John Lachs’s Practical Philosophy
John Lachs’s Practical Philosophy
Chris Skowroński moderated an Online Seminar, Feb 16, on the philosophy of G. Santayana. Happy to say that most eminent experts on the topic participated in the webinar. A 2-hour-discussion embraced many topics including the importance of Santayana’s proposal to see philosophy as a way of the good life. Btw, it’s great to see that the contemporary technology makes it possible for philosophers to discuss things in such a way, if not in a better or a more effective way, that earlier needed a conference in a definite geographical location. The present webinar is a part of Berlin Forum Seminars Online project. We thank the Santayana Society and its President, dr. Richard Rubin, for co-operation.
New book co-edited by Chris Skowroński, published by Routledge. See more HERE
Chris Skowroński (Opole University/Berlin Practical Philosophy International Forum) talks to Sami Pihlström (Faculty of Theology, University of Helsinki) on the occasion of the Berlin Forum’s international conference they both co-organize at the Finnland Institut in Berlin (July 10-13, 2017). The general title of the conference is “Pragmatist Kant” and its main idea is to discuss various aspects of the pragmatist philosophy and the Kantian philosophy as seen from the viewpoint of their mutual interrelationships. Professor Sami Pihlström is talking about his own contribution to the project. He discusses his ideas that are present in his paper/speech, entitled “Jamesian Pragmatism, Rortyan Ironism, and Kantian Antitheodicy.” He briefly explains some practical aspects of his theoretical investigations on religion, ethics, evil, suffering, and others. For example, one can detect a practical dimension of a philosophical discussion on suffering while looking for its possible justification. More generally, some people can ask: is there any deeper sense in suffering? Various philosophies provide us with different answers to this question. Both pragmatism and Kantianism do not see any cosmic, divine, and universal justification of evil and suffering.
Sami Pihlström is a professor of philosophy of religion; his recent book, co-authored with Sari Kivistö, is entitled Kantian Antitheodicy: Philosophical and Literary Varieties. In his numerous books and papers he investigates the problems of metaphysics and religion in the philosophical tradition of American pragmatism, and its relationships with the philosophy of I. Kant and the Kantian tradition in general.
The problem of ‘justice’ and ‘injustice’ has always been widely and ardently discussed in the public sphere. A professionalized type of discussions, such as amongst philosophers, lawyers, experts on political issues, etc. seems very technical, complicated and frequently misunderstood for the members of the public. One of the reasons is that this notion (‘justice’) is a very general idea having very different meanings and, additionally, it evokes high emotions in those who have experienced themselves some kind of injustice. For example, for some, ‘justice’ means ‘revenge’ (as it was according to the Hammurabi Law and still is in many cultures and in some kinds of individual approaches), which for others means hardly anything more than ‘a barbarian type of practicing injustice.’