Cfp: "Philosophies of Travel: Exploring the Value of Travel in Art, Literature, and Society," University of Sydney, September 30-October 1, 2011.

Journey, pilgrimage, linear narration; what are the paradigms of travel and how do we think on them? The philosophies of travel make vital revelations about the cultures from which travellers emerge. Do we travel, to change ourselves or as Samuel Johnson argued, to “regulate imagination by reality, and instead of thinking how things may be, to see them as they are”? Or do we use the journey to ‘turn back’ on things reflectively, or, as Pliny wrote, “to see what we disregard when it is under our own eyes.” From the ‘temple tourists’ of Augustan Rome, to Thomas Cook’s dreams of a tourism-enabled sobriety, to iPod™-wielding backpackers in the ashrams of India, travel has been understood as education, forging, exploration (both of the worlds of others and of the self), as well as frivolity, hedonism, and colonialism. Tourists have even been called the “barbarians of our Age of Leisure” (Turner and Ash 1975). This conference will look at the habits, traditions, and writings of travellers from the past and the present in order to build a picture of what travel is and has been understood to be for the traveller.

Abstracts for papers of 20min length are welcome on any of the following subjects:

• Philosophical justifications of/explanations of the impulse to travel
• Pilgrimage, religious tourism, and spiritual tourism
• Identity, meaning, and tourism 
• The aesthetics of travel in art, literature, or film
• Ideals of travel/ideals of journeying
• Reactions against travellers/travel

Abstracts of no more than 250 words, as well as a short paragraph with biographical information, should be submitted by 30 June 2011 to Alex Norman (Alex.Norman@sydney.edu.au).

Cfp: "Methods of Theorizing: Reflective Searches for Ways, Ideals and Measures," 10th Annual Meeting, International Social Theory Consortium, School of Sociology and Philosophy, University College Cork, June 16-17, 2011.

Social theory and method are inextricably bound up with one another, despite the convention of their separation and a recent tendency to differentiate them entirely by emphasizing technical training in particular methods over general education in culture and thinking. But to theorize, whether in Sociology, Philosophy, Politics, Anthropology, or in any cognate field in the Arts, Humanities and Social sciences means not simply to arrange empirical evidence, but also to seek to clarify the Ideals, Standards or Measure by virtue of a way of inquiry that is sustained and methodically pursued, so much so that we may speak of method(s) of theorizing.

Questions of method, or searches for the ‘Way’, just as the use of the powers of reason, cannot be reduced to a search for means to satisfy given ends, but must incorporate a discussion of the very ends of social and human life, including the question of meaning. Methods of theorizing are thus ways of attending to the world so as to bring into view, contemplate and articulate Standards of beauty, truth and the good life; radiant Ideals that illuminate and make possible an understanding and interpretation of our present practices and institutions, thereby enabling our education and self-transformation in light of such a Measure.

As Weber concludes in "Politics as a Vocation," “all historical experience confirms the truth – that man would not have attained the possible unless time and again he had reached out for the impossible.” Theorizing can thus be conceived of as the methodical reaching out for the impossible Measure. But as theoria and methodus have become differentiated we lose sight of the Ways towards recovering our Ideals just at a time when economic crisis, ecological catastrophe and political turmoil threaten to overwhelm us.

Last year’s ISTC meeting sought to transcend the cultural turn’s differentiation and proliferation of Habermasian, Foucaulian, Eliasian, subaltern, feminist, sub-disciplinary theories, a concern indicating an aspiration towards our recovering re-integrating, holistic methods of theorizing. This year’s conference continues this search for renaissance, inviting contributions seeking a reflective balance and harmony amongst the various currents in social & political thought at the fundamental level of theory and method, focus on their relation to the elusive but very real directive Ideals of human existence.

Papers are invited that speak to the topic from:
• Classical & contemporary social theory: working with our inheritance
• Methodology of Critical Theory
• Literary methods and Social Theory
• The interpretive tradition, depth hermeneutics & analysis
• The performative aspects of public life
• Media power and image magic
• Psychoanalytic method and social theory
• Phenomenology & hermeneutics
• Epistemologies and philosophies of knowledge today
• Asian philosophies and methods
• Socrates, Plato, and working with the Greeks today
• Political anthropology and reflexive historical sociology

Visit: http://www.cas.usf.edu/socialtheory/.

Cfp: "Italian Social Theory from Antonio Gramsci to Giorgio Agamben," 8th Annual Social Theory Forum, University of Massachusetts, Boston, April 13-14, 2011.

We invite proposals addressing the span of modern Italian social theory, including but not limited to thinkers such as Galvano Della Volpe, Norberto Bobbio, Paolo Virno, Giovanni Arrighi, Antonio Negri, and Umberto Eco.  Relevant themes may include: hegemony, culture wars, neo-Gramscianism and international relations, globalization, shifts in global capitalism; biopolitics, homo sacer, immigration, ethnicity and the war on terror, resistance, state sovereignty and power, nationalism, propaganda and agitation, Negri’s theory of “exodus”; technology experience, social media, digital labor, and Agamben’s “bare life.” Conference organizers also welcome topics bearing on the relevance of Italian Social Thought for the understanding of cultural studies, semiotics, textual analysis, linguistics, structuralism, psychoanalysis, and literary criticism in contemporary scholarship and scientific research.

For further information, email: SocialTheoryAbstracts@libraryofsocialscience.com.

Cfp: "The Unacceptable," Department of Media, Music and Cultural Studies, Macquarie University, April 29-May 1, 2011.

It wasn’t so long ago that with heroin chic and SM clubbing what had been considered unacceptable became a voguish pretext for mass marketing. Now, with global hysteria about violent computer games and increasing calls for internet censorship, the unacceptable is being reinvented as an object of policing.

The issue of what is ‘fit to’ present has always haunted culture, especially in its relationship with social institutions: the proscription of heresy, the erasure of bodies (because of their age, gender or race), the silencing of sexualities, the purging of languages, the classification of desires as pathologies …. marking things as well as the practice of everyday life. Conversely, resistance to the banning of texts and practices has long been one of the hallmarks of movements for liberalisation.

Understanding how bodies, images and practices are judged unacceptable is key to understanding how culture, communication and creativity fit into society.

Issues include:

• What is now unacceptable?
• Did the unacceptable ever go away or did it merely shift from what was outlaw to an object of voyeurism?
• How does what is deemed unacceptable reflect racial, gender and sexual fault-lines of a society?

Topic Areas:

• Body modification
• Pornography
• Transgression in the arts
• Political censorship\youth culture and behaviour
• Free speech
• Hate speech
• Excommunication
• Sexual subculture
• Outlaw fashions
• Social networking sites
• Political and aesthetic avant-gardes
• Gangs
• Imposture
• Homophobia
• Drug culture
• Infidelity
• Secret lives
• Welfare dependency
• Internet censorship
• Religious cults
• Violence
• Worklessness
• Control of school and high education curriculums
• Obesity
• Behavior in Public Space
• Racism

For further information, visit: http://unacceptableconference.wordpress.com/.

"Dialogue and Difference: Meditations on Local/Global Values in Post-Modernity," SOAS, University of London, September 9-11, 2009.

Department of Study of Religions, School of Oriental and African Studies. The aim of this conference is to gather scholars from varied disciplines and traditions, to enable critical reflection upon the academic and everyday values we live by, the changing nature of these values, their strength, their flexibility, their 'power and authority'. As intellectuals, we believe in the need for theoretical reflection on the problems of dialogue and difference as a way of contributing to society. This Conference expands on the achievements of a previous conference held at SOAS in 2001 (Sept. 12-14) on"Dialogue and Difference" and whose results have been published in two special issues of Social Identities. Those writings raised more questions than answers as dialogue itself started to appear impossible, in the face of unfolding calculated violence and terror. Now, eight years later, those questions seems to be still looking for an answer. Participants include: Professor Stephen Chan, SOAS Professor Joseph Buttigieg, University of Notre Dame, Indiana Professor Hans-Herbert Kögler, University of North Florida Dr Tiziano Tosolini, Nanzan University, Osaka Professor Couze Venn, Nottingham Trent University Dr Sîan Hawthorne, SOAS Dr Paul-François Tremlett,SOAS Professor Gordon Lynch, Birkbeck College Dr (Ayatollah) Sayed G.Safavi Professor Mineke Schipper, University of Leiden Professor Stephan Feuchtwang, LSE Professor John McCumber, UCLA Dr Cosimo Zene,SOAS Professor Mauro Pala, University of Cagliari Professor Anne Sassoon, Birkbeck College Dr Birgit Wagner, University of Vienna For details regarding registration and the full conference program please visit us at: http://www.soas.ac.uk/religions/events/ Contacts: Dr Cosimo Zene zc@soas.ac.uk Dr Paul-F Tremlett pt10@soas.ac.uk

"The Future of Capitalism and Democracy," Centre for Social and Political Thought and Department of Sociology, University of Sussex, June 3-4, 2009.

9th Annual Meeting, International Social Theory Consortium. (This conference is also over but, again, I thought that some might like to learn of it.) Keynote Speakers: Richard Sennett (London School of Economics) Stephen P. Turner (University of South Florida) William Outhwaite (University of Newcastle) Peter Wagner (University of Trento, Italy) The annual conference provides a forum for social and political theorists to meet to discuss topics of importance for an understanding of current times. This year's conference has a specific focus on the future of capitalism and democracy as well as a wider concern with exploring how social and political theory can move beyond the cultural turn. During the 'disciplinary'period of the midtwentieth century, there was a marked separation between social, political and cultural theory. This was followed by a more complex triangular relation in the last part of the century, influenced by the model of Foucault and a politicized cultural studies. Present writing in this area has moved beyond the 'cultural turn,' but not back to the earlier separation. The interpenetration of these domains, both at the level of theory and in political life itself, produces challenges for theory in all these areas. Central to all of this is a sense of the uncertainty about major social and political institutions that the present global economic crisis has heightened and clarified. Visit the conference homepage here: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/cspt/1-4-3-6.html.

42nd Annual Meeting, Cheiron: the International Society for the History of the Behavioural and Social Sciences, Le Moyne College, June 24-27, 2010.

Papers, posters, symposia, or workshops may deal with any aspect of the history of the behavioral and social sciences or related historiographical and methodological issues. All submissions must conform to the length limitations listed below (references, tables, etc. may be appended). To facilitate blind review, please include a cover sheet indicating: a) title; b)author’s name and affiliation; c) author’s address and phone number; and d) audio/visual needs. All submissions must be received by 5pm CST on January 15, 2010. Authors are strongly encouraged to send submissions electronically as attachments (.doc or .rtf), although three printed copies of a submission may be sent by post to the address below. Papers: Submit a completed paper (7-8 double-spaced pages plus a short abstract), or a 700-800 word abstract plus short bibliography. Papers should be original, i.e., not previously presented at other conferences. Posters: Submit a 300-400 word abstract. Symposia: Submit a 250-300 word abstract describing the symposium as a whole, and a 500-700 word abstract plus short bibliography from each of the participants. A cover letter should include the names and institutional affiliations of each of the participants, which should not be revealed in the abstracts. Workshops: Contact the program chair (gsullivan@ccccd.edu). Student Travel Awards: Available to help defray travel expenses of students who present papers and posters. Please indicate if you are a student and wish to be considered for an award. Program submissions should be sent to: Jerry Sullivan at gsullivan@ccccd.edu. (N.B. gsullivan). If necessary, they may be sent by regular mail to Jerry Sullivan at: Collin College 2800 E. Spring Creek Parkway Plano, TX 75074 Visit the Society's homepage here: http://people.stu.ca/~cheiron/.

Gooch, John C. "Imagining the Law and the Constitution of Societal Order ..."

Abstract: legal scholar and theorist James Boyd White has challenged both lawyers and rhetoricians to imagine the law as a rhetorical and literary process (“Imagining the Law” from the 1997 anthology, The Rhetoric of Law). White contends that members of the legal profession should see law as an activity of speech and imagination that occurs in a social world (“Imagining the Law,” p. 35). He encourages members of the legal profession to look at law in its social context; in other words, instead of thinking of law as a social machine or technical system of regulations and applying its rules in a mechanical way, lawyers should engage the legal profession as an interaction of authoritative texts and as a process of legal thought and argument (“Imagining the Law,” p. 55). By asking members of the legal professional to see law as rhetoric, White encourages them to recognize the socially constitutive nature of language, which runs contrary to a perspective of law as machine or, rather, the law as only a system of rules and regulations. My paper will extend White’s notion of imagining law as rhetorical and literary process. White has analyzed specific court cases as instances of lawyers and judges imagining the law in particular ways. In addition, scholars, particularly from communication and rhetoric, have taken inspiration from his ideas and applied them to the rhetoric of the courtroom (e.g., court testimony, judicial opinions, and narrative in legal discourse). However, I intend to take White’s concept of imagining the law and to apply it to a public address concerning constitutionality and the legal system (as opposed to analyzing transcripts from court cases). The specific case for my paper, the “Crime and the Great Society” (1965) speech from former Los Angeles Police Chief William Parker, reflects Parker’s imagining of the law and of constitutional rights – particularly the rights of the accused. (Based on my research, the speech itself represents an artifact no one has seriously studied.) My paper will show how his speech reflects a vision for the City of Los Angeles; Parker, himself, imagines the law by referencing several authoritative texts and literary works to advance his agenda for societal order in Los Angeles. In the end, Parker asks his audience, the city’s leaders and citizens, to share his vision and his imagination, and, moreover, he constitutes a societal order through his use of language. Such imaginings, however, can adversely affect the very society a rhetorician intends to strengthen if the rhetorician’s words result in negative consequences for citizens’ constitutional rights. Download the paper here: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1391668.

Starger, Colin P. "The DNA of an Argument: A Case Study in Legal Logos." JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW AND CRIMINOLOGY (2009).

Abstract: this article develops an original rhetorical framework for analyzing the logic of legal arguments and then applies it to unpack a post-conviction DNA testing controversy currently before the Supreme Court. My framework extends Aristotle's concept of logos by specifying different logical types of proof in legal argument. The Osborne case now before the Court concerns how DNA proof intersects with legal process and the procedural barriers to prisoners' accessing DNA evidence after conviction. After parsing the persuasive dynamics in the federal litigation preceding Osborne, I make a prediction on what argument logic will prevail in the Court. Drawing on the work of Aristotle, neo-Aristotelian argument scholars, and contemporary jurisprudence, I first construct an original taxonomy of logos that distinguishes between modes of proof in legal argument. This taxonomy characterizes prototypical differences in formal, empirical, narrative, and categorical arguments by reference to the logical and rhetorical roles of their constituent premises, inferences, and conclusions. I then use my new vocabulary to frame an in-depth case study of federal-court litigation over post-conviction access to DNA evidence under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983. I describe the history of this discourse, and engage in close readings of two arguments – the concurring opinions of Judge Michael Luttig and Chief Judge Harvie Wilkinson in the Harvey II case – that represent the competing rhetorical poles of the debate. I classify Luttig's argument logos as formal, and Wilkinson's as narrative. After examining all published decisions that have considered the Section 1983 issue since Harvey II, I argue that Luttig's formal logos has successfully persuaded federal courts. I therefore predict that Luttig's logic on the procedural dispute in Osborne will prevail at the Supreme Court. By closely dissecting this argument over DNA, I bring fresh perspective on the rhetorical DNA of a legal argument. Download the paper here: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1389504.

Bix, Brian. "Law and Language: How Words Mislead Us."

Abstract: this talk was the Reappointment Lecture for the Frederick W. Thomas Chair in the Interdisciplinary Study of Law and Language at the University of Minnesota. The topic is the way that the words we use in legal doctrinal reasoning can - intentionally and unintentionally - mislead us regarding the proper outcomes of cases and the best development of the law. Connecting to the ideas of the American legal realists Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., and Felix Cohen, the talk uses examples from Contract Law (assent to terms in electronic contracting cases, waiver of the failure of conditions), Medical Decision-Making (deciding on behalf of incompetent patients), and Family Law (same-sex marriage, child custody, and alimony) to make general points about how we choose words to make our decisions more persuasive or more comfortable, when we should instead be using more transparent (more honest) terminology, in order better to confront the real underlying moral and policy questions. Download the paper here: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1376366.

"International Law and Global Justice," Centre for Study of Social Justice & Centre for International Studies, University of Oxford, May 20-21, 2009.

Debates on international law and on global justice have for the most part proceeded separately. Only very few theorists have suggested that the project of designing principles of international/global justice is closely related to that of designing principles of international law. Taking the lead from this often underappreciated suggestion, in this workshop we aim to explore the connections between international law and global justice. In particular, we welcome papers – both legal and philosophical – discussing the following topics: The relation between coercion, law and (global) justice: an increasing number of political theorists have argued that obligations of justice only apply within political communities by virtue of the existence of a coercive legal system. What are the implications of this view for the question of global justice? Can we plausibly claim that international law is coercive in the same way in which domestic law is? If not, does this mean that principles of justice should not apply to it? The effectiveness of international law as a means to realising global justice: if international law is one of the most powerful instruments at our disposal to bring about a morally better world, what sort of reforms of the current international legal system would be necessary to move closer to the goal of global justice? Given the sui generis nature of the international legal system, how can such reforms be most fruitfully brought about? Global justice, international law and state sovereignty: is the principle of the sovereign equality of states itself a principle of international/global justice or a hindrance to the quest for global justice? Would a world inhabited by states which are genuinely – as opposed to merely formally – equally sovereign be a just world? Or does the realisation of a just world require us to transcend the very idea of state sovereignty, moving from a system of international law to a global legal system? Keynote Speakers: Prof. David Armstrong (University of Exeter) Prof. Allen Buchanan (Duke University) Prof. Terry Nardin (National University of Singapore) Dr Amanda Perreau-Saussine (University of Cambridge) Further information is available frmo globaljustice@politics.ox.ac.uk.

Pub: GLOBAL JUSTICE: THEORY, PRACTICE, RHETORIC 2 (2009).

Articles:

• Manfred Steger ‘Political Ideologies and Social Imaginaries in the Global Age’ pp. 1-17
• Regina Kreide ‘The Ambivalence of Juridification. On Legitimate Governance in the International Context’ pp. 18-34

Reviews:

• Clara Brandi ‘We the Stakeholders: The Power of Representation beyond Borders?Terry Macdonald, Global Stakeholder Democracy. Power and Representation Beyond Liberal States, Oxford,Oxford University Press, 2008′ pp. 35-41
• Miriam Ronzoni ‘Making Access to Trade Conditional on Labour Standards?Christian Barry and Sanjay Reddy, International Trade and Labor Standards: A Proposal for Linkage, New York, Columbia University Press, 2008′ pp. 42-46
• Tiziana Torresi ‘The Cosmopolitan Future Of DemocracyDaniele Archibugi, The Global Commonwealth of Citizens: Toward Cosmopolitan Democracy, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2008′ pp. 47-49
• Laura Valentini ‘Social Liberal or Cosmopolitan?David Miller, National Responsibility and Global Justice, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007′ pp. 50-53

Visit the journal homepage here: http://www.theglobaljusticenetwork.org/journal.

Tiersma, Peter. "What is Language and Law and Does Anyone Care?" LAW AND LANGUAGE. Ed. Frances Olsen, et al.

Abstract: There has been growing attention paid recently to the interdisciplinary study of language and law. This article explores the nature and parameters of this relatively new discipline, including its relationship to related areas such as law and semiotics, literature, and forensic linguistics. Although the study of language and law has been advancing, it nonetheless remains a relatively marginal and underappreciated field. The article concludes with some suggestions for making the field more prominent. Download the whole essay here: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1352075.

Cfp: "Conditions of Freedom," 15th International Philosophy Colloquium Evian, Evian (Lake Geneva), July 12-18, 2009.

The idea of freedom stands at the center of practical philosophy, embedded in a thick web of relations with concepts such as subjectivity, rationality, morality, and existence. It draws its force from the tension between two roles: on the one hand as a fundamental metaphysical or anthropological determination of human beings; on the other as designating a political ideal that can more or less be realized or fail to be realized in concrete forms of life. Rousseau's opening flourish in The Social Contract, "Man is born free, yet everywhere he is in chains," underlines this tension. In this sense the idea of freedom stands not only practically but also conceptually under complex conditions, which need to be understood in order to grasp what we really mean by "freedom." In this context there is a canonical distinction between two traditions: on one side liberalism, which follows Hobbes in understanding freedom negatively as freedom from physical constraints; and, on the other, the tradition inaugurated by Rousseau and Kant, which critically insists that an increase in real freedom cannot consist merely in more options, but only in autonomy, the freedom to rational and self-determined action. Recently theorists like Raz, Skinner, and Pettit have argued that autonomy is threatened when we are dominated or lack a reasonable range of options. With Hegel, Heidegger, or Merleau-Ponty it can be objected that the idea of autonomy is too abstract and that freedom must be understood as situated freedom, embedded in and developing out of our everyday bodily and practical engagement with the world. Philosophers like Schiller as well as, in different ways, Nietzsche and Foucault have attacked the one-sided rationalism of the notion of autonomy and argued for an aesthetic model of freedom as self-fashioning and self-realization that occurs in a framework of bodily practices and techniques of the self. On the social level, debates over the concept of freedom first and foremost revolve around the question of how a common life of free individuals, a free society, is possible. While the liberal tradition, following for instance Tocqueville and Mill, mainly reflects on how individual freedom can be protected from the encroachments of society, the autonomy tradition, from Hegel to Arendt to Habermas, maintains that individual freedom can only exist in a society of free, self-governing people. But the objection of abstraction is soon raised against this conception as well: Marx points to the persistence of real unfreedom under conditions of exploitation and alienation, despite the realization of formal freedom - an argument taken up by Adorno and Marcuse in the twentieth century that finds echoes in discourses on the situation of excluded voices, like those of (post-)colonial subjects, or the freedom-restricting effects of gender norms (for example by Beauvoir, Butler, and MacKinnon). The question of mediating between the basic liberties of the individual and the collective right to self-determination continues to structure debates in recent French social philosophy (Balibar, Castoriadis, but also Levinas and Nancy) as well as in Anglo-American discussions around authors like Walzer, Taylor, and Fraser. The Fifteenth International Philosophy Colloquium Evian invites philosophers to Lake Geneva to discuss these issues concerning the conditions of freedom. We especially invite contributions that explore the conditions of freedom from (post-)structural, phenomenological, hermeneutic, or (post-)analytical perspectives, as well as the differences and convergences among them. The International Philosophy Colloquium Evian aims especially to encourage its participants to transcend the narrow confines of different traditions in philosophy. It is conceived particularly as a place where the divide between continental and analytic philosophy is overcome, or at least where their differences can be rendered philosophically productive. The passive mastery of French, German, and English (the three languages of discussion of the colloquium) is an indispensable prerequisite for its participants. Visit the conference homepage here: http://www.geisteswissenschaften.fu-berlin.de/we01/arbeitsbereiche/ab_bertram/eviancolloquium/.

Cfp: "Re-Visioning the Future: Modernity between Utopia and Dystopia," University of Tennessee, Knoxville, May 14-16, 2009.

Update: the dates have been changed (see above). Original Post (January 31, 2009): 8th Annual Conference of the International Social Theory Consortium. Since the 1980s, social theorists have become increasingly reluctant to relate constructively to the future of western societies, modern democracy, and human civilization. Both in the social sciences and the humanities, postmodernist critics highlighted the affinity between utopianism and forms of totalitarianism. As a consequence, social theorists refrained from recognizing as part of their unique responsibility efforts to refine existing and to delineate new perspectives on the future. Social Theorists began to pay focused attention to problematic patterns of thought that need to be overcome, in order to reduce the odds that the kind of socially, politically and economically induced catastrophes that influenced the direction of historical change during the twentieth century will recur—both directly and indirectly, positively and negatively. Yet whether we appreciate it or not, in the context of globalization, the imminence of change has pushed itself aggressively to the forefront of social-theoretical concerns. The inevitability of change is inescapable, and its centrality to modern civilization undeniable. Concordantly, the imperative to engage in informed and critically reflexive discourses about the kind of world we will, should, or might live in, continues to increase rapidly. The conference will serve to facilitate interdisciplinary exchange relating to the continuing challenge of capturing the warped nature of modernity at the intersection of the past and the future and of utopia and dystopia. . . . Further information may be found here: http://web.utk.edu/~hdahms/ISTC2009/ISTC2009CallforPapers.pdf.

Cfp: "Resistances: Technologies and Relationalities," Philosophy, Interpretation and Culture Program, SUNY Binghamton, April 17-18, 2009.

19th Annual PIC Conference. This conference seeks to explore the interconnectedness of technology, relationality and practices of resistance. We conceptualize technology broadly, as referring to systems, methods of organization, visual/imaging techniques, and political strategies and tactics, as well as to specific material objects and systems of objects – tools, commodities, bodies. We seek papers which explore the polyvalent deployments of technologies in both reproducing extant systems of power relations and their attendant practices of subjectification, as well as their role in fashioning resistant subjects, practices, and communities. We understand these processes and poïetic productions as thoroughly embedded, in terms of both historical contingency and geopolitical location. Relationality is the cloth of subjectification processes. It is real and imagined, and inextricably linked to the production of subjects and technologies in both oppressive and resistant logics across different geopolitical locales. This conference also aims at igniting discussion and debate on the contrasting logics of resistance as they are enacted from disparate geopolitical positionalities. In keeping with the interdisciplinary emphasis of Binghamton University’s Program in Philosophy, Interpretation and Culture, we seek work that flourishes in the conjunction of multiple frames of epistemological inquiry, from fields including, but not limited to: postcolonial studies, decolonial studies, queer and gender studies, ethnic studies, media and visual culture studies, urban studies, science and technology studies, critical theory, continental philosophy, and historiography. Workers/writers/thinkers of all different disciplinary, inter-disciplinary, and non-disciplinary stripes welcome, whether academically affiliated or not. Submissions may be textual, performative, visual. Submission Guidelines: Submission deadline: January 31, 2009. Please submit a 300-500 word abstract along with a cover letter that includes your name, academic affiliation, contact numbers, complete mailing address, and e-mail address, as well as information regarding any technological equipment you may need for your presentation. Papers will be considered for a 20 minute presentation, followed by discussion, so please limit the length of paper to 10-12 pages. Email address for inquiries and electronic submission of abstracts: pic.conference.2009@gmail.com Further information is available here: http://pic.binghamton.edu/. (From www.continental-philosophy.org.)

Cfp: "Disorderly Conduct," Interdisciplinary Conference, Wilfrid Laurier University and University of Waterloo, July 24-26, 2009.

Keynote Speaker: Dr. Steven Angelides, Department of Women’s Studies, Monash University The conference, "Disorderly Conduct" will bring together scholars from around the world and from such disciplines as sociology, philosophy, health studies, history, women's studies, and medicine to explore and problematize the notion of a "disorder". The conference seeks to bring front-line medical and mental health personnel who treat various "disorders" together with humanities, social science and health and disability studies scholars who work (in one way or another) on theoretical questions related both to specific "disorders" and to the notion of a disorder simpliciter. In workshops and symposia, conference participants will engage questions like the following: What, if any, are the downsides of being diagnosed with a disorder? Does the concept of a disorder provide treatment advantages or disadvantages? Are there other advantanges or disadvantages that it incurs – besides those related to the treatment itself – for those diagnosed with a disorder? Can we reasonably expect to avoid problems of stigmatization and marginalization by turning to a medicalized language of disorder to apprehend and explain embodied difference? Conference organizers kindly invite submissions from scholars and health (physical and mental) professionals in all disciplines. Submissions from all scholarly traditions and from all theoretical/methodological approaches are welcome. Abstracts (500 words), papers (2500 words, 20 minute papers for delivery in 30 minute time slots), symposium proposals, workshop proposals, and roundtable discussion proposals will be considered. Proposals for symposia should include the names and affiliations of all participants and their papers or abstracts. Authors submitting abstracts should be prepared to submit final versions of their papers to the conference organizers by June 30. All submissions will be anonymously reviewed; names should appear only on a cover page, and cover pages should be attached in a separate file. Authors’ names or other identifying information should be removed from the properties of files before submission. Authors should indicate on their title pages if they wish to have their submissions considered for inclusion in the published proceedings of the conference. All submissions should be emailed to both Morgan Holmes at mholmes at wlu dot ca and at Shannon Dea at sjdea at uwaterloo dot ca by midnight February 27, 2009. Authors should expect to know the decision of the program committee by around March 1, 2009. Authors might consider submitting a proposal concerning one of the following (but should not feel confined by what is merely intended as a suggestive list):

• What relationship (if any) holds between the concepts, diagnosis and treatment of gender identity disorder and disorders of sexual development?
• What lessons should the editors of the inchoate DSM V take from the DSM IV?
• Is old age treated as a disorder? Should it be?
• What role does "big pharma" play in the identification of various disorders?
• Does our current notion of a disorder adequately reflect our understanding of the social determinants of health?
• In what ways is the language of 'disorder' open to deployment and/or interrogation by post-structuralist or analytic ethicists?

Conference organizers are currently seeking federal funding to support this conference. Contingent upon their success, they may be able to financially assist speakers with their travel and accommodations costs.

Submissions Deadline: February 27, 2009 For more information on "Disorderly Conduct," see the conference website at http://arts.uwaterloo.ca/~sjdea/.

The Futures of Human Rights: Moral, Legal, and Political Cultures, Comparative Literature Program, University of South Carolina, February 28-29, 2009.

The idea of human rights is frequently invoked in national and international discussions and yet never has this idea been so contested as it is today. This interdisciplinaryconference is designed to open dialogue about the future of human rights. We welcome academic or creative submissions addressing the philosophical, legal, political, literary, sociological, or technological questions of human rights. We seek presentations that speak simultaneously to the issues of specific disciplines and to the general interests of the citizen, so that a common conversation can develop during the course of the conference. Papers should take no more than twenty minutes to read. Send 500-word abstracts and 50-word bios to Meili Steele. The deadline is November 1, 2008. Contact: Meili Steele Department of English University of South Carolina Humanities Office Building Columbia, SC 29208 USA Phone: +1 (803) 777-2045 Fax: +1 (803) 777-9064 Email: steelem@sc.edu.

PUB: Devadas, Vijay, and Jane Mummery, eds. PROTEAN BORDERS AND UNSETTLED INTERSTICES. BORDERLANDS 7.1 (2008).

Table of Contents: Vijay Devadas & Jane Mummery Protean Borders & Unsettled Interstices Essays: Nick Mansfield 'There is a Spectre Haunting...': Ghosts, their Bodies, Some Philosophers, a Novel and the Cultural Politics of Climate Change Samuel Chambers & Alan Finlayson Ann Coulter and the Problem of Pluralism: from Values to Politics Debora Halbert A Political Geography of Geneva: Mapping Globalization and its Discontents Michele Acuto Edges of the Conflict: a Threefold Conceptualization of National Borders Rachel Weissbrod Israeli Literature and Cinema in a Web of Intercultural Relations: the Reconciliation of Conflicts on Screen John Hannaford & Janice Newton Sacrifice, Grief and the Sacred at the Contemporary 'Secular' Pilgramage to Gallipoli Narrative Essay: Anthony Burke Life, in the Hall of Smashed Mirrors: Biopolitics and Terror Today Review: Michael Maidan Foucault in the Geographer’s Den (Jeremy W. Crampton and Stuart Elden eds. Space, Knowledge and Power: Foucault and Geography, Hampshire: Ashgate, 2007) Or read the entire issue at: http://www.borderlands.net.au/issues/vol7no1.html.

CFP: "Feminist Rhetorics for Social Justice," Syracuse University, October 23-25, 2008.

In the academy, Feminist Rhetorics has, over the past two decades, become a very promising interdisciplinary field, spanning communication studies, women’s studies, rhetoric and writing studies, various branches of ethnic studies, and even branches of the social sciences. In a general sense, the term feminist rhetorics has referred to “to discourse advocating enlarged legal, economic, and political rights for women” (Karlyn Kohrs Campbell “Feminist Rhetoric” 301). Feminist rhetorics also have served as a way to document and analyze the multi-layered histories of feminist social movements. Scholars of feminist rhetorics have undertaken a large-scale historical recovery project that involves recovering, analyzing, and anthologizing speeches and written texts by feminist activists, organizers, and writers. There are now graduate seminars taught nationally on feminist rhetorics and many graduate students in communication studies and rhetorical studies are choosing to focus their work in this area, often blending scholarship and activism. In addition to focusing on the historical past, feminist rhetoricians also have studied and participated in strategies and movements for contemporary feminist social change in the arenas of public policy, politics, education, the workplace, and community organizing. Our major themes and questions for the symposium will be as follows: 

Feminist Activism and Rhetoric:

• How can we evaluate and understand the influence of women’s historical, geographic, economic, social, and political locations on rhetorical tactics and strategies for feminist activism?
• How can we understand the roles that individuals or groups take in maintaining or dismantling gender-based inequalities at local, national, and transnational levels?
• How can we address the presumed division between scholarly theorizing and activist work, and how can rhetoric be a tool for bridging that presumed divide?

Feminist Rhetorical Histories:

• Which rhetorical histories have been recovered, and which have been omitted? What generational and social movement tensions are present in these feminist rhetorical histories?
• What role has public memory played in feminist rhetorical histories? How have feminist rhetorical histories accounted for the histories and experiences of aging women, women with disabilities, working class women, women of color, lesbian and transgendered people, women living beyond the borders of the U.S. and Europe?
• How have rhetorical histories challenged the primary focus on the Anglo-American context as scholars have begun to engage transnational feminist rhetorical histories and contemporary practices?

Further information is available on the conference homepage: http://wrt.syr.edu/frSJ/.