Your search

Practical wisdom is the intellectual virtue relating to the ability to fix ends and discern in a concrete circumstance how to achieve those ends. It is cultivated through engagement with experience rather than book learning. However, a whole matrix of convergent technologies, such as headsets, haptic suits, AI-driven chatbots, and extended realities, such as augmented and virtual reality (AR/VR), creates new conditions for training practical wisdom. How can moral educators facilitate practical wisdom in this extended reality (XR)? Drawing on Nussbaum’s account of phronesis, we contend the job of moral education in XR is mostly about ensuring students’ critical engagement. We suggest AI assistants can contribute to this task, so long as these technologies and the people using them manifest Socratic humility ensuring that no single interaction serves as an ‘oracle of truth’, leaving critical thinking and judgment firmly in the hands of the student.

An analysis of how national narratives are inevitably forms of epistemic injustice, depriving individuals of epistemic and moral agency. Denying access to knowledge about the past is a tool of all autocratic regimes, commonly used for the purpose of retaining power and exerting dominance over individuals or groups subordinate to the ruling elite. Yet such narratives and the falsifications used to buttress them, are not the exclusive instruments of autocracies but can be found to pervade the national narratives of what we often nominally label as democracies. The denial of crimes against humanity and genocide are the most egregious examples of the harms perpetrated against victims and survivors. Miranda Fricker’s writings on epistemic injustice are employed in the analysis. Turkish and Azerbaijani genocide denial of the Armenian Genocide are used to illustrate how epistemic injustice lies at the heart of denialism. © 2024 Central European Pragmatist Forum. All rights reserved.

Abstract Despite the prominent argument for equal educational opportunity for women in Republic V, commentators frequently question Plato’s sincerity, the quality of the case made, or its significance. Undermining confidence in Plato’s advocacy of female equality are derogatory remarks about women in this and other dialogues. Since we take Plato to be sincere in the argument in Republic V, we reconcile his conclusions there about the equal educational opportunity for women with these seemingly problematic remarks by suggesting that the remarks reflect the interlocutors involved in the dialogue and conventional Athenian prejudices of that time rather than ideas that Plato held to be true. We take seriously the observation of Levin 1996, 14, “in none of those passages in which Plato makes derogatory remarks about women does he use phusis to explain why they behave in the ways of which he is critical.” Hence Plato never suggested that women were by nature limited to the position they occupied socially and politically in 5th or 4th century Athens; he understood the difference between the way they were by convention and the way that they could be, in accordance with their nature, were they to develop their natural capacities through education. We examine carefully Plato’s argument for the equal nature of women in Republic V to defend its viability. The provocation is our not finding in the extensive secondary literature a really detailed treatment of the actual argument and appreciation that it is intended as a sound philosophical argument. We then turn to the devolution schemes in Timaeus 41e–44d and 86b–92c, which again touch on the nature of women and appear to counter the position we attribute to Plato, to show that they are really supportive of our account. Both the Republic and Timaeus limit the natural differences between males and females to body-type. Therefore, even relative physical weakness of women’s bodies does not much problematize for Plato that their natural abilities are equal to those of men, where nature in these contexts means suitability to perform certain functions.

The sheep case in Analects 13.18 has generated a heated debate in contemporary Chinese philosophy for more than a decade. One side in this debate criticizes Confucius’ view in the sheep case and the other side defends Confucius’ position. Neither side’s reading of 13.18 is satisfactory. I argue that something important in the text has been overlooked and this omission may explain why neither side gives a satisfying reading. I offer in this essay a new reading of the sheep case which pays attention to what the existent interpretations have overlooked in the text. This new focus will give us a new perspective to reframe the issue in question and to defend the Confucian position in a more convincing way. On the new interpretation, Confucius’ position in the sheep case suggests a sensible and reasonable way for the state to balance some important social interests which the state seeks to protect.

Abstract The Armenian Memory Project (AMP) is a collaborative effort designed to harness the energy and resources of the University of Connecticut and the New England Armenian community for the goal of fostering greater understanding of the region’s Armenian cultural heritage and the impact human rights crimes had on the Armenian community. In 2019, students and faculty from the university worked with Armenian American institutions and individuals on an initial component of the AMP, employing digital media technology to tell the story of one immigrant Armenian family, the Dildilians. A unique course was created to produce a documentary film centring around this family’s experiences in Ottoman Turkey before, during, and after the Armenian Genocide. Designed and taught by a documentary filmmaker with support from a family archivist/historian, the course brought students together in a collaborative learning experience. By immersing themselves in the family’s extensive photograph archive, these students came to understand the important role that the past continues to play in the lives of present-day Armenians. Furthermore, by taking on the responsibility as storytellers of the Dildilian narrative, students developed a deeper identification with this distant history and, in a wider sense, an appreciation for the ethical value of memory in bearing witness to the past. This collaborative and participatory framework for teaching using archival collections can serve as a model for creating a transformative learning experience in the study of human rights, war, and genocide.

Since the last quarter of the twentieth century there has been growing interest in women’s contributions to the histories of science, philosophy, and literature dating back to the very beginnings of these disciplines. This volume offers a contemporary, multinational, multidisciplinary exploration of some of these "hidden figures". © 2023, The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

This book explores contributions by some of the most influential women in the history of philosophy, science, and literature

The propaganda efforts of the authoritarian Aliyev regime in Baku and the general Western ignorance of the history of the South Caucasus have contributed to the lack of meaningful response to the genocidal aggression that Azerbaijan has inflicted on the indigenous Armenians of Artsakh, known to many as Nagorno-Karabakh. The humanitarian crisis created by the Azeri blockade of the Lachin Corridor is only the most recent step in a process of cleansing the region of its Armenian population, a process that began in the early years of the twentieth century. The Ottoman Turkish genocide of Armenians in 1915–1923 is not a distinct event of the past but a process whose ideology is central to the Azeri-Turkish genocidal violence perpetrated against Armenians in the present. An integral component of the processes of genocide is cultural heritage destruction as noted by Raphael Lemkin. The erasure of most signs of the indigenous Armenian presence on its historic homeland was particularly pronounced in the decades following the Armenian Genocide and continues today. Cultural erasure went hand in hand with Turkish state genocide denial and the rewriting and mythologizing of its national narrative. Azerbaijan has been following a similar playbook since the collapse of the Soviet Union. These genocidal processes of denial, heritage destruction, and the rewriting of history are what I describe as “genocide by other means.”