By 'non-ideal social ontology', we have in mind social ontology that starts with difficult, complicated cases of immediate importance to social theory, rather than starting from simplified or abstractOur thinking is that just as critical philosophers of race such as Charles Mills have made a case for the importance of non-ideal political philosophy, non-ideal social ontology could play an important role in advancing emancipatory social theory. 09.00 Welcome 09.15–10.30 Robin Zheng (Yale-NUS College) “Responding to Bias: Oughts, Ideals, and Appraisals” 11.00–12.15 Åsa Burman (Stockholm University & Institute for Futures Studies) ”Collective responsibility for implicit bias” 12.15–13.30 Lunch 13.30–14.45 Katharina Berndt Rasmussen (Institute for Futures Studies) ”Implicit bias and discrimination” 15.15–16.30 Alex Madva (California State Polytechnic University), ”Responsibility for Interpreting Implicit Bias” 19.00 Workshop dinner 09.00–10.15 Rebecca Mason (University of San Francisco) ”Oppression and Incredulity” 10.30–11.45 Johan Brännmark (Malmö University) ”Institutions, Ideology, and Non-Ideal Social Ontology” 11.45–13.15 Lunch 13.15–14.30 Staffan Carlshamre (Stockholm University) ”Natural kinds, social kinds, mixed kinds” 14.45–16.00 Katharine Jenkins (University of Nottingham) ”Sex and gender, grounding and anchoring” Organized by Åsa Burman & Katharina Berndt Rasmussen. Sponsored by Jane and Dan Olsson Foundation, Institute for Futures Studies, and the Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University Questions? Please contact:

Wayne Sumner, University Professor Emeritus, University of Toronto. ABSTRACTFew people doubt that hate speech is capable of harming the minorities that it targets. This talk will explore the various ki

Evolution and Human Behavior, Volume 38, Issue 3, Pages 421–427. Abstract To examine the evolutionary basis of a behavior, an established approach (known as the phenotypic gambit) is to assume that the b

Venue: Institutet för framtidsstudier, Holländargatan 13, 4th floor, Stockholm, or online.Research seminar with Martin O'Neill, Professor of Political Philosophy, University of York.Register here AbstraMy talk addresses the questions of the size of the public sector in a just society, and the range of goods and services which should be decommodified, and provided to citizens outside of market relationships, in such a society. I examine some of the different answers given to these questions by (a) liberal egalitarians (particularly Rawls) and (b) social democrats and democratic socialists (particularly Esping-Andersen). Then, making use of the work of theorists including Waheed Hussain and Ralph Miliband, I examine the plausibility of a 'left Rawlsian' position, which would marry socialist insights about the functions of public provision with a liberal egalitarian account of the principles of justice, in order to defend an institutional model of a just society which would embody a form of liberal democratic socialism."

Philosophia 45(3): 1275–1282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-017-9812-5. Abstract In this reply I defend Kripke’s creationist thesis for mythical objects (Reference and Existence, 2013) against Jeffrey Go). I argue that Goodman has mistaken the basis for when mythical abstracta are created. Contrary to Goodman I show that, as well as how, Kripke’s theory consistently retains the analogy between creation of mythical objects and creation of fictional objects, while also explaining in what way they differ.

Prof. Dr. Armin Schäfer, Institut Für Sozialwissenschaften, Universität Osnabrück ABSTRACTAs turnout has declined in many developed democracies, it has also become more unequal. Recent studies show tha

AbstractIs Deliberation an Antidote to Extreme Partisan Polarization? Reflections on “America in One Room” Register here to join the seminar This talk is positioned at the intersectionof two literatures

Venue:Institute for Futures Studies, Holländargatan 13 in Stockholm Research seminar with Christian Rostbøll, professor of political theory at the University of Copenhagen. Register here > AbstractIt (Cambridge University Press, 2023).

In N. Marschner, C. Richter, J. Patz, & A. Salheiser (Eds.), Contested climate justice – Challenged democracy: International perspectives (pp. 59-71). Campus Verlag GmbH Abstract Earth is on a catastryet, there is little sign of halting the rise of global greenhouse gas emissions orstopping the extraction of fossil fuels. Against this background, in this articlewe re-engage with a recently proposed typology supposed to cover three modesthrough which effective climate action has been obstructed. These are, first,primary obstruction, that is, the spread of disinformation and/or denying the veryexistence of anthropogenic climate change. Second, secondary obstruction concernsmore or less deliberate obstruction via opposition to climate action and policiesvia, for example, reference to “the threat of deindustrialisation”. Finally, tertiaryobstruction denotes modes of living which, while not necessarily obstructingeffective climate change intentionally, concerns “living in denial”. Drawing onrecent research and examples, we revisit this typology.

2011. European Physical Journal B 84:147-159. AbstractWe investigate the timing of messages sent in two online communities with respect to growth fluctuations and long-term correlations. We find that the