CFP: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Moral Responsibility

Bill Hirstein and I will be speaking at an interdisciplinary responsibility conference next March at Utah Valley University. Our paper will summarize our views on moral and legal responsibility, and will dispute claims (notably, by Levy 2014) that consciousness is the best test for responsible behavior. The organizers, including Chris Weigel, have confirmed a stellar cast of speakers, including Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Adina Roskies, Chandra Sripada, and Nicole Vincent.

Come join the fun! The deadline for paper proposals is October 1, 2014:

 

Conference on Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Moral Responsibility
CALL FOR PAPERS

March 27, 2015
Utah Valley University
Orem, Utah

Moral responsibility has consistently been a salient issue in disciplines such as the law, psychology, psychiatry, and philosophy. The questions about social, cognitive, and psychological constraints on legal and moral responsibility are ever-evolving with advances in technology and knowledge. This conference seeks to address cutting-edge applied issues in moral and legal responsibility.

Confirmed speakers:
Keynote: Walter Sinnott-Armstrong
Invited: William Hirstein, Adina Roskies, Katrina Sifferd, Chandra Sripada, Nicole Vincent

We invite papers that fall under two broad themes.

1. Understanding moral responsibility based on changes in what we know: Examples of questions under this theme include, but are not limited to the following: What are the legal implications of fMRIs in the courtroom? Can neuroscience aid the courtroom in assessing moral responsibility? Do advances in understanding how the mind/brain works change our moral responsibility practices? How do practitioners’ underlying assumptions about moral responsibility inform their disciplinary practices?

2. Understanding moral responsibility in applied contexts: Examples of questions under this theme include, but are not limited to the following: Do personality disorders, schizophrenia, dementia, or attention-deficit disorder affect moral or legal responsibility? What are the implications for how we draw the distinction between addiction and compulsion? Between weakness of will and compulsion? Are we morally responsible for implicit biases? Are we legally and/or morally responsible for unconscious thought processes?

To submit, please send a 1000-1200 word abstract to the gmail account: MRConf2015. The deadline is October 1, 2014.
Please address questions to Chris Weigel to the gmail account: weigelch.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: