The schedule has been updated with information about our next few meetings.
Here are the calls for papers for three conferences that are accepting submissions from undergraduates:
Delimiting Limits: 8th Annual University of South Florida Graduate Student Conference
Midsouth Undergraduate Philosophy Conference
Pacific University’s Undergraduate Philosophy Conference
See here for a list of additional undergraduate philosophy conferences.
At our meeting on October 10th we will discuss the Frankfurt School’s critique of pop culture. Here are some recommended readings if you’re unfamiliar with the subject.
Stephen Eric Bronner, “The happy consciousness” from Critical Theory: A Very Short Introduction
Alex Ross, “The Naysayers” from The New Yorker
Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”
Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno, “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception” from Dialectic of Enlightenment
Theodor Adorno, “Culture Industry Reconsidered“
Here’s what we’ll discuss at the next three meetings.
On September 26th we’ll discuss William Lane Craig’s short article “Does God Exist?,” which outlines eight arguments for the existence of God.
On October 3rd we will discuss Ingmar Bergman’s film Wild Strawberries (Smultronstället). Please watch the film before the meeting if you haven’t already seen it.
And on October 10th we will discuss the Frankfurt School’s critique of pop culture. For an accessible overview, see Alex Ross’s recent article in The New Yorker, “The Naysayers.” For additional reading you might like to consult Benjamin’s “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” Horkheimer and Adorno’s “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception,” and Adorno’s “Culture Industry Reconsidered.”
Finally, don’t forget to fill out our survey so that future meetings can better cater to your interests.
Please fill out this short survey so that we can get a better idea about what our members’ interests and backgrounds are.
The first meeting of the fall 2014 semester will be held on September 5th at 5:30 p.m. in MSC 3713. The schedule of topics at each meeting will be updated throughout the semester.
We’re trying to get a sense of whether people are interested in summer meetings or events. Please take a minute to respond to this survey. Only the first question requires an answer, but answering the other questions will help us better plan out any meetings or events over the summer.
During the summer semester there will be Ethics Bowl practice sessions every Thursday at 2:00 p.m. in FAO 222 (“the fishbowl”). The first meeting is this week. To prepare for the meeting, please read the 2007 regional cases (here) and make a list of the cases you find interesting. For more information about the Ethics Bowl team or if you are interested in participating but unable to attend the practice sessions this summer, e-mail the team’s coach, Steven Starke, at sstarke [at] mail [dot] usf [dot] edu.
At this week’s meeting, the last of the semester, Michael Jenkins will give a talk on a topic to be announced.
We meet from 5:30 to 6:30 p.m. in MSC 2707.
On Tuesday, April 22 Philosophy Organization will host its annual symposium in MSC 2702 from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. At this year’s symposium Dr. Sidney Axinn and Dr. Eric Winsberg of the Philosophy Department will discuss some of their research. Dr. Axinn works in military ethics and Dr. Winsberg works in the philosophy of science. Food (probably pizza) will be available at the symposium.
At this week’s meeting Paul Clarke will give a talk entitled “Lowe’s Version of the Modal Ontological Argument for the Existence of God.”
Abstract: In recent years E. J. Lowe has formulated and defended a version of the modal ontological argument for the existence of God. My talk will consist of three parts. First, I will present Lowe’s interpretation of Anselm and Descartes’s versions of the ontological argument and his defense of these arguments against standard objections. This will serve as an introduction to the ontological argument as well as informally set up some of the moves Lowe uses in his own argument. In the second part I will present Lowe’s own version of the argument. Lowe takes God to be, amongst other things, a necessary concrete being. He argues that such a being must exist because the existence of necessary abstract beings can only be explained by a necessary concrete being. Finally, in the third part, I will rehearse some objections offered by Graham Oppy.
I will discuss the following papers, which I’ve made available online if you’re interested in reading them:
E. J. Lowe, “The Ontological Argument”
E. J. Lowe, “A Modal Version of the Ontological Argument”
Graham Oppy, “Lowe on ‘The Ontological Argument’“