|
ArgLab
ENFA 10 – the 10th Meeting of the Portuguese Society for Analytic Philosophy (SPFA) – will take place from 15 to 17 July at the Faculty of Arts and Letters (FAL), University of Beira Interior. The event is organised in collaboration with PRAXIS – Centre for Philosophy, Politics and Culture at the University of Beira Interior, the journal Disputatio, published by the Centre of Philosophy at the University of Lisbon (CFUL), and the Portuguese Philosophical Society (SPF).
The Organising Committee includes IFILNOVA members Nuno Venturinha (President of SPFA) and Pedro Abreu (SPFA Steering Committee). IFILNOVA will also be represented by Giulia Terzian, a member of the Scientific Committee, and by eight speakers, comprising both senior members and students: Melina Bentes, Inês Gonçalves Faria, André Kfouri, Marcin Lewiński and Amalia Haro Marchal, Guido Tana, Gonçalo Teixeira, and Eleonora Volta. This is the largest delegation at the meeting, demonstrating the vitality of analytic philosophy within IFILNOVA.
You can find the event website here.
|
|
PRÓXIMOS EVENTOS | NEXT EVENTS
13 – 17 julho 2026
|
|
|
|
ArgLab Open Seminar
The Silencing of In Situ Counterspeech
Mary Kate McGowan (Wellesley College)
Monday, 13 July
11:00 – 13:00
Colégio Almada Negreiros, Room 215 & Online
There has been considerable discussion recently about the potential harmfulness of ordinary speech. Although it is well recognized that authoritative speakers can do real harm with their words, recent work explores ways that ordinary (that is, non-authoritative) speech can do the same. This paper contributes to this discussion but shifts focus away from characteristics of the speaker and onto the broader social context in which the speaker is speaking. It is here argued that, primarily because of features of the social context, ordinary speech actions can enact harmful norms and thus constitute harm. Elsewhere, I have stressed that some speech harms are difficult to undo; I have also expressed skepticism about the justice and efficacy of in situ counter-speech as the sole remedy for harmful speech. Here, I say more. In situ counter-speech is tricky. And, it’s risky. And, it’s risky in a variety of ways. In particular, I here argue that, precisely because of the role of the norms operative in the broader culture, there is a very real danger that in situ counter-speech will backfire and do the opposite of what the speaker aims to do. Finally, if a speaker is unable to do with their words what that speaker aims to do with their words, then there might be something called silencing, a distinct speech-related harm. The third and final aim of this paper then is to explore ways that various instances of in situ counter-speech might be silenced.
If you wish to attend online, please contact Pedro Abreu at pedro...@fcsh.unl.pt to receive the Zoom link.
|
|
Os eventos e as publicações são divulgados nas línguas em que decorrem ou são escritos.
The events and publications are disseminated in the languages in which they take place or are written.
|
|
|
