ReSET Challenges Seminar
“The ‘practical turn’: contemporary philosophy in and beyond university”
First contact session,
August 18 – September 02, 2008, Vilnius.
A ‘PRACTICAL TURN’ IN POST-METAPHYSICAL PHILOSOPHY:
TRANSFORMATION OF SUBJECT FIELDS AND ANALYTIC STRATEGIES
The session
will familiarize the participants with the recent trends related to the
“practical turn” in contemporary philosophy and confront those significant
changes in international philosophical scholarship with local knowledge of the
participants oriented to the modernization of undergraduate philosophy
teaching.
Module 1. “Practicizaion”
of philosophy in the context of post-metaphysical thinking
The aim of
the module is to discuss the idea of a “practical turn” in contemporary
philosophy, which implies not the external utilization of philosophy but rather
its immanent “practicization” including: a) its revised self-positioning; b)
development of the new manners of philosophical thinking and c) discovery of
the new thematic fields. The opportunity to understand the practical turn
systematically relies upon identification of the contemporary philosophy as
“post-metaphysical”, i.e. as critically reviewing some basic presuppositions of
the traditional (“metaphysical”) philosophy.
Resource faculty: Prof. Vladimir
Fours (EHU, Vilnius), Dr. Ilya Inishev (EHU, Vilnius), Prof. Tatiana
Shchyttsova (EHU, Vilnius).
Monday, August 18 (Tauro str. 12)
(gathering
of the Seminar’s team in the hotel “Martialis” near the reception desk at
09.00)
10.00-11.30
Presentation and
general discussion of the project.
The profile
and peculiarities of a ReSET Challenge Seminar; conception of the project;
organization of work.
Project’s directors, participants
11.30-11.50
Coffee-break
11.50-13.20
Post-metaphysical thinking
in contemporary philosophy.
The idea of
a critical overcoming the metaphysics is one of the leitmotivs of the
philosophical thinking in the 20th century: philosophy which
pretends to actuality is oriented to the break with the philosophical tradition
and to the critical re-thinking of its basic presuppositions and stance. The
key features of the post-metaphysical thinking congenially represented in
various conceptions and “currents” (such as: surmounting the theoretical
objectivism, situating the (philosophical) reason, taking into account the
cultural background, stating the interconnectedness of propositional and
performative aspects of knowledge) enable to diagnose the “practical turn” in
contemporary philosophy.
Chair: Prof. Tatiana Shchyttsova
Speaker: Dr. Ilya Inishev
Presentations:
Dr. Andrey Patkul. The practical freedom:
foundation and overcoming of metaphysics
Dr. Svetlana Konacheva. Conception and program
of the special course “Heidegger and philosophical theology in the 20th
century: overcoming of metaphysics and transition to the unobjectifying
thinking”
Topics for discussion:
- The idea of overcoming the
metaphysics in contemporary philosophy;
- The key motives of the
post-metaphysical thinking;
- The immanent “practicisation”
of philosophy?
Basic literature:
Habermas J. Der Horizont der Moderne verschiebt sich.
Habermas J. Motive nachmetaphysischen Denkens.
Rorty R. Consequences of Pragmatism. Introduction.
13.30-14.30
Lunch (bar
“Relax”, Pamenkalnio str., 7)
14.30-16.00
Post-metaphysical
thinking in contemporary philosophy.
(continuation)
Tuesday, August 19 (Tauro str. 12)
The aspects of a
“practical turn.
10.00-11.30
The “pragmatic turn”
in the philosophy of language.
The
contemporary philosophy of language in its analytical and hermeneutical lines
is an important representant and resource of the “post-metaphysical thinking”.
The thematic field of the contemporary philosophy of language embraces
theorizing not only meaning but also action and world. The tasks are: a) to
analyze the senses and implications of the “pragmatic turn” in the philosophy
of language and b) to discuss a “common denominator” of the various
pragmatically oriented conceptions of language.
Chair: Prof. Tatiana Shchyttsova
Speaker: Dr. Ilya Inishev
Participants’ presentations
General discussion
Topics for discussion:
- A “linguistic turn” in the
post-metaphysical philosophy;
- The analytical and
hermeneutical visions of the “linguistic turn”;
- The “pragmatic turn” in the
philosophy of language and its meaning for the development of contemporary
practical philosophy.
Basic literature:
Austin J. L. How to do Things with Words (Selected lectures).
Searle J. What is a “speech act”.
Heidegger
M. Being and Time, §§31-34.
11.30-11.50
Coffee-break
11.50-13.20
The immanent
politicization of philosophy in contemporary Critical Theory.
The “immanent politicization” means the peculiar “fusion” of the
(philosophically) intelligible with the (politically) utopian: the existent
social order is conceptualized in the normative light of the ideal of
emancipation as the reified order of domination. In the radically
post-metaphysical thinking which implies, in particular, discarding the Marxist
world-historical dialectics of self-alienation and the idea of self-transparent
subject, the Critical Theory elaborates the revised versions of the “immanent
politicization” of philosophy. The (post-)Habermasian line in contemporary
Critical Theory is presented as a starting point for discussion.
Chair: Dr. Ilya Inishev
Speaker: Prof. Vladimir Fours
Presentations:
Wlad Navitski: The problem of the immanency of
social criticism
Andrey Tsiatserkin: On justification of the
normative guides for social interactions
General discussion
Topics for discussion:
- The senses of political
engagement in contemporary Critical Theory;
- Methodological foundations and
normative orienting points of the social-philosophical criticism
Basic literature:
McCarthy Th. The Critique of Imprure Reason: Foucault and the Frankfurt
School.
Habermas J. Once again about the relation of theory and practice.
13.30-14.30
Lunch (bar
“Relax”, Pamenkalnio str., 7).
14.30-16.00
The “natal accent” in
the post-metaphysical philosophy and its practical implications.
It occurs a certain re-orientation from the centrality of mortality and death
to the centrality of natality and birth in the post-metaphysical philosophy:
the “birth” is understood as a basic fact of the human existence in the world.
Chair: Prof. Vladimir Fours
Speaker: Prof. Tatiana Shchyttsova
Presentations:
Kategov Maxim. Practicization of the generative
phenomenology and the theory of education
General discussion
Topics for discussion:
- Birth and
death as the “regulative facts” of philosophical reflection;
- The
marginalization of birth in the philosophical tradition;
- The
practical implications of the conceptualization of birth in contemporary
philosophy.
Basic literature:
Arendt H. The Human Condition (§§ 1,3,13,14,24,34).
Saner S.
Die philosophische Bedeutung der Geburt.
Steinbock А. From
Phenomenological Immortality to Phenomenological Natality.
Module 2. The fields of
contemporary practical philosophy
The aim of
the module is to discuss the idea of “contemporary practical philosophy” as
developing as a result of the “practical turn”. The thematic field of
contemporary philosophy with a “practical emphasis” transcends the classical
areas of ethics and political philosophy and includes, in particular, analysis
of performativity, conceptualization of the “decentered subject” and of the
social-historical world. The degree of unity and coherence of the thematic
field of contemporary practical philosophy remains a controversial issue.
Resource faculty: Prof. Vladimir
Fours (EHU, Vilnius), Dr. Ilya Inishev (EHU, Vilnius), Prof. Tatiana
Shchyttsova (EHU, Vilnius).
Wednesday, August 20 (Tauro str. 12)
The dimensions of
performativity: language, life-world, arts.
The diverse manifestations and implications
of that which starting from the J. Austin’s is termed as the “performative”
delineate one of the thematic fields in the post-metaphysical practical
philosophy. The “performative” is not so much a concrete phenomenon as an
initial modus of existence and self-disclosure of a broad spectrum of
phenomena: from elements of the everyday social life to language and the arts.
The understanding of “practical” as “performative” implies the constructivist,
creative and processual character of (contemporary) culture, and that
understanding implies rethinking the traditional place and role of philosophy
in the humanities.
Chair: Prof. Tatiana Shchyttsova
Speaker: Dr. Ilya Inishev
Participants’ presentations
General discussion
Topics for discussion:
- What is “performativity” (what
are its differences from “processuality” and “transitivity”)?
- What is the structural
conjunction between the performative and the thematical and what is its
influence on the reconfiguration of the traditional practical philosophy?
- What are the aspects/dimensions
of the “performative”? What new lines and areas of research they imply?
- What new perspectives in the
university teaching does the uncovering of the performativity open?
Basic literature:
Austin J. Performative Utterances.
Gumbrecht H.-U. Form without Matter vs. Form as Event.
Fischer-Lichte E. Reversing the hierarchy between Text
and Performance.
Böhme G. Atmosphere as the Fundamental Concept of a New
Aesthetics.
Butler J. Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in
Phenomenology
and Feminist Theory.
10.00-11.30;
11.50-13.20; 14.30-16.00
11.30-11.50:
coffee-break
13.30-14.30:
lunch (bar “Relax”, Pamenkalnio str., 7)
Thursday, August 21 (Tauro str. 12)
Visions of a
“decentered subject”
The idea of a “decentered subject” which is a positive alternative to
the enunciation of the “death of subject” emerges as a result of disclosure of
the fact that the stance of the modern “philosophy of consciousness” neglects
the concrete historical life, be it the life of an individual or of a
community. The “decentered subject” is thought as related to the Other (or: to
the others) and as finding in this relativity the basic principle of its own
being.
Chair: Dr. Ilya Inishev
Speaker: Prof. Tatiana Shchyttsova
Participants’ presentations:
Wlad Navitski. Eternity as negation of totality
of the universal subject
Arseny Tarabanov. A decentered subject in the
spaces of medialandscape
Vitaly Lekhtsier. Decentering of the subject
and medical ethics
Michael Zavadsky. The communicative forms of
decentering and constructing of identity: the narrative and phenomenological
approaches
General discusion
Topics for discussion:
- Critical re-thinking of the
classical idea of subject and of the notion of the “transcendental” in
contemporary philosophy;
- The communicative forms of
“decentering” the subject and identity formation;
- Dynamical understanding of the
subject in the horizon of social-political practices;
- Pluralization of the human
subject: ethical and social implications of the gender and generative
differences.
Basic literature:
Levinas E. Totality and Eternity (fragments).
Castoriadis
C. The State of the Subject Today.
Honneth A.
The Decentered Autonomy.
Firestoun Sh. The
Dialectic of Sex (Conclusion).
Irigaray L. Love between Us.
Marion J.-L. L’Interloqué.
Taylor Ch. The Validity of Transcendental Arguments.
10.00-11.30; 11.50-13.20; 14.30-16.00
11.30-11.50:
coffee-break
13.30-14.30:
lunch (bar “Relax”, Pamenkalnio str., 7)
Friday, August 22 (Tauro str. 12).
Social-historical
world.
The social-historical dimension possesses a certain quasi-transcendental status
in the contemporary social philosophy: a) the totality of social-historical
experience is here understood as the whole reality (“world”) the actual
philosophy deals with; b) the reflexive relation to the social-historical
dimension positions philosophical thinking itself: disclosing the potential for
historical change in the present social formations, philosophy orients human
action. The radicalization of post-metaphysical thinking which discards the
world-historical teleology of progress as well as the naturalization of the
concept of “society” requires the new strategies of conceptualization of the
social-historical world. Following this way, contemporary social theory and
social philosophy develop the original conceptual tools (“social practices”,
“risk”, “social imaginary”, “hegemony”, “glocalization”,
etc.) which are presented to discussion.
Chair: Prof. Tatiana Shchyttsova
Speaker: Prof. Vladimir Fours
Participants’ presentations:
Alexey Savin. The political historicity of
life-world.
Wlad Navitski: Universal subject vs. particular
identities
Alena Sauko. The normative horizons of a unconventional
politics
General discussion
Topics for discussion:
- Elements of the
non-essentialist social ontology;
- “Transfiguration” of the
political;
- Rethinking “modernity”;
- Social imaginary, public
discourse and philosophy.
Basic literature:
Heidegger M.
Temporality and Historicity.
Giddens A.
Fate, Risk and Security.
Gaonkar D.P. Toward New Imaginaries
Laclau E., Mouffe Ch. Foreword to the second edition of “Hegemony &
Socialist Strategy”
10.00-11.30;
11.50-13.20; 14.30-16.00: work
11.30-11.50:
coffee-break
13.30-14.30:
lunch (bar “Relax”, Pamenkalnio str., 7)
Saturday, August 23 (Valacupu str. 5)
Implication of the
“practical turn” for the university philosophy teaching
Participants’ presentations and general
discussion.
10.00-11.30:
chair Prof. Tatiana Shchyttsova
11.30-11.50:
coffee-break
11.50-13.20:
chair Dr. Ilya Inishev
13.30-14.30:
lunch (bar “Relax”, Pamenkalnio str., 7)
14.30-16.00:
chair Prof. Vladimir Fours
Sunday, August 24
Day of
rest, excursion to Trakai.
Monday, August 25 – Wednesday, August 27 (Tauro
str. 12)
Module 3. Experience and
value commitment: a pragmatist approach
Resourse person: Prof. Hans Joas
(Erfurt/Chicago)
One of the crucial questions of historical and
social-scientific research, but also of practical philosophy and public debate,
is: Where do our values and value commitments come from? How do they arise? On
the basis mostly of American pragmatist philosophy I have developed an answer
to these questions: Values arise in experiences of self-formation and
self-transcendence. In this teaching module we have to take three steps
together:
1. We will go back to the two
philosophers who are the pioneers in this area: Friedrich Nietzsche and William
James. I argue that Nietzsche asked the right question, but that his answers
are not acceptable, whereas William James offers us a phenomenology of
religious experiences that can be seen as the first step in the right
direction.
2. There are disturbing similarities
between value-constitutive experiences and experiences of violence, both as a
victim and as a perpetrator of violence. Both types of experience became
clearer when we try to describe their similarities and dissimilarities. This
will be done on the basis of (my) studies about long-term consequences of the
experience of violence and on the intense production of interpretation in
moments of collective “ecstasy” (as often in wars).
3. While religious experiences have
served as a first example of value-constitutive experiences, we have to
distinguish, of course, between the commitment to secular values and religious
convictions. We have to ask, therefore, what the specificities of religious
experience are and how they are transformed under contemporary conditions.
Basic literature:
Selected chapters from the Hans Joas’ books The Genesis of Values; Do We Need Religion; War and Modernity.
Daily schedule:
10.00-11.30;
11.50-13.20; 14.30-16.00: work
11.30-11.50:
coffee-break
13.30-14.30:
lunch (bar “Relax”, Pamenkalnio str., 7)
Module 4.
Post-metaphysical perspectives in contemporary ethics
Part 1. “Continental” line.
Resource person: Prof Jurate
Baranova (Vilnius Pedagogical University)
Thursday, August 28 (Tauro str. 12)
10.00-11.30
Rationality and its limits
in ethics
British argument
(G.Moore, A,Ayers, H. Prichard, D.Ross, R. Hare) in the XXth century ethical
discourse concentrating on the fact and value problem made it atemporal logical
and context-free solution. Prescriptivism as universalism in the case of R.
Hare‘s moral philosophy in fact continued tradition suggested by Kant. What means
the return back towards Aristotele in contemporary ethics? What new answers to
old questions suggests this new descriptivism? Is contemporary ethics following
normativism in collapse as apocalyptically announced MacIntyre?
Topics for discussion:
(a)Hermeneutics
and historicity versus logical
atemporality of methaethics (H.-G.Gadamer, A.MacIntyre).
(b) Can ethics be
context-free? Sittlichkeit versus Moralität.
(c) Which one of
two questions: „how should one live?“ or „what ought I to do“?
Literature:
Gadamer, H.-G. (1993). On the
Possibility of a Philosophical Ethics // Kant
and Political Philosophy. The Contemporary Legacy / Ed. by R.Beiner,
W.J.Booth. - New Haven, London: Yale University Press.
MacIntyre,
A. (1971a). What Morality is Not // MacIntyre A. Against the Self-Images of the Age.Essays on Ideology and Philosophy. –
London: Duckworth.
11.30-11.50: coffee-break
11.50-13.20; 14.30-16.00 (13.30-14.30: lunch, bar “Relax”, Pamenkalnio str., 7)
What is ethical subject?
Turn towards
historicity suggested new premises for philosophical antropology. Man is
considered as a story telling animal. The transcendental subject is substituted
by creater of narratives. Self-identity of personality is started to be
elaborated by this new conceptions of narativity. The unity of a human life is
considered as the unity of a narrative quest (MacIntyre, Ricouer). Virtues
instead of norms. Moral ontology and the three axis of moral space. Grasping
and understanding our lives as unfolding story is possible only in narratives
(Ch.Taylor).Self-knowledge is considered as self-creation (F.Nietsche,
R.Rorty). In what sense esthetic criterion of self creation as
self-understanding could be treated as ethical? What is the matherial for such
a creation? Is a person without language a person without self-identity?
Topics for discussion:
(a)Narrative
identity of personality. (A.MacIntyre, Ch.Taylor, P.Ricoeur, R.Rorty).
(b) Personal
identity - invented or found in a narrative?
(c) Postcolonial
identity – personal or social?
Reader: Jūratė
Baranova
Speakers:
Literature:
MacIntyre, A. (1985). After Virtue: a Study on Moral Theory. – London: Duckworth (Chapter 15 – The Virtues, the Unity of a
Human Life and the Concept of a Tradition)
Rorty, R. (1989). Contingency,
Irony, Solidarity. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (chapter 2 –
The Contingency of Selfhood)
Taylor, Ch. (1989). Sources of the Self. The Making of the Modern Identity. –
Cambridge: University Press
(Chapters – Inescapable Frameworks and The Self in Moral Space).
Friday, August 29 (Tauro str. 12)
10.00-11.10
Deconstruction of
ethical concepts. Rhetorics priority over logics. Habermasian critique of
deridian deconstruction (Philosophical
discourse of modernity). Why Derrida does not agree about abondoning ethics?.
Topics for discussion:
(a) Jürgen Habermas versus Derrida, Derrida
versus Habermas:
(b) Is it possible a new ethics of
deconstruction?
(c) Hospitality
and friendship as „deconstructed concepts“.
Literature:
Деррида, Ж. (1992). Письмо японскому другу // Вопросы философии. - N.4.
Деррида, Ж.
(1998). Страсти // Эссе об имени. -
Санкт Петербург: Aлeтeйя.
Derrida J. Hospitality //
Derrida J. Basic Pritings. Ed. By B.Stocker. London, New York: Routledge, 2008,
p.243-264
Derrida J.Politics of
Friendship // Derrida J. Basic Pritings. Ed. By B.Stocker. London, New York:
Routledge, 2008, p.271-295.
Habermas J. (1992) The Philosophical Disourse of
Modernity.Twelve lectures. Cambride, Mass.:The MIT Press.
11.10-11.30: coffee-break
11.30-12.35
Zygmund Bauman
considers Levinasian ethics as an example of postmodern ethics without moral
code. Derrida stresses the problem of violence and methapysics in the ethics of
Levinas. Is it possible to deconstruct the concept of responsibility in the
philosophy of Levinas? What are the sources of such understanding of
responsibility? What does it mean disinteressness in the contemporary world?
Topics for discussion:
(a) Response and responsibility
(b) Two ways of responding toward the Other:
Martin Buber and Emmanule Levinas;
(b) Ethics of dialogue of Emmanuel Levinas: postmodern project, new utopija
or return to traditonal values?
Andrei Tsiatserkin. The problem of the
recognition of the Other: does the ethics of respect and equality suffice?
Literature:
Derrida, J. (1999). Adieu to
Emmanuel Levinas. - Stanford, California: Stanford university press.
Baranova, J. Philosophical
Interpretation by Levinas Dostoyevsky’s Conception of Guilt // Religion and
Culture after Modernity. Ed. V. Peterca, M. Dumitrana. The
Council for Reasearch in Values and Philosophy, Vashington, Roman Catholic St.
Theresa Theological Institute, Bucharest, 2004, p. 203-226
Levinas, E. (1989a). Substitution //
Levinas E. The Levinas Reader. -
Oxford, Cambridge: Blackwell.
Module 5.
Post-metaphysical perspectives in contemporary ethics
Part 2. “Analytical” line.
Resource person: Prof. Timo
Airaksinen (University of Helsinki).
The aim of the second part of the module is to familiarize the
participants whose background is mostly “continental” with the key features of
the analytical method in philosophical ethics.
1. The
basic idea of philosophical ethics and its application to everyday problems.
Ethics is a normative enterprise, not descriptive. Moore’s Naturalistic Fallacy
and Hume’s Law. The problem of ethical relativism: subjectivism and cultural
relativism. Egoism and altruism, esp. the possibility of altruism. The question
of the rationality of morals vs. its emotional foundations.
2. Virtues:
the types of virtue ethics, especially character ethics. The problem of akrasia
(weakness of the will). Happiness and the virtuous life (Socrates). Virtue as
moral perfection. Aristotle view of virtue as moderation and its relationship
to vice. Cardinal virtues and their relevance today.
3.
Utilitarianism: act-utilitarianism vs. rule utilitarianism. The types of rule
utilitarianism. The paradox of utilitarianism. Hedonism vs.
preference-utilitarianism. The meaning of hedonism and pleasure. Happiness and
the realization of preferences. Practical examples and cases.
4.
Individual rights: the types of rights are freedom, claim, immunity, and power.
We discuss all these in detail and apply them to real-life cases. The basic
idea of the rights based social life and its inherent limitations. Rights and
supererogatory acts: a problem for a rights-based theory of ethics? Minority
rights. Women’s rights.
5. Duties:
the Kantian theory of duty and its valid interpretation as a definition of
morality. The idea of natural human duties and the necessity of their
postulation. Why is the notion of duty more fashionable nowadays? Duty and
rights; duty and utility; duty and virtue. Are there real conflicts here.
Suggested literature:
Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Rights, Supererogation, and Virtue Ethics.
Timo Airaksinen. Heterogenous Professional Ethics.
Schedule:
Saturday, August 30 (Valakupu str.
5)
11.30-13.00; 15.00-16.30; 16.50-18.20: work
13.30-14.30: lunch, bar “Relax”, Pamenkalnio str., 7
16.30-16.50: coffee-break
Sunday, August 31 (Valakupu str. 5)
10.00-11.10; 11.30-12.35: work
11.10-11.30: coffee-break
13.30-14.30: lunch (bar “Relax”, Pamenkalnio str., 7)
Module 5. Flexibility in teaching philosophy
Resourse faculty: Dr. Olli Loukola, Markus Neuvonen, Taina Joutsenvirta (University of Helsinki)
Monday, September 01 (Tauro str. 12)
10.00-10.15: Opening, introductions and distribution of materials (Olli Loukola)
10.15-11.00: Blended Learning: prospects for future
education (Taina Joutsenvirta)
11.15-12.00: Philosophy and Blended Learning: beyond
instructional design (Olli Loukola and Markus Neuvonen)
12.00-12.20: coffee-break
12.20-13.20: Teaching Philosophy as a Skill Subject: two
cases (Olli Loukola & Markus
Neuvonen)
13.20-13.50: General discussion on
the day’s topics
14.00-15.00: lunch (bar “Relax”, Pamenkalnio str., 7)
Tuesday, September 02 (Tauro str. 12)
10.00-10.15: Introduction to the workshop programme (OL, TJ, MN)
10.15-11.45: Workshops on blended learning (OL, TJ, MN)
11.45-12.00:
coffee-break
12.00-12.45: Workshop presentations & Discussion (OL, TJ, MN)
12.45-14.00: Seminar conclusions & General
discussion
14.00-15.00: lunch (bar “Relax”, Pamenkalnio str., 7)
Note:
Breakfasts and dinners are organized at the hotel “Martialis”
restaurant.
On Monday, August 18 the participants of the seminar are invited to
welcome reception at the hotel “Martialis” restaurant.