CFP: Global Rhetorics of Science
“We cannot solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them.”
– A. Einstein
The rhetoric of science (ROS) has made great strides in recent years in diversity, addressing citizen expertise (Wynn 2017) and critical issues such disability (Jack 2009, Johnson 2015), gender (Keränen 2010), race (Happe 2013, Condit 2016), and non-human agency (Johnson & Johnson 2018). But a glaring blind spot remains, covering the diversity of “science” itself. In other words, while rhetoricians are eager to challenge hegemonic assumptions about gender, race, class, and humanity, we lag behind philosophers and historians in challenging the hegemony of the Western style of inquiry into natural phenomena. And in an era when Western science is imbricated in crises in climate change, genetic modification, and artificial intelligence, among other areas—it makes sense to investigate alternatives for deliberating publicly about these exigent issues.
At my invitation, my former student Dylan Awalt-Conley has agreed to make the following short essay public as a Guest Post. Please address any questions or comments to Dylan.
Neo-Confucianism and Physicalism
© 2016, Dylan Awalt-Conley
Despite general enthusiasm for engaging with the Neo-Confucian imaginary in a serious philosophical way, there seem to be some widely held reservations against its use in scientific contexts. Yet I believe that much of the intuitive incompatibility between the Cheng-Zhu metaphysic and a scientific framework comes from a sense of ‘science’ that is constrained by an implicit ontological reductionism. If we are willing to take Neo-Confucianism seriously, then the ontology invoked by concepts like li and qi can provide an experimentally sound alternative to physicalism, complete with new ways of thinking and working scientifically.
I was asked to post this CFP; the organizers are particularly interested in reaching out to people working on Chinese and comparative philosophy, as Karine Chemla is one of our two keynote speakers this year.
HOPOS 2016 Call for Submissions
Stanford scholar shows Koreans and Americans tackle moral dilemmas using different brain regions … offers first look at neural differences between cultural groups solving tricky moral problems.
Someone pointed me to the story, published here (thank you, Annette Bryson!). The study, which is hyperlinked in the story, is available here for free download (last I checked). I have no real comment on it yet, but thought some blog readers who are interested in empirical studies about moral thinking in Confucian societies might find it interesting, assuming, as I do, that Korea has a society that still remains heavily influenced by its history of Confucianism.
The next session of the Columbia University Seminar on Neo-Confucian Studies will convene on Friday, May 3, 2013, from 3:30 to 5:30pm. We will meet in the Board Room of the Heyman Center for the Humanities at Columbia University. Please note the earlier starting time.
Our presenters for this session (listed here in alphabetical order) are Agnes Chalier and Tom Selover. Dr. Chalier’s paper is titled “Scientific Variations: Research on History and Philosophy of Science in Europe and China.” A copy of her paper is attached (actually, if you’re reading this on-line, contact one of the organizers for a copy). Dr. Selover’s paper is titled “Neo-Confucian Principle(s) in the Thought of Sun Myung Moon (1920-2012).” His paper will be distributed as soon as it is available.
Cultures of Ancient Science
Friday, March 15 2013 – Sunday, March 17 2013
University College London
This conference will bring together the leading international scholars of the history science of many ancient cultures to discuss the content and methodology of the study of ancient science and prospects for future research. The scope here is important and unique. While there are conferences on the science of individual ancient cultures, there are not conferences on ancient science across many cultures.
Friend of the blog Patrick O’Donnell has two posts up on “classical Chinese medicine” at Ratio Juris (cross-posted at ReligiousLeftLaw) and, and he invites comments from Warp, Weft & Way readers.
The first: http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/2012/04/toward-understanding-of-classical.html
The second: http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/2012/08/toward-understanding-of-classical.html
Patrick notes that he plans more posts over the next year or two on the same subject.