Joanne Faulkner in the Gong

We're pleased to Joanne Faulkner (UNSW) visiting us on Tuesday, May 18th, to give a paper at our Philosophy Research Seminar series.

Title: Vulnerability and the Passing of Childhood in Bill Henson: Innocence in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction

When and Where: 5:30 pm, Tuesday, May 18th in room 19.1003

Abstract: The most public responses to Bill Henson's 2008 exhibition either judged the photographs to constitute child pornography (or a prelude to child abuse), or argued for the exemption of Henson's work from that field on the basis of its status as fine art. This paper interrogates these responses by asking what opportunities were missed amid the "controversy," for critical reflection on the political significance of childhood and of art. With reference to Walter Benjamin's reflections on art in the age of new technologies of reproduction, the paper attempts to re-situate Henson's 2008 work — and particularly the most controversial photograph within that exhibition — in the context of a broader 'crisis' in the (artistic) representation of children.

Paul Griffiths in the Gong

We're very pleased to have Paul Griffiths (USyd) visiting us next week to give a paper in our Philosophy Research Seminar series. Paul will be speaking on May 11th, at 5:30 pm in the usual location (19.1003).

Title: "When do evolutionary explanations of belief debunk belief?", co-authored with John Wilkins (Bond)

Abstract: Ever since Darwin people have worried about the sceptical implications of evolution. If our minds are products of evolution like those of other animals, why suppose that the beliefs they produce are true, rather than merely useful? In this paper we apply this argument to beliefs in three different domains: morality, religion, and commonsense/science. We identify replies to evolutionary scepticism that work in some domains but not in others. The simplest reply to evolutionary scepticism is that the truth of beliefs in a certain domain is, in fact, connected to evolutionary success. So evolution can be expected to design systems that produce true beliefs in that domain. We call a connection between truth and evolutionary success a 'Milvian bridge', after the tradition which ascribes the triumph of Christianity at the battle of the Milvian bridge to the truth of Christianity. We argue that a Milvian bridge can be constructed for commonsense beliefs, and extended to scientific beliefs, but not to moral and religious beliefs. An alternative reply to evolutionary scepticism, which as been used to defend moral beliefs, is to argue that their truth does not depend on their tracking some external state of affairs. We ask if this reply could be used to defend religious beliefs.