Call for Submissions: Young Philosophers Lecture Series at the Prindle Institute for Ethics.

Submission deadline: August 6, 2018

The DePauw University Philosophy department and the Prindle Institute for Ethics invite 3–4 early-career philosophers to give a campus talk on November 13, 2018. Each talk should be an introductory-style presentation geared toward an audience with no background in philosophy. The invited philosophers will also workshop a research paper with the other selected speakers, submission referees from institutions outside of DePauw, and DePauw philosophy faculty. Additionally, each philosopher will film a 2-5 minute video on a topic to be determined.

We’re currently accepting submissions for Fall 2018. You only need to submit your research paper. If your paper is selected, we’ll contact you for more information concerning your introductory talk and video.

Submission Guidelines

Submit your papers via this form. If the form isn’t working, contact Lana Hall (lanahall@depauw.edu).

In your submission, include the following:

• Research paper (3,000–4,000 words) – MS Word or PDF
• Abstract of research paper (max 250 words) – MS Word or PDF
• Make sure everything is suitable for ANONYMOUS REVIEW. Don’t include any identifying information in your paper or your abstracts.

Direct all questions or comments to Andrew Cullison (andycullison@depauw.edu) or Lana Hall (lanahall@depauw.edu).

What Is a Young Philosopher?

Your age is irrelevant to whether or not you are a young philosopher. By “young philosopher,” we mean someone who has received their Ph.D. in philosophy within the last 6 years. We will also consider submissions from exceptional graduate students who reasonably expect to defend by the spring or summer at the end of the academic year.

Honorarium and Travel

Selected participants will be given a small travel stipend and honorarium.

My daughter. CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE KEN HARBAUGH.

David,

My daughter was born with a pre-existing condition.

My family has been without health care. As a parent, it is gut-wrenching to think you cannot provide your children with the care they need. No parent should ever have to feel that way.

Last night, the Administration failed to defend the ACA. This dangerous and unprecedented action threatens health care protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

As usual, Bob Gibbs had nothing to say.

Our own governor, John Kasich, has begged Congress to protect health care for Ohioans.

Instead, Bob Gibbs has voted time and again to take away people’s coverage when they need it most.

It’s time to stop playing politics with people’s lives. It’s time for Bob Gibbs to stop hurting Ohio families.

As Americans, we should talk about health care. Costs are too high. Coverage is too complicated. But that conversation should be about providing families with access to affordable care, and not, as Bob Gibbs would have it, TAKING THAT COVERAGE AWAY.

It’s time to put country over party and fight for a long-term, bipartisan solution to health care.

In service,

Ken

FEATURE ARTICLES. THE SOCIOPATH- A DANGER ALL AROUND US. PT 13

Basically, the FUNCTIONAL SOCIOPATH achieves success in short-term relationships.  They know what their Personal Wants, Desires, and Needs are, and what must be done to realize these goals.

Each person they encounter will be evaluated by the role they can play in helping the Functional Sociopath acquire whatever they want;

1)  Is this individual likely to remain a casual acquaintance at best, so little time will be spent cultivating a personal relationship.  All interaction

will be superficial at most.

2)  Will they help satisfy a need that must be met, so attempting to establish a "Friendship" would be worth a certain amount of time and effort?

3)  Can this be the rare person(s) who will fulfill multiple roles in the life of a Functioning Sociopath, and must be drawn into the web of lies and deceit at all costs?

In the first two examples the skill of the Functioning Sociopath is able to bring in or cast aside these individuals with little effort.  Many people that they claim as "Friends," are simply tools to use on a short-term basis.  They will satisfy specific and usually short-term needs.  Once this is done, they will be suddenly dumped or cast aside by the Functional Sociopath. 

Why? Because there are always more like them living in society, so the Functional Sociopath jettisons these friends with little thought or remorse.

This is the flaw in the personality of the Functional Sociopath.  Going through friends is a constant theme in their lives.  Too often, once the short-term goal is reached, the Functional Sociopath casts aside persons who may have, down the road, again become a valuable asset.  This results in few, if any, lifelong relationships.

In the third example, we have the Functional Sociopath attempting to evaluate the individual in terms of long-term worth or value. They often lack the discipline to do this, so their lives are in constant chaos.  This is what sets them apart from the ACCOMPLISHED SOCIOPATH.  They quite simply cannot contain their true nature for any great length of time, when dealing with specific individuals.

So what does this say about the FAILED SOCIOPATH?

See PT 14.

LOGIC. IT'S NOT JUST FOR VULCANS, AND VIEWERS OF "THE BIG BANG THEORY." #7. THE FALLACY OF INTOLERANCE. PT 1.

For this example, we can again turn to "BIG BANG THEORY", to give us an idea on how this Fallacy Works in the Real World.

Do you remember these Episodes;

-  Where Penny claimed that Sheldon went on a Psychotic Rant when she tried to create Horoscopes for the others.  She Refers to him as a "TYPICAL TAURUS."

-  That ended with Leonard agreeing to visit Pennys Psychic, and her refusal to read a Book Debunking Psychic Phenomena.

-   That saw Raj agreeing with Sheldon that according to Hindu Tradition, he was responsible for Controlling his Sister Priyas Baser Instincts, because that was the Job of the Closest Male Relative.  However, when Priya points out that the same Tradition Punishes Raj for Consuming Beef, he backs off saying some of it is crazy, some of it isn't. (Referring to Hindu Tradition.)

These are examples of the FALLACY OF INTOLERANCE, WHICH CAN BE DEFINED AS: CRITICIZING OTHERS FOR NOT ACCEPTING THEIR BELIEFS AS VALID AND/OR DESERVING OF RESPECT, BUT REFUSING TO HOLD THEMSELVES ACCOUNTABLE FOR NOT DOING THE SAME FOR THOSE WITH OPPOSING VIEWS.

This is a Fallacy that can appear in many different ways, but Applying it to the CATEGORIES OF RELIGIOUS FAITH, POLITICS, AND THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD SEEM TO BE THE MOST PREVALENT FORMS IN TODAYS SOCIETY.