Fischer Awarded Hourani Prize

An announcement from David Hershenov:

The University of Buffalo Philosophy Department is proud to announce that John Martin Fischer has been chosen to deliver the Fall 2008 Hourani Lectures. His topic will be Free Will and Moral Responsibility. The Hourani Lectures are given every two years by philosophers working in either ethics or Islamic philosophy. The endowment generously left to the University at Buffalo Philosophy Department by the late George Hourani provides for an award of $12,000 to the speaker. Previous Hourani lecturers have been Jeff McMahan, Anthony Appiah, Martha Nussbaum, Onora O'Neill, and Shelly Kagan.

Dates of the talks: 9/24, 9/26, 10/1, 10/3, 10/6, and 10/10.

Other details are available at the University at Buffalo Philosophy Department webpage.

Congratulations John!

Comments

[Chris F.]

congrats John. Well deserved!

[Manuel]

yay John! Yay George Hourani!

[Dan]

That's awesome, John! Garden road trip to Buffalo!?
(probably not).

[V. Alan White]

Now THAT'S an honorarium!!! Heartiest congratulations!!!

[James Gibson]

That's great news. Congratulations. Please update us on what the lectures will cover (more precisely than FW/MR).

[John Fischer]

Thanks, all, for your very kind words. Here is something about the lectures, which I'll need to fill in over time:

> The lectures are called, "Deep Control". Some philosophers--such as Galen Strawson and others--hold that we need something like "Total Control" to be properly deemed morally responsible. I argue that this is an unreasonably demanding requirement. Others argue that all we need is some sort of Conditional Freedom (Gary Watson) or Judgment-Sensitivity (Scanlon). I argue that this does not require enough. What is needed for moral responsibility is a kind of control that is "in between"--what I call "Deep Control". Deep Control includes a tracing component, but it does not penetrate all the way
back along the causal chain leading to action.

[Saul Smilansky]

Congratulations John (and Manuel, a bit earlier). Aren't you two happy that you aren't hard determinists, as then (setting aside the questions of whether you would be mistaken, and/or still receive the awards) - you would have to believe that you don't deserve the honor and money?! Now that's a revisionist argument for compatibilism...

[Rico Vitz]

Congratulations, John! That's terrific!

[Randy Clarke]

Congratulations. Well deserved, if anyting is.

[Neil]

Congratulations John. Best of all (from my selfish point of view) the lectures sound like a substantial contribution to a really important topic. Hope you'll make them available to us.

[Mark Smeltzer]

Congrats John. Despite what the skeptics may tell you, you definitely deserve this honor. Keep up the good work!

p.s. Any chance of getting a prepublication copy of that lecture posted here after the talks are concluded?

[Tamler Sommers]

I think what everyone here means to say is: "assuming that you're causa sui, John, heartiest congratulations, you deserve it!"

(Many of you don't know that you mean this, but trust me, you do.)

Of course, there are all sorts of reasons to offer congratulations and take pride in accomplishments which don't involve attributing praiseworthiness to anyone-- but that's another post. In any case, congratulations!

[Eddy Nahmias]

Congratulations John on having used your rational control capacities and strength of will so well such that you are *genuinely praiseworthy* for this accomplishment.

[Joe Campbell]

I just noticed this. Sorry for not saying anything earlier! Congratulations, John!