__________________________________________________

Call for Papers

Theme: Global Ethics of Compromise
Type: International Conference
Institution: School of Advanced Studies in Social Sciences (EHESS)
   Paris Sciences et Lettres (PSL), University of Paris
Location: Paris (France)
Date: 7.–8.3.2019
Deadline: 15.11.2018

__________________________________________________


The present conference wishes to expand the understanding of the
controversial concept of compromise in its transnational dimension,
in order to test the relevance of a cultural and global approach to
compromise. It will be held in EHESS (École des Hautes Études en
Sciences Sociales), on March 7-8, 2019.

The main questions addressed will be: What are the normative
assumptions and solutions proposed to develop morally right or wrong
compromise typologies? Can we develop a universal ethics of
compromise or does compromise vary depending on the socio-cultural
history of a country? To what extent is culture relevant in shaping
types and norms of compromise?

This symposium will examine theoretical issues and practices
associated with compromise, by adopting a global perspective. To do
so, it will seek to bring together the contributions of European,
American and Asian researchers. 

The official language of communication is English. Each communication
will last 20 minutes. Lunch will be taken charge of, but participants
are expected to ask their home institutions for the reimbursement of
accommodation and transport costs.

Deadline for Abstracts: November 15, 2018

Abstracts must be sent to globalethicsofcomprom...@gmail.com and must
include: a title, a summary of 500 words, an indication of the area
in which the proposal fits.

Deadline for full papers: January 30, 2019.


Abstracts may be developed around the following three areas:

1. Compromise standards

Compromise is a polemical conceptual object, sometimes praised,
sometimes disputed. Avishai Margalit (2010) explains these
contradictory attitudes by a confusion between a "rotten" compromise,
and a "necessary" compromise to achieve social peace. Similarly,
Richard Bellamy (1998) insists on the distinction between a weak
compromise, or "shallow compromise", and a "deep" compromise. A
number of political theorists and philosophers have also paid
attention to the attractive normative features of this
decision-making process (Hampshire, 2001; Arnsperger, Picavet, 2004).

In the face of a serious moral disagreement or conflictual situation,
is there such thing as a principled compromise (May, 2005) to settle
moral and political dilemma? Is compromise a virtue, or is it a
pragmatic need, the only possible solution to exit violence?

Under what circumstances and to what degree is it justifiable to
resort to compromise – in other words, are there degrees of
compromise, from accommodation to sacrifice of fundamental principles?

Contributions in Area 1 can include, but are not limited to, the
following topics:

- compromise definition and epistemology
- compromise typology and its relationship with other forms of
  negotiations
- compromise legitimacy as a mean to exit violence. 


2. Cultures of Compromise: Asian & Multicultural approaches

This part will combine an empirical with a theoretical analysis to
understand if it is possible for philosophers to distinguish a
prevalent attitude towards compromise. Can we consider compromise as
a cultural process and test the relevance of cultural uniqueness in
decision-making?

Contributions in Area 2 would necessarily have to fit in one of the
following topics:

- The first topic will concern the various spaces of compromise
production, either in the works of Japanese and Taiwanese
philosophers, or through socio-economic phenomena specific to Japan
and Taiwan, in order to better grasp the relevance of a reciprocal
causality between the practice of compromise and a given culture.

- The second panel will question the relationship between
multiculturalism and compromise: a liberal-pluralist perspective
tends to value compromise for its ability to create a more inclusive,
multicultural common culture, seen as an accommodating way to find
common grounds on opposing opinions. But are minorities or States
willing to compromise in negotiations, when arrangements are not
necessarily respected or enforced?


3. Global Governance and Compromise

In this third area, contributors would propose frameworks of thought
in order to take into account both a "local" aspect of compromise
alongside compromise, defined in terms of "global ethics and
justice" (Widdows 2012). While contemporary political philosophers
have focused on justice within the State, new questions arise about
responsibilities and principles to guide international action (Pogge,
2002).

Can compromise be a fair way to deal with global governance on issues
such as humanitarian intervention, immigration or environment?

Topics can include, but are not limited to, analysis of compromise
through global environmental/ economic justice, military
intervention, and proposals of new theoretical models to think an
ethics of compromise at an international and global level.


The objectives of the symposium are to constitute an international
network of researchers working on the concept of compromise from a
historical, philosophical, sociological point of view; to highlight
the contributions of Asian researchers on this issue; to explore a
global and transnational dimension of compromise.


Scientific committee:
Professor Luc Foisneau (EHESS, CESPRA, France)
Professor Emmanuel Picavet (Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, Nosophi,
France)
Professor Christian Thuderoz (Insa, Lyon University, France)
Lecturer Michel Dalissier (University of Kanazawa, Japan)

Organizer:
Mrs Laure Assayag-Gillot (PhD student, EHESS, CESPRA)


Contact:

Laure Assayag-Gillot
École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales
Paris, France
Email: globalethicsofcomprom...@gmail.com
Web: https://globalethicsofcompromise.wordpress.com




__________________________________________________


InterPhil List Administration:
https://interphil.polylog.org

InterPhil List Archive:
https://www.mail-archive.com/interphil@list.polylog.org/

__________________________________________________

 

Reply via email to