Print This Post Print This Post

University of Colorado, Boulder
August 9-12, 2012
Boulder, Colorado
 
An international conference geared to offer the highest quality, highest altitude discussion of ethics, broadly conceived
 
CALL FOR COMMENTATORS
 
The Center for Values and Social Policy in the Philosophy Department at the University of Colorado, Boulder is pleased to invite philosophers to comment on main program papers at the fifth annual RoME Congress.  See our preliminary main conference program below for a list of selected papers.
 
As we finalize this program, we will need to assign commentators to each paper. Ideally we’d like to match papers up with experts and critics. That’s where you come in.
 
Anyone with interest in attending the RoME conference is invited to submit a letter indicating their interest in commenting. Unfortunately, given the vagaries of scheduling, we will not be able to assign commentator slots to all who express interest, but instead will do our best to fill the ranks with qualified commentators.

DEADLINES
 
Commentator Expression of Interest Deadline: June 22, 2012.
 
Please submit (1) a short expression of interest, (2) your AOS, and (3) your (short or long) CV, electronically (in Word format) to the organizers: Benjamin Hale (bhale (at) colorado.edu), Alastair Norcross (Alastair.Norcross (at) colorado.edu), Duncan Purves (duncan.purves (at) gmail.com), and Ryan Jenkins (ryanjenkins (at) gmail.com).
 
For organizational purposes, please specify in the subject line of your e-mail by writing the words “RoME CFC Reply.” We hope to notify all commentators by June 29.
 
FORMAT
Main Papers: 30 minutes or 4500 words, whichever is shorter
Comments: 10-15 minutes
Q&A: Remaining Time
Session Length: 75 minutes total
 
For more information and updates on RoME V, please visit our website at http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/center/rome.shtml
 
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
 
 
Keynote speakers:
 
Julia Annas (Arizona)
Jeff McMahan (Rutgers)
Thomas Christiano (Arizona)
 
 
Main program (alphabetical order):
 
1. Roman Altshuler (Stony Brook) “Character, Will, and Agency”
2. Marcus Arvan (U of Tampa) “Groundwork for a New Moral Epistemology: What Personality Research May Be Able to do for Moral and Political Philosophy”
3. Sara Bernstein (Duke) “Omissions, morality, and possibility”
4. Gwen Bradford (Rice) “Problems for perfectionism”
5. Tim Campbell (Rutgers) “Infinite utility and Cain’s paradox: How personal identity complicates the quantification problem”
6. Tom Carson (Loyola-Chicago) “President Lincoln: Slavery, Utilitarianism, and Moral Luck”
7. Randolph Clarke (Florida State) “Freely omitting to act”
8. Christian Coons (Bowling Green) “If the shoe fits, what kind of reason do I have to wear it?”
9. Eva Dadlez and William Andrews (Central Oklahoma) “Fetal sentience and legislation”
10. Jorah Dannenberg (Stanford) “Promising, practices, and interpersonal obligation”
11. Michael Deem (Notre Dame) “Dehorning the Darwinian dilemma for realist theories of value”
12. Wiebke Deimling (Pennsylvania) “Kant’s Pragmatic Concept of Emotions”
13. Candice Delmas (Clemson) “Political resistance: A matter of fairness”
14. Dan Demetriou (Minnesota-Morris) “Realism and fundamental disagreement: The case of honor reconsidered”
15. Cristian Dimitriu (University of Kansas) “Odious debts and global justice”
16. Dale Dorsey (Kansas) “How not to argue against consequentialism”
17. Michael Ducey (University of Cincinnati) “Ethical surrogacy in the face of noncompliance”
18. Kyla Ebels-Duggan (Northwestern) “Dealing with the past: Responsibility and Personal History”
19. Mylan Engel (NIU) “Do Animals Have Rights, and Does it Matter if They Don’t?”
20. Wenwen Fan (University of Missouri-Columbia) “Second-Personal Reasons and Moral Obligation”
21. David Faraci (Bowling Green State University) “Enemy of My Enemy: Nihilism and the Case for Cognitivism”
22. Jeremy Garrett (Missouri-Kansas) “City Marriage, children, and the state”
23. Carl Hammer (CUNY Staten Island) “Kant’s vegetarian imperative”
24. Jason Hanna (NIU) “Doing, allowing, and the relevance of the past”
25. Edward Harcourt (Oxford) “The theory of approval and disapproval”
26. Paul Kelleher (Wisconsin-Madison) “Aggregation, relevance, and intransitivity”
27. David Killoren (Wisconsin-Madison) “Non-naturalist moral perception”
28. Charlie Kurth (Washington-St. Louis) “On moral motivation: Internalism, externalism, or spoils to the victor?”
29. Jonathan Lang (Wisconsin-Madison) “Imperative logic and explicit performatives: The failure of the grammaticality principle and compositionality principle”
30. Hallie Liberto (Connecticut) “Contextualizing Exploitation”
31. Matt Lutz (USC) “The ‘now what’ problem for error theory”
32. Adrienne Martin (Pennsylvania) “Gratitude, Disappointment, and Normative Hope”
33. Patricia McShane (Georgetown) “A Kantian Defense of Self-deception”
34. Chris Melenovsky (U Penn) “The practice-dependent (yet personal) wrong of breaking promises”
35. Garret Merriam (Southern Indiana) “Miscarriages of justice and the paradox of innocence: An experimental philosophy approach to the death penalty”
36. Zachary Miller (Rutgers) “Strong versus weak deontic necessity: A semantic argument with metaethical implications”
37. David Morrow (UAB) “Why act-consequentialism collapses into rule-consequentialism”
38. Jeremy Moss (Melbourne) “Emissions and climate justice: an egalitarian response”
39. Collin O’Neil (Center for Bioethics, NYU) “Placebo controls and the doctrine of double effect”
40. Tyler Paytas (Washington-St. Louis) “Duty, love, and the summum bonum: A Kantian response to the alienation objection”
41. Theron Pummer (UCSD) “Would division multiply desert?”
42. Travis Reider (Georgetown) “From strategies to acts: Defending the reduction of morality to self-interest”
43. Mark Rosner (Queen’s University, Canada) “Defending the Rational Relations View”
44. Brook Sadler (South Florida) “Marriage: A matter of right or virtue? Kant and the contemporary debate”
45. Jeff Sebo (New York University) “The narrative theory of the self”
46. Matthew Smith (Yale/Leeds) “Bootstrapping and the authority of intentions”
47. Aaron Smuts (Rhode Island College) “A life worth living”
48. Justin Snedegar (USC) “Contrastive reasons and promotion”
49. Vojko Strahovnik and Matjaz Potrc (University of Ljubljana) “Phenomenological objectivity”
50. Jennifer Szende (Queen’s University, Canada) “Is global justice bad for women?”
51. Mikhail Valdman (Virginia Commonwealth) “Autonomy: Incoherent or unimportant?”
52. Elijah Weber (Bowling Green) “Moral Responsibility and One’s Own Actions:  Rethinking the Compatibilist Perspective”
53. Justin Weinberg (South Carolina) “Why we are wrong about dependency”
54. Rivka Weinberg (Scripps) “Procreation, paternalism, and consent”
55. Erik Wielenberg (DePauw University) “Three ways the moral can supervene”
56. Jack Woods and Derek Baker (Princeton) “Inconsistent attitudes and inconsistent contents: A defense of b-type inconsistency”


Comments

Comments are closed.

Post a comment

Name: (required)

Email Address: (required) (will not be published)

URL:

Comments: