Skip to main content

2012 #UEA Philosophy PublicLecture Series:

PHILOSOPHY AND THE ECONOMIC CRISIS:

27 September: Prof. Nassim Taleb, author of The Black Swan – "What is the opposite of a 'fragile' system?: Comprehending the true origins of the financial crisis" [This will be AMAZING]

11 October: Panel discussion, moderated by Dr. Judith Mehta (ECO): Prof. Shaun Hargreaves-Heap (ECO), Dr. Alex Haxeltine (ENV) & Dr. Rupert Read (PHI) bringing different disciplinary perspectives to bear on "The current state of play of the Euro-crisis"

25 October: Prof. Catherine Rowett (PHI) – "Learning from Greece: thinking about austerity and monetary union in Pythagorean and Platonic politics"

8 November: Prof. Raymond Geuss, Cambridge – "The political philosophy underlying our financial and economic system"

22 November: Prof. Shaun Hargreaves-Heap vs Prof. Bob Sugden in debate over "The rationality of 'rational choice theory' and of contemporary economics"

6 December: Dr. Davide Rizza (PHI) – "What money can do for you: Insights from the philosophy of money"

All lectures held in Lecture Theatre 2 at 6.30 pm.
Admission Free - Everyone Welcome.

Philosophy has always gained strength from its engagement with the world around us, and in turn may help us to understand this world in which we live. In this series of lectures, philosophers and philosophically-minded scholars from other disciplines analyse the financial and economic crisis that has overtaken western economies in the last five years. How does it relate to our political and social philosophies? What does it mean for our ideas of Europe? Can philosophy contribute to our understanding or even point out directions we could follow to help get us out of this crisis? Will the crisis be resolved by a return to 'business as usual' - or is a whole new philosophy of economics or indeed of life on the point of emerging?

Series organised by Rupert Read and Jerry Goodenough, PHI, UEA.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reasonable manners, in the blogosphere

Dear readers of Rupert's Read; One thing I am pleased about about this blog is that when we have had debates or disagreements here, they have virtually always been good-tempered. Because the norm out there in the blogosphere is often not like that. Take 'Comment is Free', for example, on the Guardian Unlimited site: the level of debate on CIF is pretty awful, frankly, in terms of civility. It is a very unpleasant place to take part in any debate, generally, unless perhaps (as most commenters do) one hides behind the veil of anonymity (which 'ain't allowed' here). And the truth is, in case any fellow commenters reading this don't realise it, that there are many many people who get put off even reading (let alone posting to) CIF because of the volume of plain nasty comments that they risk getting, when they do. I am slightly singling out CIF here, because I believe that this is actually one of the worst places on the blogosphere in terms of this kind of ...

Medialens under the lens, over Syria and Libya: Becoming the new Dave Sparts?

I have long been an active supporter of Medialens ( http://www.medialens.org/ ). Like many others, I have supported them with money, time, tips, and I have been proud to have done so. For they have done very important groundbreaking work over the years challenging the inanities and distortions of the 'mainstream' media. They have for example written important critiques of mainstream media coverage of dangerous climate change, of Iraq Body Count, of the corporate nature of most of our media, and much more besides. They have held the corporate media to account time and again. They ought to be saluted for all of that. It is therefore with a sense of deep regret (as well as of some foreboding) that I have finally to write to address the ways in which, lately, some of the wheels seem to be coming off their wagon. An early warning sign perhaps was their long-running spat with George Monbiot, over the Rwandan genocide and the terrible atr...