[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section” _builder_version=”3.0.47″][et_pb_row admin_label=”row” _builder_version=”3.0.48″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”3.0.47″ parallax=”off” parallax_method=”on”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Text” _builder_version=”3.17.6″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat”]<\/p>\n
Convenors<\/strong><\/p>\n Niels de Haan<\/strong> (University of Vienna)<\/p>\n David P. Schweikard<\/strong> (Europa-University Flensburg)<\/p>\n Invited Speakers<\/strong><\/p>\n Toni Erskine<\/strong> (ANU)<\/p>\n Herlinde Pauer-Studer<\/strong> (University of Vienna)<\/p>\n *All times are British Summer Time (BST)<\/p>\n 09.30 \u2013 10.30 <\/strong>– \u201dWhy Groups Are Not Responsible\u201d \u2013 Lars Moen<\/strong> (Australian National University)<\/p>\n 10.30 \u2013 11.30<\/strong> – \u201dIntra-Group Disagreement and Responsibility\u201d \u2013 Jane Weiling Loo<\/strong> (National University of Singapore)<\/p>\n Break<\/strong><\/p>\n 12.00 \u2013 13.30<\/strong> – Keynote<\/strong> \u2013 Herlinde Pauer-Studer<\/strong> (University of Vienna)<\/p>\n Break<\/strong><\/p>\n 14.00 \u2013 15.00<\/strong> – “Are Groups Owed Anything?\u201d \u2013 \u00c9liot Litalien<\/strong> (McGill University)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n 09.00 \u2013 10.00<\/strong> – “Corporations as Moral Actors\u201d \u2013 S\u00e4de Hormio<\/strong> (University of Helsinki)<\/p>\n 10.00 \u2013 11.00<\/strong> – \u201cThe Normative Profile of the Deliberative Corporate Moral Agent\u201d \u2013 Kristian H\u00f8yer Toft<\/strong> (University of Copenhagen)<\/p>\n Break<\/strong><\/p>\n 11.30 \u2013 12.30<\/strong> – \u201cCollective Moral Agency and Self-Induced Moral Incompetence\u201d \u2013 Niels de Haan<\/strong> (University of Vienna)<\/p>\n 12.30 \u2013 13.30<\/strong> – \u201cThe Possibility of the Amoral Group Agent\u201d \u2013 Franz Altner<\/strong> (University of Vienna)<\/p>\n Break<\/strong><\/p>\n 14.00 \u2013 15.00<\/strong> – \u201cShould an Organization Have a Normative Point of View?\u201d \u2013 Frank Hindriks<\/strong> (University of Groningen)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n 10.00 \u2013 11.30<\/strong> – Keynote<\/strong> – Toni Erskine<\/strong> (Australian National University)<\/p>\n Break<\/strong><\/p>\n 12.00 \u2013 13.00<\/strong> – “The Citizen-Inclusive State as a Moral Agent\u201d \u2013 Evrensel Sebep<\/strong> (BilkentUniversity)<\/p>\n 13.00 \u2013 14.00<\/strong> – \u201cThe State as (Non)Agent\u201d \u2013 Brookes Colyton Brown<\/strong> (Clemson University)<\/p>\n Break<\/strong><\/p>\n 14.30 \u2013 15.30<\/strong> – \u201cPolitical Agents and Motivation\u201d \u2013 Camila Hernandez Flowerman<\/strong> (University of Wisconsin-Madison)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n 10.00 \u2013 11.00<\/strong> – \u201cCooperation among Collective Agents \u201d – David Schweikard<\/strong> (Europa-Universit\u00e4t Flensburg)<\/p>\n 11.00 \u2013 12.00<\/strong> – \u201cMetaphysics Incorporated\u201d \u2013 Kenneth Silver<\/strong> (Trinity College Dublin)<\/p>\n Break<\/strong><\/p>\n 13.00 \u2013 14.00<\/strong> – \u201cVirtues and Vices for Groups\u201d \u2013 Stephen McLeod<\/strong> (University of Liverpool)<\/p>\n 14.00 \u2013 15.00<\/strong> – \u201cConsensus and Compromise in Collective Choice\u201d \u2013 Ryan Doody<\/strong> (Brown University)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Which social groups (if any) are to count as agents in their own right? Which group agents (if any) are to count as moral agents in their own right? These and further questions concerning the possibility of group agency and the normative status of group agents lie at the core of recent debates in social ontology and social philosophy. They are of interest to political philosophy and political theory more broadly in so far as they target the foundations of established ways of ascribing agency to corporations and states, for instance, and of holding such large-scale organized social formations accountable. The respective discussions typically invoke and strengthen familiar oppositions between reductionists and non-reductionists, between individualists and holists.<\/p>\n This workshop is focused on questions regarding the normative profile of collective agency. The more specifically action-theoretical and ontological questions regarding the possibility of group agency shall not be ignored, but they won\u2019t take centre stage. Instead, the discussions will target and explore the ways in which group agents instantiate, or indeed fail to instantiate, moral agency. At least four different approaches might be put under scrutiny: first, the view that the locus of morality in group agents is solely on the level of the individual group members; second, the view that group agents can be designed in such a way that they can count as moral agents; third, the view that despite elaborate design group agents are principally incapable of the form of sensitivity specific to moral agency; and fourth, the view that in virtue of their design group agents, though capable of full-blown moral agency, systematically seek out special advantages and show a deep-seated sense of entitlement that shields them off against others\u2019 complaints. These approaches suggest conceiving group agents either not as moral agents at all, as moral agents (more or less) on a par with individual agents, as psychopaths whose accountability is limited at best, or as assholes (in Aaron James\u2019 terminological sense).<\/p>\n We invite submissions on topics directly related to the moral agency of group agents. In particular, and most importantly, this workshop is meant to address two particular challenges that go beyond defending any of these or alternative Submission Information:<\/strong> Conference Information:<\/strong> A small number of bursaries (for graduate students only) are available. Please state in your application whether you intend to apply for a bursary.<\/p>\n We look forward to your submission. [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Normative Profile of Collective Agents Convenors Niels de Haan (University of Vienna) David P. Schweikard (Europa-University Flensburg) Invited Speakers Toni Erskine (ANU) Herlinde Pauer-Studer (University of Vienna) *All times are British Summer Time (BST) Tuesday 7 September 2021 Session 1 09.30 \u2013 10.30 – \u201dWhy Groups Are Not Responsible\u201d \u2013 Lars Moen (Australian National […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3596,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"on","_et_pb_old_content":"Convenors<\/strong>\r\n\r\nNiels de Haan<\/strong> (University of Vienna)\r\n\r\nDavid P. Schweikard<\/strong> (Europa-University Flensburg)\r\n\r\nInvited Speakers<\/strong>\r\n\r\n Toni Erskine<\/strong> (ANU)\r\n\r\nHerlinde Pauer-Studer<\/strong> (University of Vienna)\r\n\r\n
\nTuesday 7 September 2021<\/h4>\n
Session 1<\/em><\/h6>\n
Wednesday 8 September 2021<\/h4>\n
Session 2<\/em><\/h6>\n
Thursday 9 September 2021<\/h4>\n
Session 3<\/em><\/h6>\n
Friday 10 September 2021<\/h4>\n
Session 4<\/em><\/h6>\n
approaches on a conceptual level. First, one main discussion shall target the question as to whether any approach is applicable to all kinds of group agents or whether different kinds of group agents reveal specific normative profiles along the lines of the aforementioned approaches. And second, the workshop is focused on more applied questions concerning the moral agency of groups. Discussions shall make explicit reference to the design and agency of real-life collective agents, especially corporations and states. This is aimed at questions such as the following: Which corporation or which state displays what kind of normative profile? Given the design and actions of (or ascribable to) a particular corporation or state, how should its normative status be captured? And how could a differentiation between normative profiles of collective agents be used in prescriptions or critiques of their design?<\/p>\n
To apply for this workshop, please send an abstract (300-500 words) prepared for anonymous review to ndehaanphilosophy@gmail.com<\/a> by May 10, 2021<\/strong>. We especially welcome submissions from underrepresented groups. Each speaker will be allotted 30 minutes for presentation and 30 minutes for discussion. The exact timing of the sessions will be determined in view of confirmed speakers\u2019 time-zones.<\/p>\n
The MANCEPT Workshops 2021 take place between 7 and 10 September 2021. The conference will be held online. Registration will open in May. All participants must register in order to attend.
The fees for MANCEPT Workshops 2021 are
Academics: \u00a345
Graduate students, retirees, and unaffiliated attendees: \u00a320
Non-speaker\/non-presenting attendees: \u00a315<\/p>\n
Kind regards,
Niels de Haan and David P. Schweikard<\/p>\n
\r\n\r\nWhich social groups (if any) are to count as agents in their own right? Which group agents (if any) are to count as moral agents in their own right? These and further questions concerning the possibility of group agency and the normative status of group agents lie at the core of recent debates in social ontology and social philosophy. They are of interest to political philosophy and political theory more broadly in so far as they target the foundations of established ways of ascribing agency to corporations and states, for instance, and of holding such large-scale organized social formations accountable. The respective discussions typically invoke and strengthen familiar oppositions between reductionists and non-reductionists, between individualists and holists.\r\n\r\nThis workshop is focused on questions regarding the normative profile of collective agency. The more specifically action-theoretical and ontological questions regarding the possibility of group agency shall not be ignored, but they won\u2019t take centre stage. Instead, the discussions will target and explore the ways in which group agents instantiate, or indeed fail to instantiate, moral agency. At least four different approaches might be put under scrutiny: first, the view that the locus of morality in group agents is solely on the level of the individual group members; second, the view that group agents can be designed in such a way that they can count as moral agents; third, the view that despite elaborate design group agents are principally incapable of the form of sensitivity specific to moral agency; and fourth, the view that in virtue of their design group agents, though capable of full-blown moral agency, systematically seek out special advantages and show a deep-seated sense of entitlement that shields them off against others\u2019 complaints. These approaches suggest conceiving group agents either not as moral agents at all, as moral agents (more or less) on a par with individual agents, as psychopaths whose accountability is limited at best, or as assholes (in Aaron James\u2019 terminological sense).\r\n\r\nWe invite submissions on topics directly related to the moral agency of group agents. In particular, and most importantly, this workshop is meant to address two particular challenges that go beyond defending any of these or alternative\r\napproaches on a conceptual level. First, one main discussion shall target the question as to whether any approach is applicable to all kinds of group agents or whether different kinds of group agents reveal specific normative profiles along the lines of the aforementioned approaches. And second, the workshop is focused on more applied questions concerning the moral agency of groups. Discussions shall make explicit reference to the design and agency of real-life collective agents, especially corporations and states. This is aimed at questions such as the following: Which corporation or which state displays what kind of normative profile? Given the design and actions of (or ascribable to) a particular corporation or state, how should its normative status be captured? And how could a differentiation between normative profiles of collective agents be used in prescriptions or critiques of their design?\r\n\r\nSubmission Information:<\/strong>\r\nTo apply for this workshop, please send an abstract (300-500 words) prepared for anonymous review to ndehaanphilosophy@gmail.com<\/a> by May 10, 2021<\/strong>. We especially welcome submissions from underrepresented groups. Each speaker will be allotted 30 minutes for presentation and 30 minutes for discussion. The exact timing of the sessions will be determined in view of confirmed speakers\u2019 time-zones.\r\n\r\nConference Information:<\/strong>\r\nThe MANCEPT Workshops 2021 take place between 7 and 10 September 2021. The conference will be held online. Registration will open in May. All participants must register in order to attend.\r\nThe fees for MANCEPT Workshops 2021 are\r\nAcademics: \u00a345\r\nGraduate students, retirees, and unaffiliated attendees: \u00a320\r\nNon-speaker\/non-presenting attendees: \u00a315\r\n\r\nA small number of bursaries (for graduate students only) are available. Please state in your application whether you intend to apply for a bursary.\r\n\r\nWe look forward to your submission.\r\nKind regards,\r\nNiels de Haan and David P. Schweikard","_et_gb_content_width":"","_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-2497","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.manchester.ac.uk\/mancept\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2497","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.manchester.ac.uk\/mancept\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.manchester.ac.uk\/mancept\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.manchester.ac.uk\/mancept\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3596"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.manchester.ac.uk\/mancept\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2497"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/sites.manchester.ac.uk\/mancept\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2497\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2569,"href":"https:\/\/sites.manchester.ac.uk\/mancept\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2497\/revisions\/2569"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.manchester.ac.uk\/mancept\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2497"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}