Wednesday, December 26, 2012

CFP: Ancient and Analytic Philosophy

Ancient philosophy and analytic philosophy

Conference organised by Catherine Rowett, Tom Sorell and Alberto Vanzo, to be held in St Anne's College, Oxford, on 25-27 October 2013

For the past forty years, most research on ancient philosophy in the
English-speaking world has been shaped by the methods and style of
analytic philosophy. This has sharpened our understanding of key
doctrines, highlighted their philosophical relevance, and made it
possible for ancient views to bear on current debates. This alliance
of analytic philosophy and ancient philosophy also raises pressing
methodological questions. To what extent are we allowed to supplement
the claims of ancient philosophers with premises and concepts that the
authors involved would not recognize? How can our understanding of the
arguments of ancient philosophers profit from the study of
non-argumentative aspects of their texts, like the use of myths or the
dialogic form? How should we deal wih texts whose standards of
argument that are markedly different from our own, or which seek to
promote specific forms of life, rather than establishing a specific
body of truths?

Invited speakers: Mosley Brown (Oxford), Walter Cavini (Bologna), Gail
Fine (Cornell/Oxford), Terence Irwin (Oxford), Kathryn Morgan (UCLA),
Vasilis Politis (Dublin), Christopher Rowe (Durham).

Two slots are available for presentations of 45 minutes from
early-career scholars, followed by 30 minutes of discussion. We aim
to cover some of the travel and accommodation costs.

Please submit full papers (max. 15,000 words) to Alberto Vanzo
(alberto.vanzo@email.it) by Monday 3 June 2013.

2 comments:

  1. Exciting topic. Note the CFP is for "early career" scholars.

    ReplyDelete
  2. p.s.

    I am glad to see a community of analytic scholars not the distinction between "history of philosophy" and analytic "history of philosophy" and its significance, which is a distinction that many in my acquaintance refuse to make. There is a very notable difference, most especially in historiography, and it is blatantly obvious to one familiar with non-analytic historiography.

    ReplyDelete

There was an error in this gadget