Taylor wins Kyoto Prize

Political theorist, McGill emeritus professor, and winner of last year's Templeton Prize, and lately co-chair of the Quebec commission on reasonable accommodation has won this year's Kyoto Prize.

The prize, which is often referred to as the "Japanese Nobel", consists of a gold medal and 50 million yen ($470,765) in cash.

"I'm very, very honoured and I still haven't quite gotten over it," Taylor said.

"I feel there must have been some mistake, but I'm honoured to think that I place on a par with those other people that have won this award," including German thinker Jürgen Habermas.

The award citation follows.

Construction of a social philosophy to pursue the coexistence of diverse cultures

Dr. Charles Taylor is an outstanding philosopher who advocates "communitarianism" and "multiculturalism" from the perspective of "holistic individualism." He has constructed and endeavored to put into practice a social philosophy that allows human beings with different historical, traditional, and cultural backgrounds to retain their multiple identities and to live in happiness with each other.

He has criticized the atomistic view of the self, the conception of the human being grounded in the human sciences of naturalistic tendency such as methodological individualism and behaviorism, and tried to establish a "philosophical anthropology" on a foundation of phenomenology, hermeneutics, and language-game theory. In his view, human beings are "self-interpreting animals" that act with a sense of value and purpose: human beings articulate everyday feelings and moral intuitions in language and act according to their own evaluation of goals and values. He criticizes modern utilitarianism for leaving value judgments to the feelings and preferences of the atomistic selves and argues against it that human beings are the "situated selves" that are embedded in the fabric of social relations. In other words, it is through webs of interlocution that human beings develop identities and acquire frameworks within which they determine for themselves what is good, what is valuable, what they should do, and what they are for or against.

Having made extensive studies of the philosophy of Hegel, which are widely regarded as the best contemporary work on the philosopher written in English, Dr. Taylor delved back into the thought of Rousseau and Herder. He then adopted Gadamer's notions "fusion of horizons" and "history of effects" to situate his own thought in a historical context and has built a convincing social theory. Drawing on the concept of "recognition," which is a key to his philosophy, he contrasts the "dialogical self" with the "monological self" and offers "freedom in situation" in place of "absolute freedom." Human beings can flourish only if their identities are recognized by others and, accordingly, he stresses the importance of bonds with community and sense of community as a necessary condition for the realization of liberalism emphasizing individual autonomy.

The concept of recognition is at the base of Dr. Taylor's multiculturalism as well. Identity-formation in modern society is sometimes rooted in a distorted recognition, and this often results in self-repression and in a subsequent struggle aimed at a revision of "self-representations" projected upon by others. Dr. Taylor argues that "it's reasonable to suppose that cultures that have provided the horizon of meaning for large numbers of human beings, of diverse characters and temperaments, over a long period of time are almost certain to have something that deserves our admiration and respect, even if it goes along with much that we have to abhor and reject." In putting forth this principle, he has provided rational grounds for the dignity of human beings living a deep diversity and for their demands for recognition.

In his native Canada, Dr. Taylor is also involved in political activities campaigning for the recognition of collective rights of minority groups to preserve their cultural identities. He has been seeking a way to overcome Eurocentrism and to reach for genuinely global values, paying due attention to the specific conditions of non-Western societies. He has invariably aspired to a society resting on mutual recognition, where each member strives by mutual efforts through dialogue for a better understanding and for changing the narrow frameworks of understanding with the realization that the space occupied by him/her as a self within the whole "story" of mankind is quite limited and he/she is in no possession of an absolute standard for judging the relative merits of various cultures. Dr. Taylor is a prominent thinker who has pointed the future course for us through his own life, envisioning the future in which diverse, heterogeneous cultures peacefully coexist upon mutual recognition.

"May equality live long and prosper."

Impending nuptials for George Takei.

I'm going to live forever, part 73 of a continuing series

More good news about the nectar of the gods.

Harvard School of Public Health researchers looked at coffee drinking and the risk of dying from heart disease, cancer or any other cause. They found that people who drank more coffee were less likely to die during 18 years of follow-up in men, and 24 years of follow-up in women.

And the effect was strongest in women: those who drank two to five cups of coffee a day were up to 26 per cent less likely to die than abstainers - mainly because of a lower risk of death from heart disease.

Women who drank two to three cups of caffeinated coffee daily were 25 per cent less likely to die from cardiovascular disease than "non-consumers."

Those who drank more - four to five daily cups of coffee - saw their odds fare even better, to 34 per cent reduced risk.

Researchers found similar patterns for men, but the numbers didn't reach statistical significance, meaning they may be due to chance.

The team found no association between coffee drinking and dying of cancer in either gender.

"Previous studies had been inconsistent. Some of them found that coffee increased the risk of total death and others found just the opposite," says Esther Lopez-Garcia, the study's lead author.

Published in this week's Annals of Internal Medicine, the new study suggests that "coffee drinkers can be reassured that coffee doesn't increase the risk of death," says Lopez-Garcia, of the department of preventive medicine and public health at Universidad Autonoma de Madrid.

Showing something of an excess of scholarly caution,

Lopez-Garcia isn't recommending people drink more coffee to live longer. "It's too early to say coffee is beneficial for health," she says.

It's not too early; it just feels that way because you haven't had enough coffee yet!

Festival season

A selection of the events in my neighborhood over the next ten days is here (warning: a photograph of a rude hand gesture is part of the festival's logo) and here. That's just within walking distance, before the Jazz Festival starts, and not including the fireworks competition, or the regular performances here.

And it's the season to eat from Jean-Talon...

Update:
Went out a little while later and saw people advertising for the Fringe Festival-- two young women, maybe Japanese, wearing mime makeup and outfits that might have been Swiss milkmaid costumes and might have been French maid costumes, doing a synchronized song-and-dance routine.

Elsewhere

Today at the Chronicle: a very interesting and engaging Russell Jacoby article about Paul Piccone, founder of the journal Telos.

Link fixed: "What It Means To Be A Pluralist."

Sorry about the earlier link that only went to an abstract. "What It Means to Be A Pluralist," the paper I'll be giving tomorrow at the Walzer conference, is now online.

While I've mentioned this one before, it turns out to be thematically closely related, so I'll also note my essay about David Miller's new book, "National and Statist Responsibility."

Now online

My paper for the "Justice, Culture, and Tradition" conference next week, What It Means To Be A Pluralist. Comments welcome.

Michael Walzer has made great contributions to the appreciation of both moral and cultural pluralism in political theory. Nonetheless, there are ways in which Walzer's arguments appear anti-pluralistic. The question of this essay is: why is there so little pluralism in Walzer's political theory, or why does its pluralism run out so soon? Focusing on Spheres of Justice and "Nation and Universe," it examines the effect of Walzer's nationalism/statism on his theory, and the constraints his theory faces in considering multiculturalism or political pluralist regimes such as federalism within a state.

For academic pop culture consumers of a certain age

Timothy Burke on G.I. Joe.

A slap in the face: a tale of the Brezhnev Doctrine

While I don't agree with all of it, the Bouchard-Taylor Commission Report is a very thoughtful, judicious, impressive document-- extraordinarily so, given the circumstances of its creation.

And the ink wasn't yet dry on it when the Charest government made clear how thoughtfully it would treat the the report's analyses and recommendations. It rushed to the National Assembly and introduced a unanimously-approved quickie resolution affirming that the crucifix would not come down off the Assembly's walls.

Bouchard and Taylro spent months, at the request of the Charest government, trying to conceive and describe a balance among the various rights, responsibilities, and identity claims at stake in the accommodation debate and related disputes. Their proposals rested in part on an "open secularism," a secular state that was not as reflexively anti-clerical or Jacobin as post-Quiet Revolution Quebec has sometimes been. One of the most prominent obstacles to that is the very public symbol of a non-secular Quebec that is the crucifix on the QNA walls.

Charest defended the crucifix as embodying 350 years of Quebec history, though it does no such thing. It was erected in 1936 by Duplessis, who more than any other politician embodies the Francoist Catholic-corporatist regime of the bad old days when members of minority religions were actively persecuted in Quebec.

The immediate rejection of the crucifix's removal is an obvious attempt by the government to escape any political fallout from the commission it appointed in its rush to survive the ADQ's challenge before the last election. Insofar as the commission made recommendations that depart from already-existing majority sentiment, it will be ignored. This was always likely, of course, but it did not need to be expressed in quite so obnoxious a manner. Bouchard and Taylor (and the taxpayers, and the hundreds of people who took part in the process) could be forgiven for wondering today why they wasted their time. Surely one of the things that we've learned in thinking about religious accommodation is that symbols matter, and the symbolic import of yesterday's action coulnd't have been clearer. Charest slapped Bouchard and Taylor in the face in exchange for their months of service.

But the graver slap to the face is to religious minorities. What they have learned is that questions of religion and politics remain ripe for demagoguery in Quebec. Any possible steps taken as a result of the report that will protect their religiou freedom will be slow, painstaking, reluctant, and potentially voted down in the QNA by the two opposition parties. Kirpans, turbans, hijabs, and kosher and halal food all apparently raise difficult questions that require careful government consideration even after the commission has done its work. The crucifix requires no such careful consideration. In short, religious minorities who might have been hoping for the unlikely outcome that the commission's report would be taken seriously now know better. The message from the Charest government to them is a variant on the old Brezhnev Doctrine: What's ours is ours, what's yours is negotiable.

CTV appearance

My CTV appearance last night is online.

I was a little bit longwinded; I was also a little bit angry, because on my way to the studio I heard the news that the Charest government had rushed through a unanimous resolution insisting that the crucifix would remain on the National Assembly walls. I never expected it to come down, but I though the government would have the decency to ignore unpopular or difficult recommendations rather than deliberately hanging the commissioners out to dry. I'll have more to say on that in the next couple days.

Commission report reactions

I'll be answering reader questions about reasonable accommodation tomorrow starting at 3 pm at globeandmail.com . Questions can be sent in advance or during the session.

I'll be on CBC Newsworld tomorrow afternoon, apparently. I'll be taping an interview not long after the 12:30 press conference that unveils the report; not sure when it will air.

Update: I'll also be on CTV tonight, probably between 7 and 8 pm.

Update: The globeandmail.com link above (now fixed) remains good even though question time is now closed; the questions and answers are all there (and my typing fingers are tired!)

Henry Richardson succeeds John Deigh as Editor of Ethics

From the press release:

Henry S. Richardson named new Editor of
Ethics: An International Journal of Social, Political, and Legal Philosophy
Press salutes accomplishments of departing editor John Deigh

The University of Chicago Press salutes the service of John Deigh, Professor of Law and Philosophy at the University of Texas-Austin for his eleven year term of service as the editor of Ethics: An International Journal of Social, Political, and Legal Philosophy. He previously served as Associate editor from 1985-1997, and served as the book review editor from 1990-1996. Under his leadership, the journal strengthened its position as the premier journal in its field.

The Press is pleased to announce the appointment to a five year term of Henry S. Richardson as the new Editor of Ethics, where he is currently an Associate Editor, effective July 1, 2008.“I am excited to be taking over the helm at Ethics at this time,” Richardson comments, “for now it is more possible than ever before for this venerable and vibrant journal, so well nurtured under John Deigh’s leadership, to live up to its full title, Ethics: An International Journal of Social, Political, and Legal Philosophy. While moral philosophy will always lie at the journal’s core, I look forward to reaching out both to scholars abroad and to those in allied fields who write on normative issues.”

About Henry S. Richardson
Henry S. Richardson is Professor of Philosophy and Adjunct Professor of Law at Georgetown University. Currently an Associate Editor of Ethics and Editor-at-Large of the Human Development and Capability Association, Richardson has taught at Georgetown since 1986. He has also served as visiting scholar at the Department of Clinical Bioethics, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health. After earning his undergraduate degree at Harvard College, he went on to earn graduate degrees in law and in public policy at Harvard University before earning his Ph.D. there under John Rawls. He would later edit, with Paul Weithman, The Philosophy of Rawls. Dr. Richardson’s work centers on practical reasoning in all of its many guises: in the reasoning of individuals about their aims, in the democratic reasoning of citizens about public policy, and in our moral reasoning. Dr. Richardson’s initial work concerned the nature of individual reasoning. His more recent book, Democratic Autonomy: Public Reasoning about the Ends of Policy, won the Herbert A. Simon Award in Public Administration and the David Easton Award in the Foundations of Political Theory. He is the current recipient of an NEH Fellowship for University Teachers to begin a book project in moral theory entitled Articulating the Moral Community.

That aspiration to live up to the full title is a good one. It seems to me that Richardson is right-- while the journal is in great shape and is incomparable in moral philosophy, the articles section has seen social, political, and legal philosophy, to varying degrees, slip away over the past decade or so. (The same is not true of the book reviews.) Best of luck to him.

Bouchard-Taylor Commission: The Climax Approaches

The press has gotten ahold of a leaked (French) copy of the commission's report: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3.

From the summaries and reactions, it seems as though the report was filled with decency, moderation, and good sense (e.g. "enough about the hijab")... which means it's doomed to impotence. Better that than the alternative, but I feel for the commissioners; they're in for a brutal reception. As I've said several times, they were given an impossible combination of explicit and implicit missions.

I'll have more to say after I've read the report myself.

The official

Modern Political Thought, Winter, 2008

If I want my August to be free of hecticness, I ought to start thinking now about how to rework this. But here's what we did this past semester.

POLI 232: Modern Political Thought
Winter 2008, McGill University
Jacob T. Levy

This course provides an introduction to questions of morality and politics: what it is for a private person or an officeholder to act ethically in a political society, the degree to which an individual person ought to be free from political interference to follow his or her own moral understanding, what collective decisions ought to be made, and who ought to make them. Through analyses of some of the central ethical questions in politics (obedience, freedom, the use of bad means for good ends) and some of the central modern views about right and wrong in politics (liberalism, conservatism, socialism, and democracy) it will offer an introductions to key concepts in social science and in ethics.

1. January 4: Introduction

Part I. Ethics and Politics

2. January 7:
Thoreau, “Resistance to Civil Government” [appearing under the modern title “Civil Disobedience”]

3. January 9:
Max Weber, “Politics as a Vocation,” in Gerth and Mills, eds., From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, Oxford University Press, 1958 [1919] pp. 77-128

4. January 11:
Sophocles, Antigone, entire

5. January 14
Plato, “Crito” and “The Apology”

6. January 16-18
Machiavelli, The Prince, ch. 8-26

7. January 21:
Michael Walzer, “Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands” Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 2, No. 2. (Winter, 1973), pp. 160-180.
Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0048-3915%28197324%292%3A2%3C160%3APATPOD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-7

8. January 23-25:
Bernard Williams, “A Critique of Utilitarianism,” in Smart & Williams, Utilitarianism, for and against, Cambridge University Press, pp. 93-118.
Williams, “Politics and Moral Character,” and Thomas Nagel, “Ruthlessness in Public Life,” in Stuart Hampshire, ed., Public and Private Morality, Cambridge University Press, pp. 56-73 and 75-91

9. January 28:
Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political, University of Chicago Press, 1996, pp. 19-38
Thucydides, “The Melian Dialogue,” from History of the Peloponnesian War

10. January 30- February 1:
Robert Nozick, “The Tale of the Slave,” from Anarchy, State, and Utopia, pp. 290-2.
Robert Paul Wolff, In Defense of Anarchism, University of California Press, 1970, pp. 3-19
Aristotle, The Politics, Everson ed., Cambridge University Press, pp. 65-8 and 170-1

11. February 5:
F. A. Hayek, “The Use of Knowledge in Society,” The American Economic Review, Vol. 35, No. 4. (Sep., 1945), pp. 519-530.
Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-8282%28194509%2935%3A4%3C519%3ATUOKIS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-1
John Dewey, The Political Writings, Hackett, pp. 158-60, 169-72

FEBRUARY 6: FIRST PAPER DUE

12. February 7-9:
Michael Oakeshott, “Rationalism in Politics,” in Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays, Liberty Fund, pp. 5-43
Jeremy Bentham, Bentham’s Handbook of Anarchical Fallacies, pp. 43-51, 131-5, 193-205

Part II. Liberty

13. February 12.
Plato, The Republic, Allan Bloom trans., pp. 235-242 (557a-564a), 251-60 (571a-579e)

14. February 14-16.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract, in Gourevitch,ed., The Social Contract and Other Later Political Writings, Cambridge University Press, pp. 49-54, 59-64, 121-2 (I.6-8, II.3-4, IV.1)
Benjamin Constant, “The Liberty of the Ancients Compared with That of the Moderns,” in Biancamaria Fontana, ed., Constant: Political Writings, Cambridge University Press, pp. 309-28

15. February 19.
Isaiah Berlin, “Two Concepts of Liberty,” in Four Essays on Liberty, Oxford University Press, pp. 119-54

16. February 21-23.
Berlin, “Two Concepts,” pp. 154-72.
Charles Taylor, “What’s Wrong With Negative Liberty,” in Philosophical Papers vol 2: Philosophy and the Human Sciences, pp. 211-29

Part III. Ideas, ideals, and ideologies: what shall we do?

19. March 3:
John Locke, Second Treatise of Civil Government, Cambridge University Press, pp. 269-78, 330-63, ch. 2, 8-11
Declaration of American Independence

21. March 5-7:
David Hume, “Of the Original Contract,” in Essays Moral, Political, and Literary, Liberty Fund, pp. 465-88
Hume, Political Writings, Hackett, pp. 51-73 [Treatise of Human Nature III.8-10]
Ralph Waldo Emerson, “The Conservative,” in Essays & Lectures, Library of America, pp. 173-89

22. March 10:
Oakeshott, “On Being Conservative,” in Rationalism in Politics, pp. 407-37

23. March 12-14
John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, ch. 1-2

24. March 17
John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, ch. 3-5

25. March 19
John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, 1971, pp. 3-33 and 54-65

28. March 26-28.
Karl Marx, “On the Jewish Question,” in Tucker, ed., The Marx-Engels Reader, pp. 26-52
“The Communist Manifesto,” sections 1 and 2, pp. 469-91

29. March 31.
Publius, The Federalist Papers, Rossiter ed., Signet, pp. 66-79, 297-322 (#s 9-10, 47-51
And review: Rousseau reading from February 14-16
Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen

30. April 2-4.
John Stuart Mill, Considerations on Representative Government, ch. 16, “Of Nationality.”

31. April 7
Isaiah Berlin, “The Pursuit of the Ideal,” in The Crooked Timber of Humanity, Vintage, pp. 1-19
George Orwell, “Politics and the English Language,” in The Orwell Reader, Harvest, pp. 355-66

Quote of the Day

From Brad DeLong.

Glaukon: But the bottom line is that we don't have good explanations at any deep level for why the U.S. today is and stays 30 times richer than Kenya.

Akhilleus: Or, rather, that we have good explanations but they are historians', political scientists', and sociologists' explanations--not explanations in which a facility with the differential calculus is terribly helpful and thus not explanations instrumentally useful to a sect of academics who want to use their facility with the differential calculus to impose a form of hegemonic domination over social science in general.

The post has a great title, too: "After the Examination All Professors Are Sad: A Dialogue About Teaching the Wrong Thing."

Neutrality conference roundup

Jon Mandle has posted a summary at Crooked Timber, and the commentators' remarks and the discussions (though not the paper presentations) are available for audio download.

Conference: "Justice, Culture and Tradition"

"Justice, Culture and Tradition"

To recognize Michael Walzer's contributions to the ethical and political philosophy of the twentieth century, a conference titled Justice, Culture and Tradition will take place June 2-4, 2008 at the Institute for Advanced Study (IAS), Princeton, New Jersey.

The Conference will consider the following questions:

How should liberalism treat cultures, cultural diversity and cultural identities?

How should the just society distribute resources and the goods social life produces?

When is waging war justified? What is the meaning of national self-defense and how is it related to self-defense in the domestic realm?

Is an international system constituted from fully sovereign states justified, or should the international society be federalized?

The political philosophy of the 20th century intensely explored the themes raised by these questions; however, a conception of the inter-relations among the issues they raise is still under-developed. A penetrating discussion of Walzer's philosophy will allow us to fill this gap.

Michael Walzer will attend and comment on the papers presented.

The conference is organized by Professor Yitzhak Benbaji of Bar-Ilan University and Shalom Hartman Institute.


All sessions are free of charge and open to the public. Please RSVP for each session by contacting Danielle Candy at dcandy@cceia.org, or 212-838-4120, ext. 259.

MONDAY, JUNE 2ND

9:45AM - 10:00AM Greeting Session
IAS Director Peter Goddard and Conference Organizer Yitzhak Benbaji (Bar-Ilan University)

10:00AM - 12:15PM "Distributive Justice"
Speakers
Thomas Scanlon (Harvard University)
Michael J. Sandel (Harvard University)
Commentator
Amy Gutmann (University of Pennsylvania)
Chair
Joan W.Scott (IAS)

2:00PM - 3:00PM "The Interpretive View of Ethics"
Speaker
Georgia Warnke (University of California)
Commentator
Susan Neiman (Einstein Forum)
Chair
Harry Frankfurt (Princeton University)

3:30PM - 6:00PM Round Table: "The Practice of Social Criticism"
Speakers
Mitchell Cohen (CUNY Baruch College)
Martin Peretz (The New Republic)
Menachem Lorberbaum (Tel Aviv University)
Axel Honneth (Institut fur Sozialforschung)
Chair
Ian Shapiro (Yale University)


TUESDAY, JUNE 3RD

10:00AM - 12:15PM "Multiculturalism, Civil Society, and the Politics of Recognition"
Speakers
Jacob T. Levy (McGill University)
Will Kymlicka (Queen's University)
Commentator
Charles Taylor (McGill University)

2:00PM - 5:00PM Round Table: "The Just War Theory - Moral and Legal Perspectives"
Speakers
Yitzhak Benbaji (Bar-Ilan University)
Jeff McMahan (Rutgers University)
Brian Orend (University of Waterloo)
Commentator
Noam J. Zohar (Bar-Ilan University)


Speakers
Michael Doyle (Columbia University)
Haim Shapira (Bar-Ilan University)
Chair
Joel Rosenthal (Carnegie Council)
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 4TH

10:00AM - 12:15PM "Tradition, Radicalism and Solidarity"
Speakers
Avishai Margalit (Institute for Advanced Study)
George Kateb (Princeton University)
Commentator
Moshe Halbertal (The Hebrew University of Jerusalem)


2:00PM - 4:00PM "The Moral Standing of States"
Speaker
Ruth Gavison (The Hebrew University)
Charles R. Beitz (Princeton University)
Commentator
Nancy L. Rosenblum (Harvard University)
Chair
Jacob T. Levy (McGill University)


4:30PM - 6:30PM Round Table: "The Jewish Political Tradition"
Speakers
Leon Wieseltier (The New Republic)
David Novak (University of Toronto)
Pierre Birnbaum (Columbia University Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies)
Chair
Noam J. Zohar (Bar-Ilan University)

Now online

"It Usually Begins With Isaiah Berlin," my essay on Richard Flathman's Pluralism and Liberal Democracy for a symposium on the same in the current issue of The Good Society. The symposium also includes contributions from George Kateb, Eric MacGilvray, and Richard Boyd, and a response by Flathman.

Intentions and Motivations in International Relations

FRIDAY MAY 23 2008
Department of philosophy, University of Montreal, room 422

Sponsored by the Centre de recherches en éthique de l'Université de
Montréal (CRÉUM)
Convenors: Ryoa Chung / France Gaudreault / Jean-Baptiste Jeangène Vilmer
and Martin Blanchard


Workshop themes : This workshop proposes to examine the notions of
intention and motivation in international relations in the spirit of
an interdisciplinary dialogue between philosophy, law and political
science for the benefit of a deepened understanding of ethics in
international relations. The goal of this interdisciplinary workshop
is to explore new paths of research in the study of intentions and
motivations in political and moral agency and to better understand the
role they play in individual, collective or corporate action.

Participants :

Simon Caney (Oxford University)
Ryoa Chung (Université de Montréal)
Peter Dietsch (Université de Montréal)
Jean-Baptiste Jeangène Vilmer (Université de Montréal / ÉHESS / McGill
University)
Pablo Gilabert (Concordia University)
Frédéric Mégret (McGill University)
Christine Straehle (UQÀM)
Daniel Weinstock (CRÉUM)

where and when ?

Friday May 23 2008
Université de montréal
2910 boul. Edouard-montpetit
Room 422
Métro université de montréal

Full program here.

Now online

at my SSRN page: "Not so Novus an Ordo: Constitutions without Social Contracts," forthcoming in Political Theory.

CFP: Harvard graduate Conference in Political Theory

CALL FOR PAPERS
Harvard University
Graduate Conference in Political Theory
October 31–November 1, 2008

The Department of Government (FAS) at Harvard University will host its second conference for graduate students in political theory and political philosophy from October 31–November 1, 2008. Papers on any theme or topic within political theory—from the history of political thought to contemporary normative and conceptual theory—will be considered. Between seven and twelve papers will be accepted.

Each presentation should last no longer than 20 minutes; please limit your paper sub-
mission to 20 double-spaced pages. Please format it for blind review: the text should
include your title but also be free of personal and institutional information; and a
separate cover page should include your title; a brief abstract (100 words max.); and
your name, e-mail address, and institutional affiliation.

Discussion panels comprised of Harvard graduate students will accompany each accepted
paper. Each presenter will have a chance to answer questions during a general discus-
sion period after each panel discussion.

Food and housing will be provided by the Government Department and its graduate stu-
dents. Unfortunately, Harvard will not be able to provide funds for transportation.
Submissions are due via e-mail (in PDF) on August 1, 2008. Acceptance notices will
be sent by early September. Papers will be refereed by juries composed of current
graduate students in the Government Department at Harvard.

Questions, comments, and submissions should be sent to
•
For more information, please visit the conference Web site at
• http://isites.harvard.edu/k16266.

Charles Tilly

Mario Small at orgtheory reports that Charles Tilly, one of the dominant figures in the human sciences for decades, passed away this morning. He integrated and made major contributions to many fields of the social sciences, building systematic thinking and theorizing as well as deep knowledge of history in an incredibly fruitful way. This is a major loss.

Forecasts

Two interesting posts about pending or present difficulties in two different hybrid disciplines.

Josh Wright on the future of law and economics in an era of constantly-increasing technical sophistication in economics.

omar at orgtheory on organizations theory: "where are the phenomena?"

Elsewhere

If you're someone who should be reading Professor Fabio's Grad Skool Roolz series, you presumably already are reading it and don't need advice from me to do so. But just in case: "grad skool rulz #19: words for women."

AAAS 2008

(2007 post here, 2006 post here.)

One political theorist elected to the AAAS this year, Charles Beitz of Princeton. Congratulations, and congratulations also to former colleagues Sue Stokes and Stathis Kalyvas. Political philosopher Elizabeth Anderson was inducted, as was McGill's incoming Macdonald Chair in Moral Philosophy, Calvin Normore, and Princeton political philosopher/ religious scholar Jeffrey Stout. Margaret Jane Radin, who has also made important contributions to political theory, was chosen under law.