In this first roundtable in the series "Dialogues between Eastern Philosophy and Western Traditions," participants will discuss the topic of "The Good Life with Responsibility and Freedom." This event is sponsored by the History of Philosophy Forum and co-sponsored by the  Institute for Ethics and the Common Good, the Liu Institute for Asia and Asian Studies, and the Kellogg Institute for International Studies. Speakers:Michael Puett, the Walter C. Klein Professor of Chinese History and Anthropology, Harvard UniversityMeghan Sullivan, the Wilsey Family College Professor of Philosophy; Director of the Institute for Ethics and the Common Good, University of Notre DameThe speakers in the first roundtable, Michael Puett and Meghan Sullivan, are leading scholars of Eastern and Western ethical traditions, respectively. Both professors have crafted phenomenally successful undergraduate courses. Prof. Puett's "Classical Chinese Ethical and Political Theory" is Harvard's third most popular undergraduate course, inviting students to reevaluate contemporary assumptions about ethics in light of classical Chinese thought. Prof. Sullivan's "God and the Good Life" at Notre Dame introduces philosophy to students as a "way of life," drawing upon such figures as Plato, Aristotle , and Descartes to present different ways of engaging with questions of ultimate meaning. Organizer: Liang Cai, Associate Professor of History, University of Notre Dame Series Description: This series of roundtables is designed to foster meaningful exchanges between Eastern and Western philosophers on the themes of responsibility, rights, and virtue. These dialogues aim to inspire thoughtful solutions to contemporary social and international challenges. In the early 20th century, Chinese intellectuals and politicians, confronted with Western imperialism and colonialism, critiqued their own traditions, particularly Confucianism, for a perceived lack of emphasis on freedom and rights. They argued that the focus on responsibility and virtue stifled humanity, individual freedom, and creativity, leading to slower economic and technological development. In 1992, the American political scientist Francis Fukuyama argued that the rise of Western liberal democracy signified the "end of history" and the final form of human government. However, in the 21st century, we have seen that societies prioritizing freedom and individual rights can become polarized and divided, both internally and internationally. Echoing the 2024-25 Notre Dame Forum Theme, "What Do We Owe Each Other," this roundtable series aims to create a platform for Eastern and Western philosophers to discuss different philosophical traditions’ perspectives on responsibility, rights, and virtue. Through these dialogues, we hope to bridge social divides and foster healing amidst suffering, division, and injustice.Originally published at historyofphilosophy.nd.edu.

Victims sometimes forgive the perpetrators of past wrongdoings, either to repair a relationship or simply to move on. After forgiving, however, victims typically still remember what happened. Yet, the memory of the wrongdoing does not elicit the same affective and reactive attitudes it once did. How does forgiveness interact with memory to bring about this emotional change? In this talk, Felipe De Brigard, associate professor of psychology and neuroscience and associate of the Duke Initiative for Science Society at Duke University, will offer conceptual and empirical reasons to think of forgiveness as mollifying the affective contents of retrieved memories of past wrongdoings via a process of emotional reappraisal. He will also show how this research, which is being conducted with victims of political violence in Colombia, can have implications for peace and reconciliation strategies in post-conflict societies. Laura Miller-Graff, professor of psychology and peace studies, will moderate this discussion. Originally published at kroc.nd.edu.

Scholars have been thinking about the Roman empire for a long time, offering a variety of theories and explanations for Roman imperialism. Too often, however, they have taken the writings of the ancient historians simply at face value. The object of this conference is to examine the attitudes toward Roman imperialism on the part of Greek historians writing under the Roman empire, and to compare these views and their evolution over time with those found in Latin historical writing. The conference offers an innovative approach by integrating historiography with the study of Roman imperialism. Organizers: Christopher Baron (University of Notre Dame)Anders Holm Rasmussen (University of Copenhagen) List of speakers: Sulochana Asirvatham (Montclair State University)Christopher Burden-Strevens (University of Kent)Jessica Clark (Florida State University)Cynthia Damon (University of Pennsylvania)Jon Davies (University of Copenhagen)Jennifer Gerrish (College of Charleston)Caitlin Gillespie (Brandeis University)Kyle Khellaf (UC Riverside)Mads Ortving Lindholmer (Danish Institute in Rome)Regina Loehr (Washington University in St. Louis)Jesper Majbom Madsen (University of Southern Denmark)Kit Morrell (University of Queensland)Josiah Osgood (Georgetown University)Antonio Pistellato (Università Ca’Foscari Venezia)Anders Holm Rasmussen (University of Copenhagen)Andrew Scott (Villanova University)Kathryn Welch (University of Sydney)Liv Mariah Yarrow (Brooklyn College) Sponsors: Institute for Scholarship in the Liberal Arts, Notre Dame Independent Research Fund Denmark (DFF) Department of Classics, Notre Dame Department of History, Notre Dame Originally published at classics.nd.edu.

Mariela Noles CotitoProfessor of Discrimination and Public PolicyUniversidad del Pacífico (Lima, Peru) The formulation of legislation aimed at promoting and protecting the rights of racial and ethnic minorities in Andean countries is a very recent phenomenon. Indeed, it is not until the end of the 1980s that said countries embarked on a consistent effort to move away from legal colorblindness and the denial of racial discrimination to begin the process of affirming the citizenship of their citizens of African descent in a way that considers, protects, and respects their ethno-racial identity. This lecture will reconstruct some of the elements that allowed for this transition in Latin America at large, and what is the current state of black citizenship in Andean countries.Mariela Noles Cotito is a professor of discrimination and public policy at the Universidad del Pacífico in Lima, Peru. Her research portfolio spans gender equality, social inclusion policies within the Peruvian context, and the intricate intersections of various systems of oppression. She holds a law degree from the Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru, an LLM from the University of Pennsylvania, and dual MA degrees in Latin American studies and in political science from the University of South Florida.   More information here  

The Office of Institutional Transformation, in partnership with the Initiative on Race and Resilience, invites students, faculty, and staff to gather weekly for support and fellowship. Wellsprings: A Time for Connection and Care provides a safe space for members of the campus community to discuss fears and concerns related to social divisiveness. Some sessions may feature presentations or information from campus resources. To suggest a topic, please contact Eve Kelly at ekelly11@nd.edu. Originally published at diversity.nd.edu.

As part of the Keough-Naughton Institute's fall 2024 speaker series, Professor Peter Shirlow will deliver a lecture titled “The Failings of Irish Republicans and the National Question in Ireland.” Lecture Abstract This lecture will explore how, despite post-Brexit Referendum predictions of a united Ireland by as early as 2021, there has been, at best, limited growth in recorded support for ending partition between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Growth of Northern Ireland’s Catholic population has been less dramatic than predicted and the region now has the fastest growing economy in the UK. Peter Shirlow asserts that in this context, pro-united Ireland campaigns and republican activism, especially via civic fora and social media, have failed to significantly close the gap between Irish unity and pro-union proponents. In this lecture, Shirlow will consider how Irish Republican arguments for unity contain internal contractions: underscoring the economic successes of the South while also indicating its structural deficiencies, or pointing to socio-economic deficiencies of Northern Ireland even while Republicans are co-authors of its new found economic growth. Ultimately, Shirlow argues, the shortcomings of Irish republicanism lie in its inability to read and understand the new sociology of Northern Ireland– particularly temporal and social shifts that potentially render the inevitability thesis of Irish unification inconsistent, if not ineffective, in the short to medium term. Speaker Biography Professor Peter Shirlow (FaCSS) is the director at the University of Liverpool’s Institute of Irish Studies. He was formerly the deputy director of the Institute for Conflict Transformation and Social Justice, QUB. He is the independent chair of the Executive Office's Employers' Guidance on Recruiting People with Conflict-Related Convictions Working Group and a board member of the mental health charity Threshold. He is a visiting research professor at the Senator George J. Mitchell Institute for Global Peace, Security and Justice. He sits on the editorial boards of Irish Political Studies and International Planning Studies. Professor Shirlow has undertaken conflict transformation work in Northern Ireland and has used that knowledge in exchanges with governments, former combatants and NGOs in the former Yugoslavia, Moldova, Bahrain and Iraq. He has also presented talks to members of the US Senate and House of Representatives and is a regular media contributor. Originally published at irishstudies.nd.edu.