Schedule
* All times are based on Canada/Eastern EST.
08:30
Canada/Eastern
09:00
Canada/Eastern
7 parallel sessionsA1 – Social and Political Philosophy
Chair: Emily Cichocki
B1 – Meta-Ethics
C1 – Feminist Philosophy
Chair: Tyra Lennie
D1 – Ancient and Medieval Philosophy
Chair: Manuela Rondón Triana
E1 – Epistemology
Chair: Chase Moloney
F1 – Symposium: Painting – Between Philosophy and Art History
Organizer: Pirachula Chulanon - Richard Neer (University of Chicago)- Bence Nanay (University of Antwerp)- Sonia Sedivy (University of Toronto)- Susanna Berger (University of Southern California)
G1 – Metaphysics
Chair: Matthew Delhey
10:30
Canada/Eastern
11:00
Canada/Eastern
5 parallel sessionsA2 – Social and Political Philosophy
Chair: Suze G. Berkhout (University of Toronto)
B2 – Meta Ethics
Chair: Duncan Maclean
C2 – Feminist Philosophy
Chair: Paulina Siemieniec
D2 – Ancient and Medieval Philosophy
Chair: Evan Robichaud
G2 – Contemporary European Philosophy
Chair: Ilgin Aksoy
12:00
Canada/Eastern
2 parallel sessions12:15
Canada/Eastern
Chairs’ Forum
The CPA has partnered with the Chairs and Heads of Philosophy departments in Canada to plan and host a forum in which Chairs can review data and share strategies bearing on common issues, and the needs of their departments and programs. The common opportunities, challenges, and experiences of Philosophy programs mean that the insights of fellow Chairs within the discipline can be particularly valuable, often applying across institutions. At the same time, the Chairs’ Forum is an opportunity for Philosophy departments in Canada to coordinate strategies on issues of national or discipline-wide significance, including diversity, inclusivity, and climate; the significance of indigenization for Philosophy departments; and public outreach and perceptions of philosophy beyond the academy.
12:30
Canada/Eastern
13:30
Canada/Eastern
CJP Lecture – Valuings as Sentiments
Christine Tappolet (Université de Montréal)co-authored with Mauro Rossi (UQÀM) We are valuing beings, beings who possess the capacity to value things. But what is it to value something? The most common accounts in the literature hold that to value an item is either to have a first-order or a second-order desire towards it; or to believe that item to be valuable; or to care about that item; or to have a combination of all these mental states. In our paper, we raise some objections against all these accounts and defend a new affective account of valuings. Unlike standard affective accounts, according to which the term ‘valuing’ refers to a single type of affective state, such as care, we hold that ‘valuing’ refers to the members of a class of affective states, namely, the class of sentiments. On our view, to value something is to have a particular sentiment towards it. Since sentiments can be of different types, our account implies that there are as many ways of valuing things as there are types of sentiments. Chair: Mark McCullagh
15:00
Canada/Eastern
7 parallel sessionsA3.1 – Social and Political Philosophy
Chair: Jules Sheldon
B3.1 – Moral Psychology
Chair: Kseniya Dybatch
C3.1 – Feminist Philosophy
D3.1 – Ancient and Medieval Philosophy
Chair: Sage Cugino
E3.1 – Epistemology
Chair: Andrew Allison
F3.1 – Applied Ethics
Chair: Clair Baleshta
G3.1 – Metaphysics
15:30
Canada/Eastern
16:00
Canada/Eastern
7 parallel sessionsA3.2 – Social and Political Philosophy
Chair: Jules Sheldon
B3.2 – Moral Psychology
Chair: Kseniya Dybatch
C3.2 – Feminist Philosophy
D3.2 – Philosophy of Art
Chair: Sage Cugino
E3.2 – Epistemology
Chair: Andrew Allison
F3.2 – Applied Ethics
Chair: Clair Baleshta
G3.2 – Metaphysics
17:00
Canada/Eastern