[PEIRCE-L] Decolonizing “Natural Logic” / Logical Skills / LUWebinar Dec 15, 4 pm CET

2021-12-14 Thread jean-yves beziau
This coming Wednesday, Dec 15,  in the Logica Universalis Webinar, we will
have the presentation of the book

Logical Skills
edited by Julie Brumberg-Chaumont & Claude Rosental
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-58446-7
published in the book series Studies in Universal Logic
https://www.springer.com/series/7391

and a talk based on one of the chapters of this book

Decolonizing “Natural Logic”
by  Scott L. Prat
“Natural logic” was proposed by Lewis Henry Morgan (1818–1881) as the
engine of cultural evolution, concluding that the “course and manner” of
cultural development “was predetermined, as well as restricted within
narrow limits of divergence, by the natural logic of the human mind.” This
essay argues that Morgan’s conception of natural logic aids the project of
settler colonialism. Rather than being a false account of human agency,
however, it is a conception of natural logic that is produced through the
systematic narrowing of possibilities for agency, human, and otherwise.
This narrowed logic is thus only a part of a differently conceived logic of
agency that is also general (and so serves as the framework for all action)
and normative (albeit with a set of norms different from those identified
by Morgan). The discussion proceeds in four sections: first, a presentation
of Morgan’s conception of natural logic and its origins; second, an
analysis of four colonizing implications of Morgan’s view; third, examples
of further developments of natural logic in the twentieth and twenty-first
centuries in the work structuralist and post-structuralist theorists; and,
last, a brief introduction of a decolonial logic that provides a broader
alternative conception of the structure of agency, human, and otherwise,
and that avoids the oppressive effects of the reductionism of the natural
logic received from Morgan and his successors.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-58446-7_2

Chair: Raffaela Giovganoli
https://philpeople.org/profiles/raffaela-giovagnoli

To attend this LUW session register here:
https://www.springer.com/journal/11787/updates/18988758

Jean-Yves Beziau
President of LUA - Logica Universalis Association
http://www.logica-universalis.org/LUAD
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON 
PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . 
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu 
with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the 
body.  More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.


[PEIRCE-L] LOGIC AND THE CONCEPT OF GOD The Logic and Religion Webinar, December 16

2021-12-14 Thread FRANCISCO MARIANO
Dear Colleague,



You are invited to participate in the next session of the Logic and
Religion Webinar Series which will be held on December 16, 2021 at 4pm CET
with the topic:



LOGIC AND THE CONCEPT OF GOD

Speaker: Graham Oppy (Monash University, Australia)

Chair: Ricardo Silvestre (University of Campina Grande, Brazil)



Please register in advance!

https://www.logicandreligion.com/webinars



Abstract: In this webinar I discuss the following topics: (a) the concept
of a god; (b) the concept of God; (c) conceptions of God; (d) the Simple
Being; (e) the Greatest Being; and (f) the Perfect Being. I argue that,
perhaps, we should think of the word 'god' as a family resemblance term; I
suggest that, for some purposes, it is useful to stipulate that gods are
venerable beings that have and exercise power over all else. I argue—in
line with my book Describing Gods: An Investigation of Divine Attributes
(pp. 1-22)—that, necessarily, something is God if and only if it is the one
and only god. I insist that this nominal definition does all of the work
that we need nominal definitions to do. I suggest that we might extract
real definitions of God from theistic theories about God. I then go on to
discuss three different real definitions that some theists have given of
God: 'the Simple Being', 'the Greatest Being', and 'The Perfect Being'. My
discussion of the Greatest Being follows Jeff Speaks' book The Greatest
Possible Being. My discussion of the Perfect Being criticises the line that
Rasmussen takes in his review of Speaks' book. In addressing these topics,
I hope to also address what might be called "the logic of the concept of
God".

With best wishes,



Francisco de Assis Mariano

The University of Missouri-Columbia
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON 
PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . 
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu 
with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the 
body.  More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.