can only be established by aggregating gains and losses of different persons. As opposed to intrapersonal aggregation, interpersonal aggregation might seem illegitimate. Frances Kamm’s Aggregation Argument is meant to overcome this difficulty. I consider how her argument is dealt with by Iwao Hirose and Weyma Lübbe, and what is wrong with it from Taurek’s own perspective. But then I suggest that this perspective is untenable: while Taurek correctly analyses the concept of ‘better’ in terms of fitting attitudes, he accounts for fittingness in terms of the wrong kind of reasons. Still, even so, the Aggregation Argument fails, but a closely related argument may well be acceptable. That argument takes into consideration that different persons’ lives, unless they dramatically differ, typically are incommensurable in value – on par, rather than equally good.
-
Lauren Freeman (U. of Louisville) @ Salle 422, 4e étage, UdeM - mode hybride
13 h 00 – 14 h 30
CRÉ and The Canada Research Chair on Epistemic Injustice and Agency are pleased to welcome Lauren Freeman (University of Louisville) who will be in Montreal to give us a presentation entitled “Switching the Script: A Harm Based Account of Microaggressions (in Medicine)”.
To participate via Zoom, it’s here.
-
« Il faut une faute pour faire un fautif » @ Salle 309, CRÉ - Hybride
11 h 30 – 12 h 45
Simon-Pierre Chevarie-Cossette (Université de Neuchâtel) will give a presentation (in person and on Zoom) titled « Il faut une faute pour faire un fautif ». The presentation will be offered in French. But those who wish to obtain the text in English need only write to valery.giroux@umontreal.ca.
To attend via Zoom, it’s here.
Abstract
Anyone blameworthy for an action had a duty not to do that action. This principle seems almost trivial; yet it has important consequences in the debate on free will, but also on moral luck and on the conceptual unity of responsibility. Even more, it makes it possible to account for the way in which we defend our conduct before our relatives or before the law. However, this principle has formidable adversaries (Scanlon, Zimmerman, Haji, Graham) to whom it will be necessary to respond by addressing, among other things, the nature of homework. The principle holds, provided that we avoid overly subjectivizing blame or overly objectivizing duties.
-
Emmanuel Picavet (U. Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne) @ Salle 422, 4e étage, UdeM - mode hybride
13 h 00 – 14 h 30
Emmanuel Picavet (Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne) sera à Montréal pour nous offrir une présentation intitulée “Dimensions de l’internormativité”.
Pour y participer par Zoom, c’est ici.
-
7th Social Justice Theory Workshop
8 Jun – 9 Jun All day
The aim of the Social Justice Theory Workshop is to enable sustained exploration in the theory of social justice. It addresses topics such as the articulation of ideals and principles of economic, political, gender, race, environmental, and cultural justice; the critique of inequality, domination, exploitation, and alienation; and the illumination of political institutions, practices and processes of transformation that might foster progressive change.
Workshop papers will be pre-circulated, and participation implies a commitment to reading the papers in advance.
The workshop will be in person. Places are limited. If you would like to participate, please send your name to Christiane Bailey (sjc@concordia.ca) by May 1, 2023.
This year’s workshop is organised by Pablo Gilabert and Peter Dietsch, in association with the Social Justice Centre (Concordia University), le Centre de Recherche en Éthique (Université de Montréal) and the Department of Philosophy at the University of Victoria.
Programme
9:00 Welcome (Thursday June 8)
9:15 Peter Dietsch (University of Victoria); Commentator: Åsbjørn Melkevik (Queen’s University)
10:30 Break
10:45 Louis-Philippe Hodgson (York University), “Parental Justice: A Rawlsian Proposal”; Commentator: Pablo Gilabert (Concordia University)
12:00 Lunch
13:30 Sabine Tsuruda (Queen’s University); Commentator: Denise Celentano (Université de Montréal)
14:45 Break
15:00 Jan Kandiyali (Durham University, UK), Commentator: Will Roberts (McGill University)
18:30 Dinner
9:30 Welcome (Friday June 9)
9:45 Martin O’Neill (University of York, UK), “Public Goods, Public Provision, and the Sense of Justice”; Commentator: Eleni Schirmer (Concordia University)
11:00 Break
11:15 Avia Pasternak (University of Toronto); Commentator: Sylvie Loriaux (Université Laval)
12:30 Lunch and Farewell
The workshop will take place in the seminar room of the Library Building (LB-362) and the food will be served in the adjacent Friends of the Library Room (LB-361).
WHERE:
Sir George Williams Campus
McConnell Building,
Library 3rd floor (Room LB-362)
1400 de Maisonneuve Blvd. W.
Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3G 1M8
For more information.
-
‘First Among Equals’, by Teresa Bejan (U. of Oxford) – GRIPP @ Stewart-Bio room S/3-4, Université McGill
24 May – 25 May All day
GRIPP Manuscript Workshop
‘First Among Equals’ by Teresa Bejan (U. of Oxford)
Programme
9h00: Coffee & croissants
9h30 : Welcome
9h45 — 11h30 : Chair: Ryoa Chung (philosophy, UdeM)
Chapter One: “An Equal Commonwealth”: Balance
Commentator: Will Roberts (politics, McGill)
Chapter Two: “Omnes Homines Aequales Sunt”: Indifference
Commentator: Jacob Levy (politics, McGill)11h30 — 13h00: Lunch
13h00 — 14h45: Chair: Rob Goodman (politics, Toronto Metropolitan)
Chapter Three: “Peers or Equalls”: Parity
Commentator: Yves Winter (politics, McGill)
Chapter Four: “Equals in the Creation”: Levelling Down
Commentator: Jeffrey Collins (history, Queen’s)
14h45 — 15h00: Coffee break15h00 — 16h45: Chair: Pablo Gilabert (philosophy, Concordia)
Chapter Five: “Too Noble a Being”: Blind Spots and Smoking Guns
Commentators: Lisa Shapiro (philosophy, McGill) and Natalie Stoljar (philosophy, McGill)
Chapter Six: Conclusion: Peers and Equals
Commentator: Robert Sparling (politics, Ottawa)18h30: Dinner
-
Rencontre annuelle transatlantique de philosophie pratique #2 @ Online
4 May – 5 May All day
Annual Transatlantic Workshop in Practical Philosophy #2, on May 4 & 5, 2023, online.
Programme (.pdf)
Day 1: May 4 (Thursday) To get the zoom link, please contact valerygiroux@gmail.com Time (EST) Time (CET) Program 9:00 15:00 Foreword Chair: Magali Bessone (NoSoPhi) 9:05 15:05 Presentation 1 Amine Benabdallah (NoSoPhi)
A Comparative Landscape of the Criminal Liability of States
9:30 15:30 Discussion 10:00 16:00 Presentation 2 Meredith Sheeks (Parr)
The Guilt of the Moral Minimalist
10:25 16:25 Discussion 10:55 16:55 Break 11:10 17:10 Presentation 3 Emil Andersson (CRÉ)
Liberal Legitimacy and Future Citizens
Chair: Ryoa Chung (CRÉ) 11:35 17:35 Discussion 12:05 18:05 Presentation 4 John Lain Miller (Parr)
The Islamic Moral Epistemology of Abolqasem Fanaei
12:30 18:30 Discussion 13:00 19:00 End of day 1 Day 2: May 5 (Friday) To get the zoom link, please contact kristin.voigt@ mcgill.ca Time (EST) Time (CET) Program 9:00 15:00 Foreword Chair: Axel Gosseries (Hoover) 9:05 15:05 Presentation 5 Manuel Sá Valente (Hoover) What do children owe their ageing parents?
9:30 15:30 Discussion 10:00 16:00 Presentation 6 Grégory Ponthière (Hoover) Are Long-Lived Persons Utility Monsters?
10:25 16:25 Discussion 10:55 16:55 Break 11:10 17:10 Presentation 7 Eraldo Souza dos Santos (NoSoPhi)
A Plea for a Conceptual History of Civil Disobedience
Chair: Sarah Stroud (Parr) 11:35 17:35 Discussion 12:05 18:05 Presentation 8 Frauke Albersmeier (CRÉ)
Are some animals more equal than others? An egalitarian challenge for animal rights theory
12:30 18:30 Discussion 13:00 19:00 End of day 2 Co-organisé par Ryoa Chung et Kristin Voigt pour le Centre de recherche en éthique; Axel Gosseries et Pierre André pour la Chaire Hoover; Magali Messone pour le NoSoPhi et Sarah Stroud pour le Parr Center for Ethics.
-
Normativité et justice sociale / Normativity and Social Critique @ Room C-3061, Pavillon Lionel-Groulx, Université de Montréal
1 May – 2 May All day
Colloque “Normativité et justice sociale”, les 1-2 mai 2023 / Conference “Normativity and Social Critique”, May 1-2 2023.
The members of the Centre for Research in Ethics (CRÉ) are pleased to announce this year’s graduate Fellows’ conference, organized with the support of the CRÉ and University of Montreal (UdeM) is entitled “Normativity and Social Justice”. It will be held on May 1-2, 2023 at the UdeM. The goal of the conference is to explore recent work on social criticism and social movements.
Registration is free. Please do register in advance via this link.The keynote speakers are:
Agnès Berthelot-Raffard – “Resisting Medical Colonialism: the case of Black Women’s reproductive health knowledge and community care’’; and
Yann Allard-Tremblay – “Avancer vers nos ancêtres en théories politique normative”
Here is the program. If you have any questions, please contact: creconference2023@
gmail.com Organizing Committee: Frédérique Drouin, Dean Joseph, Alexia Leclerc, Yanie Pierre-Jérôme, Robyn Mellett, Sandrine Renaud and Jordan Walters.
-
Dans le cadre des midis de l’éthique CRÉ-OBVIA, Joé Martineau (HEC Montréal) offrira une présentation intitulée “Tour d’horizon des enjeux éthiques liés à l’IA en santé”.Pour y participer par Zoom, c’est ici.Résumé
Le développement et le déploiement de technologies numériques et de l’IA en santé engendrent différents enjeux éthiques et sociaux. La présentation se veut un tour d’horizon des principaux enjeux éthiques liés à l’IA dans le domaine de la santé, basé sur les travaux menés par une équipe de chercheurs de l’OBVIA pour le compte du Ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux du Québec. -
Dans le cadre des midis de l’éthique CRÉ-OBVIA, Alexis Morin-Martel (McGill U.) nous offrira une présentation intitulée “L’IA et les décisions de libération sous caution : une question de confiance?”.
Pour y participer par Zoom, c’est ici.
Résumé
À l’heure actuelle, l’utilisation d’algorithmes d’intelligence artificielle pour aider à la prise de décision dans les procès criminels est l’objet de débats éthiques et juridiques très houleux, notamment à cause des effets discriminatoires que certains algorithmes engendrent. Cependant, de nouveaux algorithmes semblent particulièrement efficaces pour les décisions de libération sous caution, puisque ces décisions ont un caractère probabiliste et mobilisent des données statistiques auxquelles les décideurs humains ont du mal à donner une importance adéquate. En me basant sur un modèle relationnel de la justice procédurale, j’explore la possibilité que l’usage de certains algorithmes pourrait contribuer à rendre les juges davantage dignes de confiance.
