Home » Member Announcements » Recent Articles:

AMINTAPHIL 2018 Conference on Democracy, Populism, and Truth

November 14, 2017 Member Announcements Comments Off on AMINTAPHIL 2018 Conference on Democracy, Populism, and Truth

AMINTAPHIL 2018 Conference on Democracy, Populism, and Truth

August 16-19, 2018 Boston University, Boston, MA Due Date: June 30, 2018

We invite submissions for the 2018 biannual conference of the American Section of the International Association for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy (AMINTAPHIL) on the topic of Democracy, Populism, and Truth. Suggestions for specific paper topics have been developed by the Program Committee and are listed below.

AMINTAPHIL is an interdisciplinary society of philosophers, legal theorists, political scientists, and economists who are interested in normative questions about justice, society, the economy, and democracy. It is affiliated with the International Association for the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy (IVR), which meets biannually in years opposite to AMINTPHIL meetings. All members of AMINTAPHIL gain membership in IVR.

AMINTAPHIL conferences follow a distinctive format, in which “principal papers” are submitted and distributed in advance. “Comment papers” are then submitted, also in advance of the conference, and the meeting proceeds in discussion format. Attendees are expected to read the papers prior to the conference. The Program Committee will group papers on related themes into distinct sessions for the conference, and all sessions are plenary (i.e., there are no breakouts). This conference format lends itself to gaining deep, multi-faceted and multi-disciplinary perspectives on the chosen topic, and engaging in rich dialogue with other attendees. All on-topic submitted papers are included in the conference, and selected papers are published in a subsequent, peer reviewed volume of essays by Springer.

AMINTAPHIL members are eligible to submit papers. (Membership information is now online at http://www.pdcnet.org/amintaphil.) Principal papers, due by June 30, 2018 should be no more than 5500 words, and should begin with a brief abstract; comment papers will be due by August 5, 2018 and should be no more than 2200 words. All members of AMINTAPHIL will be notified when principal papers are available for download. Submit papers to Mark Navin at navin@oakland.edu with the subject line: “AMINTAPHIL 2018 submission.”

Please direct inquiries to: AMINTAPHIL Executive Director: Prof. Mark Navin, Department of Philosophy, Oakland University navin@oakland.edu. Local Host: Dean Ann Cudd, Dean of Arts & Sciences, Boston University, acudd@bu.edu

Suggested Topics
The following is a list of topics and sub-topics for the AMINTAPHIL 2018 conference. The list serves to provide suggestions and give more definition to the general topic of the conference. It is not intended to be either exhaustive or exclusive. Nor is it intended to be the template for the final program of the conference or the grouping of papers and commentaries into sessions.

Populism and Democratic Institutions

  • What is populism?
  • How does populism relate to democratic and anti-democratic social movements, e.g. nationalism, isolationism, religious factionalism, women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, Black Lives Matter, disability rights, health care rights?
  • How is populism given voice by federalist systems of voting partition, e.g. the Electoral College?
  • How is populism enhanced or triggered by election district gerrymandering?
  • What is the threat or benefit of populism to political parties?
  • Given populism’s reliance on emotional appeals, to what extent is the role of emotions in politics good or bad?
  • What is the relationship between populism and publicly-funded education?
  • Does populism only or mostly reflect uneducated preferences?

Truth, Media & Populism

  • How do (more or less) traditional news media sources support populism?
  • What role should news media play in informing populist debate?
  • What obligation(s) do members of the news media have to be truthful?
  • What obligations do politicians and citizens have to be truthful in advancing their political goals and policy preferences?
  • How has social media transformed populist leadership and populist movements?
  • How does social media foster and sustain populist protest movements/social movements?
  • Are there (or should there be) norms of public reason governing our behavior as social media consumers: as individual purveyors, transmitters, and recipients of social media messaging?
  • What are the ethical responsibilities of social media providers, such as Facebook, Google, and other online platforms in the fight against misinformation, fake news, and false attributions of fake news?
    • (How) Should participants in political debates be identified, e.g. as lobbyists, agents of foreign powers, government contractors, ‘sock puppets’?
    • (How) Should social media companies regulate participation in online political debates, e.g. to prevent participation by people with particular ideological commitments or (foreign) funding sources?

Democracy, Truth, & Public Political Discourse

  • (How much) has partisan politics undermined truth or truthfulness in political and/or public discourse?
  • How does a permissive legal environment for campaign and political cause expenditures tend to benefit or harm truthful political discourse?
  • How can we control more effectively for truth in political discourse and respond more effectively to its absence?
  • Should there be legal constraints on who may participate in political debates? E.g., should foreign actors be excluded? What about corporations, hate groups, or government employees who occupy (highly) politically sensitive roles?
  • Is truthful public political discourse a reasonable aspiration in a democracy?


August 17, 2017 Member Announcements Comments Off on Join NASSP

Joining the North American Society for Social Philosophy is easy!  Membership may be obtained through the Philosophy Documentation Center at https://www.pdcnet.org/nassp/North-American-Society-for-Social-Philosophy-(NASSP)

Social Philosophy Today Call for Submissions

July 20, 2017 Member Announcements, News Comments Off on Social Philosophy Today Call for Submissions



Congratulations once again on your recent presentation at the 34th Annual International Social Philosophy Conference at Loyola University Chicago.  Papers presented at the conference are eligible for consideration for publication in Social Philosophy Today.


Although all the articles published in Social Philosophy Today are based on papers presented at the conference, the journal is not a proceedings volume. Only those articles recommended on the basis of peer review will be accepted for publication. Accordingly, all papers submitted should be prepared for blind review according to the guidelines below.




Manuscripts: Submission of a manuscript to Social Philosophy Today is understood to imply that the manuscript is not under consideration by any other journal and is offered to Social Philosophy Today for first publication.

Deadline for Submission: October 13, 2017

Length: 6000-word limit

Title sheet: To facilitate anonymous review, the author should not be identified in the manuscript or the abstract, or in any electronic signature. Contact information, including name, institutional affiliation, and an e-mail address, must be submitted as an attachment on a separate title sheet.

Abstract: Papers must include an abstract of no more than 200 words placed at the beginning of the article.

File Type and Format: Manuscripts should be submitted as Word files. They should be double-spaced (including quotations, notes, and references), and the right margin should not be justified.

Endnote Style: We use the Chicago Manual of Style “notes and bibliography system” for endnotes, and request that authors use this in their submissions.  For more information seehttp://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide.html

Bibliography: Please attach a bibliography to the paper. Very recently our publisher has requested this for all manuscripts for electronic citation purposes. For references use the University of Chicago style, e.g.,
Anderson, Elizabeth.  Value in Ethics and Economics.  Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard University Press, 1993.
Chamallas, Martha.  “Consent, Equality, and the Legal Control of Sexual Conduct.”  Southern California Law Review 61 (1987): 826-30.

In addition:
•Avoid 3-em-dashes or other replacements for the author’s name in multiple citations
•List author names in each citation

Rights & permissions: Authors of manuscripts accepted for publication are free to reuse their own articles in other publications they write or edit, and no further permission is required. We only require appropriate acknowledgement of the original publication of that item in Social Philosophy Today.  For more information see http://secure.pdcnet.org/socphiltoday/Rights-and-Permissions

Submission: Manuscripts and title sheets should be submitted as separate attachments to SPTeditor@northamericansocietyforsocialphilosophy.org no later than October 13, 2017.



Call for Papers: Journal of Global Ethics Special Issue

Education and Migration

Guest editors Julian Culp (Frankfurt) and Danielle Zwarthoed (Louvain)

Submission of abstracts: asap

Submission of papers: October 15, 2017

Direct enquiries and submissions to: Culp@em.uni-frankfurt.de, Danielle.Zwarthoed@uclouvain.be


Following upon the special issue Refugee Crisis: The Borders of Human Mobility (December, 2016), The Journal of Global Ethics introduces a further special issue concerning the responsibilities for education that pertain to international migration. The Journal of Global Ethics invites scholars and practitioners from the disciplines of education, economics, law, philosophy, political science sociology and other fields to submit articles for review.

Migration is driven by climate change, resource scarcity, state failure and other factors. It deeply marks all our everyday lives, it is ever present in the news, and it influences elections around the globe. Migration is hotly debated in politics, and so the ethics of migration is also a topic in contemporary moral and political philosophy. The merits of open vs. closed borders, problems of brain drain and territorial rights are familiar foci, but academic debate has largely neglected the matter of education in a world of transnational migration.

Migration includes seasonal work, informal or undocumented migration, guest-worker migration, refugee accommodation, refugee resettlement and non-asylum immigration. Education that pertains to migration may be a concern that applies to migrants entering a nation and their children, but also to those adults and children who are already resident in nations receiving migrants.

Topics for this issue include, but are not restricted to:

  • Methodological issues about how to justify educational ends and practices:

o Which ideals, principles or values serve for justifying migration-related education in both receiving and sending countries? For example, should the education of migrants in receiving countries be justified on the basis of (moral or international legal) human rights or other principles of justice, humanity, charity or utility?

o Should the justification for these educational policies be distinct from or conjoined to other migration-related policy? For example, must the justification of migration-related education take into consideration climate refugee policy or development policy?


  • Substantive issues about migration-related education in countries of immigration:

o What should be the shape of educational programs in societies that receive, or that should receive, migrants? Should educational institutions prepare the next generation to welcome and cohabit with newcomers? Should education cultivate virtues that are conducive to the fulfilment of the obligations of receiving societies to migrants and refugees, and, if so, which virtues? How should the school curriculum address migration? For example, is it desirable that history classes avoid sedentary biases and insist more on the fact that migration has been a continuous feature of human history? In countries with many immigrants arriving from former colonies, how should colonial history be taught?

o Children of migrants attend educational programs that have been promoted by political representatives that their parents neither elect nor can hold accountable. To what extent, if at all, should adult migrants have a voice in deciding what constitutes a good education for the next generation?

o What ought to be the aims and purposes of accommodation or integration programs? Should they solely aim at economic integration in order to make sure migrants enjoy decent opportunities to access the job market and contribute to the economy? Or should they pursue more ambitious goals, such as educating migrants for the conception of citizenship that prevails in their country of destination? Is it legitimate to make such programs, which target adults, mandatory? And how should these programs be funded?

o Which educational policies should formerly colonized countries like Angola adopt in light of so-called reverse migration from formerly colonizing countries like Portugal?


  • Substantive issues about migration-related education in countries of emigration:

Migration also raises issues for educational institutions within countries of emigration, regardless of whether this involves migration from relatively poor to relatively rich countries or vice versa. Do educational institutions in these countries have an obligation to prepare children and young adults for transnational mobility? For example, should they adapt their educational programs to the labor demands in countries of destination? To what extent should they teach children to accommodate values with which they are not familiar? Migrants may experience conflicting allegiance between their country of origin and their country of destination: how should educational policies and practices address this conflict?


  • Distributive issues about how to divide the costs and benefits of migration-related education between countries of emigration and immigration:

Who should pay how much for integration programs? Do countries of immigration have such a duty to pay, or should integration be considered charitable treatment, or wise social policy? If such a duty holds, is it a duty of justice or a duty of humanity? Are there distributive justice-based arguments that tell against countries of destination providing education for irregular migrants? Should countries of immigration have a role in supporting educational systems in countries of emigration? If yes, on what grounds do they have this duty?


  • Educational issues about migration-related political communication and rhetoric:

What economists, sociologists, demographers and lawyers know about migration does not tend to register in the public debate, and popular biases are not easily overturned. How should information about migration be transmitted, and are communications media, as currently structured, adequate to the task? What are the obligations of politicians and public officials with respect to the way they communicate about migration? What are the obligations of academics and journalists with respect to this problem?

The guest editors have supplemented this call for papers with invited contributions from Meira Levinson (Harvard University), Krassimir Stojanov (KU-Eichstätt-Ingolstadt), Carola Suárez-Orozco (UCLA) and Marcelo Suárez-Orozco (UCLA).

Publication is projected for issue 14:2 (2018). Length: 8000 words excluding tables, references, footnotes, and endnotes. Manuscripts should be compiled in the following order: title; abstract (200 words); keywords; main text; acknowledgments; references; appendices (if appropriate). Style guidelines:




CFA: Food Justice, the Environment, and Climate Change

CFA: Food Justice, the Environment, and Climate Change

Although theoretical explorations of food have exploded in recent literature, sustained philosophical treatment of the environmental implications of food systems, especially regarding global climate change (GCC), is still absent. In contrast, there is considerable popular discussion of how agricultural practices, dietary choices, and the structure of globalized food systems affect the environment broadly and climate change more specifically (e.g., Bittman, Pollan, etc). This volume aims to bridge the gap between the academic discourse and the mainstream discourse by engaging a diverse array of scholars in analysis and reflection on the ethical and political implications of food and agricultural practices in relation to environmental concerns, with special attention to climate change. In particular, the goal of this collection of essays is to develop a discussion at the intersection of food justice, environmental justice, and climate justice, with an emphasis on identifying both the philosophical and practical relationships that exist between these problems/areas of study. We hope this volume will speak to a broad audience (ranging from undergraduate students to research scholars), and will address both activist and scholarly concerns by employing diverse methods and frameworks. Towards this end, we invite authors to submit abstracts that address one of the below questions and/or other relevant topics.

Abstracts should be 750-1000 words in length, and should explicitly address how the essay will fit within the aims and ends of the volume as a whole. Interested authors should send abstracts to Erinn Cunniff Gilson (e.gilson@unf.edu) and Sarah Kenehan (skenehan@marywood.edu) no later than July 3rd, 2017. In the interest of anonymous review, please leave off identifying information.

Potential Questions:

What philosophical concepts, theories, and viewpoints best address the complex relationships between global food systems, environmental problems, and climate change? What connections can be made between food justice, environmental justice, and climate justice? For instance:
• How do environmental justice perspectives and food justice perspectives contribute to under-standing the harms of global climate change (GCC), the sources of these harms, and the possibilities for activism and change?
• When it comes to food systems, is GCC one environmental issue among many or the primary one?
• How should we understand GCC in relation to other environmental problems stemming from agricultural and food production practices (such as soil degradation, desertification, clear-cutting, water and air pollution, loss of biodiversity)?
• In light of the increased demand for food, how can and should the tension between conservation and agriculture be addressed?
• How can the harms to oceans and riparian ecosystems stemming from GCC (rising water temperatures, loss of coral reefs, sea level rise) and intensive fishing and aquaculture (pollution, species loss, dead zones) be theorized?
• How are the injustices related to food and agriculture best conceptualized? As food insecurity? An absence of food sovereignty? How does the way such injustices are conceptualized impact the kinds of normative conclusions that are drawn?
• How do these injustices overlap with other forms of subordination and oppression such as racism, sexism, capitalism, xenophobia, and so on? What does an intersectional approach to food justice and/or climate justice look like?

In relation to the nexus of problems concerning food, environment, and climate, what are the ethical and political responsibilities of various parties (e.g., individuals, communities, towns, cities, states, national governments, corporations, international organizations such as NGOs and governing bodies such as the UN)? More specifically:
• In the context of global climate change, do individuals have an obligation to adopt diets that rely less on animal products, as animal agriculture is one of the leading contributors to green-house gas (GHG) emissions? To adopt diets that rely less on food that is not local in origin to reduce emissions from food transportation? What other kinds of individual actions are necessary (e.g., growing one’s own food, participating in a CSA or community garden, minimizing food waste, salvaging wasted food, etc.)?
• Is individual action sufficient? Why/why not? Given the scale of environmental problems, do individualized responses distract and divert attention from the broad-scale political and structural remedies that are needed? Or are individual actions important for motivation, developing knowledge, fostering affective engagement, and community-building?
• The activities of industrialized nations have contributed in significant ways to the ability of many peoples to maintain food and water security. What obligations do industrialized nations have to mitigate this harm and to help the affected peoples adapt? Do these obligations change given differing conditions and varying levels of food insecurity and/or instability (e.g., famine, drought, desertification)?
• Given the inefficiencies and environmental harms of intensive animal agriculture (high levels of water use, air and water pollution, deforestation in developing nations, reductions in biodiversity, excessive use of antibiotics, and so on) and its role in GCC, do nations have a moral obligation to produce food that is more (resource) efficient? Should governments continue to subsidize intensive animal agriculture or do they, conversely, have an obligation to reorient food production?
• What practices and technologies can and should be used to increase the efficiency of food production? E.g., geo-engineering to create more favorable conditions to grow food and genetic modification to make products that can grow in unfavorable conditions? How should “efficiency” be measured so as to take what are usually deemed externalities into account?
• To what extent should food production and agricultural processes be taken into consideration in the calculation of carbon taxes and carbon compensation methods? Should nations that rely on food imports be treated differently than those whose economic stability depends on exporting food to the rest of the world?
• Are food production and agriculture considered sufficiently in climate negotiations and policy decisions both intra- and inter- nationally? Should such concerns be offered a more substantive role?
• What obligations do relatively affluent and/or privileged parties have to frontline communities (indigenous peoples, racially marginalized groups, impoverished communities) within their own nation who are and will be adversely effected by GCC and other environmental harms?
• If migration is an effect of GCC and environmental degradation more broadly, what does global justice entail for climate refugees or environmental migrants? Do these effects create a new category of migration – agriculture/food migration?
• How might ethical and political obligations be related when it comes to food, environmental, and climate justice?
• Do shifting political atmospheres (such as the increase in support for far-right political parties) alter the political responsibilities of individuals, nations, and international organizations with regard to obligations of food, climate, and environmental justice?

How do epistemic, cultural, political, and ethical claims intersect and overlap when it comes to food, environmental, and climate justice? For instance:
• What role should scientists have in shaping global climate policy?
• What role should indigenous peoples have in informing global climate, environmental, and food policy?
• To what extent do claims of cultural sovereignty matter in discussions about sustainable food systems?
• How can epistemic justice frameworks facilitate food, environmental, and climate justice, especially when significant power to make policy, mitigate harm, and intervene globally rests in the hands of the governments of Western, industrialized nations?
• What forms of knowledge are marginalized (e.g., those of “subjugated,” “subaltern,” and/or indigenous people)? Why might such knowledge be crucial for achieving food, environmental, and climate justice?
• Which kinds of standards should be employed to determine the merit of potential remedies for the effects of GCC and environmental degradation? Efficacy? Participation/democracy? Cultural and biological diversity?
• What are the obstacles to remedying environmental and food injustice, and ameliorating the effects of GCC? How can those obstacles be understood better and addressed?


Call for Papers

CFA – 35th Annual International Social Philosophy Conference

Thirty-Fifth International Social Philosophy Conference Sponsored by the North American Society for Social Philosophy with the Department of Philosophy, Oakland University, Rochester, MI July 18-20, 2018 Proposals in all areas of social philosophy are welcome, but special attention will be devoted to: Health, Well-being, and Society Some possible paper topics …

Member Announcements

AMINTAPHIL 2018 Conference on Democracy, Populism, and Truth

AMINTAPHIL 2018 Conference on Democracy, Populism, and Truth August 16-19, 2018 Boston University, Boston, MA Due Date: June 30, 2018 We invite submissions for the 2018 biannual conference of the American Section of the International Association for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy (AMINTAPHIL) on the topic of Democracy, Populism, …


Joining the North American Society for Social Philosophy is easy!  Membership may be obtained through the Philosophy Documentation Center at https://www.pdcnet.org/nassp/North-American-Society-for-Social-Philosophy-(NASSP)

Social Philosophy Today Call for Submissions

CALL FOR PAPERS   Congratulations once again on your recent presentation at the 34th Annual International Social Philosophy Conference at Loyola University Chicago.  Papers presented at the conference are eligible for consideration for publication in Social Philosophy Today.   Although all the articles published in Social Philosophy Today are based on papers presented …


Social Media Icons Powered by Acurax Web Design Company