Skip to main content

"Why Study Philosophy?" Day, June 28th Manchester - I'm speaking

'Why study Philosophy?' day

Title: Why Study Philosophy
Date: June 28th, 2013, 10.15am-4.00pm (followed by optional campus tour)
For: Year 12 students from schools and colleges
To Book: Please click enter your details in the booking form - please note if you are teacher bringing a group of students please complete the bottom section in addition to your details.
This event is completely free to any students wanting to find out more about this fascinating subject. Through a series of interactive talks and workshops, participants will gain hands-on experience of this fascinating area, and there will be plenty of opportunities during the day to put your questions to university teachers of philosophy, students, and even a best-selling philosophy author.
Speakers will include:
So why indeed study Philosophy?
What makes our actions right or wrong? Is it OK to torture one innocent person in order to save the lives of a thousand others? Does God exist? How can we know anything about the world around us? Is my mind just my brain? Should we trust doctors more than homeopaths? What is truth? Is democracy better than dictatorship? Is it rational to fear death? What is time? If you find these kinds of questions interesting, then come along to Why Study Philosophy? and find out more! The event is aimed at year 11 students, whether they are considering studying at Manchester or elsewhere, and whether or not they are studying or have any prior knowledge of philosophy. You can come to philosophy with any academic background: you just need curiosity and an open mind. Philosophy asks – and tries to answer – the kinds of deep and puzzling questions that other subjects don’t answer. So if you’re interested in truth, beauty, right and wrong, justice, the nature of science, how language works, the meaning and value of life, the existence of God, the difference between rational and irrational beliefs … then philosophy is for you.
Developing key skills
When studying for a degree in philosophy, students don’t simply learn about philosophical questions and how philosophers have attempted to answer them. Instead, the focus is on doing philosophy for oneself: thinking through the questions, analysing and criticising existing answers, and trying to think of new answers – and indeed new questions. Students learn how to argue carefully and persuasively, without ignoring other people’s views for no good reason and without relying on the kind of rhetoric we find in the media and in politics. Throughout the day, visiting students will see how philosophy creates graduates with highly developed language and communication skills and exceptional critical and analytical skills. Most importantly, it creates people who can think carefully and creatively for themselves.
Frequently asked questions:
  • Q: Can students book on as individuals and attend the day on their own? A: Yes, you can – all we ask is that you make sure your school/college is comfortable with missing any lectures you’re due to complete on that day
  • Q: Can teachers book large groups on in one go? A: Yes, you can, but you will be limited to booking on a maximum of 15 students.
  • Q: Will there be refreshments? A: Yes, there will. We will be providing some drinks in the morning, a light lunch, and coffee and cake in the afternoon.
  • Q: I still want to know more before booking on who do I talk to? A: Please email for more information, or call 0161 275 8924.
  • Q: How do I book onto the day? A: Please complete the booking form via the link above.
This event has been organised in collaboration with the British Philosophical Association and with support from the Higher Education Academy

Source here.


Popular posts from this blog


(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen

What is Humanism?

What is Humanism? “Humanism” is a word that has had and continues to have a number of meanings. The focus here is on kind of atheistic world-view espoused by those who organize and campaign under that banner in the UK and abroad. We should acknowledge that there remain other uses of term. In one of the loosest senses of the expression, a “Humanist” is someone whose world-view gives special importance to human concerns, values and dignity. If that is what a Humanist is, then of course most of us qualify as Humanists, including many religious theists. But the fact remains that, around the world, those who organize under the label “Humanism” tend to sign up to a narrower, atheistic view. What does Humanism, understood in this narrower way, involve? The boundaries of the concept remain somewhat vague and ambiguous. However, most of those who organize under the banner of Humanism would accept the following minimal seven-point characterization of their world-view.

Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism refuted

Here's my central criticism of Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN). It's novel and was published in Analysis last year. Here's the gist. Plantinga argues that if naturalism and evolution are true, then semantic epiphenomenalism is very probably true - that's to say, the content of our beliefs does not causally impinge on our behaviour. And if semantic properties such as having such-and-such content or being true cannot causally impinge on behaviour, then they cannot be selected for by unguided evolution. Plantinga's argument requires, crucially, that there be no conceptual links between belief content and behaviour of a sort that it's actually very plausible to suppose exist (note that to suppose there are such conceptual links is not necessarily to suppose that content can be exhaustively captured in terms of behaviour or functional role, etc. in the way logical behaviourists or functionalists suppose). It turns o