4:00-5:30 p.m.
141 Park Hall
The Dynamic Ontology of Social Groups
The study of social groups ontology confronts a fundamental challenge: balancing the need for stability with the inherent dynamism of social life. With their static assumptions and constraints, traditional ontologies struggle to preserve the causal power of social groups while accommodating the fluidity that characterizes them. This paper argues that the prevailing ontological models, which emphasize synchronic and asymmetric dependencies within a part-whole relationship, inevitably lead to a dilemma: they either fail to maintain the necessary stability for causal efficacy or negate the dynamicity intrinsic to social groups. Drawing from this tension, the paper advocates for a shift in perspective. It suggests that to capture the change and complexity inherent in social groups authentically, we must move beyond the existing constraints of our ontologies that enforce a static picture. Instead, recognizing social groups as complex and dynamic entities allows us to reconcile the need for stability with the reality of change. This reconceptualization points towards a dynamic ontology as not just a theoretical preference but a necessity for accurately reflecting the nature of social groups.
4:00-5:30 p.m.
141 Park Hall
Why Talking to Our Children About Injustice Cannot Wait
In this talk, I appeal to the values of fairness and solidarity to argue that white parents ought not put off conversations about racial injustice. First, I note that Black parents are obligated to talk to their children about racial injustice early in order to protect them from racial injustice. I argue that white parents’ reason not to wait is triggered by two kinds of unfairness: first, that conversations about racial injustice are painful for all children but especially painful for children learning that the are the targets of the injustice; and second, that white parents have the option of waiting while Black parents do not. Appealing to fairness alone, however, plausibly leads to objectionable leveling down. Accordingly, I appeal to the value of fairness via the value of solidarity. Solidarity is widely taken to involve a kind of felt kinship with those one stands in solidarity with, and a concomitant desire to share their fate. However, I argue that difference as well as similarity should provide reasons to engage in acts of solidarity: namely, recognition of the ways in which the same system unfairly benefits oneself while harming others. It is this position that white parents find ourselves in.
4:00-5:30 p.m.
141 Park Hall
A Deliberative Approach to The Issue of Abortion in America
In the Fall of 2018, a cross-state PA Deliberative Forum was held on the Issue of abortion in America, with a focus on clinic regulations. Deliberative Forums differ from standard opinion polls and focus groups. They are designed to give participants the opportunity to learn about an issue and engage in structured, moderated conversations. Discussion tables formulate questions for an expert panel and fill out an exit survey containing questions about the topic and the process itself. Replies to questions are both quantitative and qualitative. The latter allows for participants to give reasons for their opinions. The results of the forum, which represented the considered judgment of the participants, were presented to the PA State Women’s Health Caucus. A clear majority sided with Roe and its guard rails. In the post-Dobbs era, it is interesting to note that these results mirror the results of state referenda on the issue.