- Study at Deakin
- Campus life
- Industry and community
- About Deakin
During 2012, CCG will present a series of special public seminars on a range of topics. These special seminars will compliment our regular Lunchtime Seminar Series. For more information about CCG events and to express your interest in attending or presenting, contact us.
|March||Prof. Philomena Essed||Racism in Europe: Humiliation and Homgenisation|
|May||Dr David Pritchard||Sport, Democracy and War in Classical Athens|
|June||Prof. Tariq Modood|
|August||Prof. Roland Axtmann||Democracy without demos, or: Whatever happened to 'We, the People'?|
|August||Mr Saleem Aljebori||The European Union’s Foreign Policy Towards Iraq|
|September||Mr Edwin Ng||Staging a Hospitable Encounter Between Buddhism and Derridean Deconstruction|
|September||Dr Jonathan Lyons|
|October||Dr Anita Harris||At Home or Out of Place? National Belongings and the Next Generation|
Prof. Daniel D. Hutto
The cognitive revolution deposed behaviourist thinking (in both philosophy and psychology) and licensed a return to active theorizing about the properties of mental states and their place in nature. Promoting representational and computational theories of mind, many researchers have assumed that the contentful properties of mental states get manipulated in computational processes, enabling intelligent activity. But to date no tenable naturalised theory of content has emerged. Moreover, newly articulated non-representationalist approaches in the philosophy of mind and cognitive science - enactive, embodied approaches - are growing in popularity. Against this backdrop, I give reasons for thinking that radically embodied/enactive accounts of cognition are both conceptually coherent and preferable for understanding basic minds than their rivals, which buy into the traditional assumptions of classical cognitive science. Using what I call 'The Hard Problem of Content' as a foil I argue for a fundamental shift in how we conceive of the nature of basic minds.
Daniel D. Hutto - Professional Background
Daniel D. Hutto is Professor of Philosophical Psychology and Research Leader for Philosophy at the University of Hertfordshire, UK. He is a chief co-investigator for the Australian Research Council ‘Embodied Virtues and Expertise’ project (2010-2013) and collaborator in the Marie Curie Action ‘Towards an Embodied Science of Intersubjectivity’ initial training network (2011-2015) and the 'Agency, Normativity and Identity' project (2012-2015) funded by the Spanish Ministry of Innovation and Research. His publications include The Presence of Mind (John Benjamins, 1999), Beyond Physicalism (John Benjamins, 2000), Wittgenstein and the End of Philosophy (Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), Folk Psychological Narratives (MIT Bradford Books, 2008) and (with Erik Myin) Radicalizing Enactivism: Basic Minds without Content (MIT Press, 2013). He is co-editor of Folk-Psychology Re-Assessed (Springer, 2007) and editor of Narrative and Understanding Persons (CUP, 2007) and Narrative and Folk Psychology (Imprint Academic, 2009). “Radical Enactivism,” a special yearbook issue of Consciousness and Emotion focussing on his work on intentionality, phenomenology and narrative, was published in 2006.
This event has been organised in partnership with the School of Humanities and Social Sciences.
How are feelings and practices of national belonging or exclusion made real in the everyday spaces of young people’s lives? Drawing on research with young people living in Australia's most multicultural neighbourhoods, this paper explores how those who actively claim a right to multicultural citizenship are re-minoritised through demands that they be in civic space in the 'right' ways. It suggests that such spatial policing positions those who feel increasingly comfortable with hybrid identifications as instead outside the nation, but considers how young people’s everyday politics of home-making in urban multiculture challenge these efforts to exclude them from national belonging.
Anita Harris is an Australian Research Council Future Fellow in the School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash University. Her programme of research includes an international study of young people and social inclusion in multicultural cities, as well as an ARC Discovery Project on civic life and belonging amongst young Australian Muslims. Her research interests are centred on youth identities and cultures; citizenship, participation and multiculturalism, and girls’ studies. Her books include Young People and Everyday Multiculturalism (Routledge, in press); Next Wave Cultures: Feminism, Subcultures, Activism (edited, Routledge, 2008); Young Femininity: Girlhood, Power and Social Change (with Sinikka Aapola and Marnina Gonick, Palgrave, 2005); Future Girl: Young Women in the Twenty First Century, (Routledge, 2004); and All About the Girl: Culture, Power and Identity (edited, Routledge, 2004).
Dr Jonathan Lyons is the author of The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization (Bloomsbury Press) and Islam Through Western Eyes: From the Crusades to the War on Terrorism (Columbia University Press). Each of these books unpicks Western prejudices about Islam and demonstrates who benefits from being negative about Islam. These understandings are essential to an informed approach to policies of religious diversity and the treatment of Muslims.
Jonathan says, ‘I have spent much of my professional and personal life exploring the shifting boundaries between East and West, first on both sides of the Cold War divide and, for the past two decades, on the cusp between the Islamic and Western worlds. Over time, I have come to see the relationships between these seemingly polar fields as a problem not of geography or politics (or even geo-politics) but of thought, ideas, and knowledge.
I served as a foreign correspondent for the Reuters news agency, with posts in Moscow, during the collapse of the Soviet Union; in Turkey, during the rise of the first elected Islamist government; and in Tehran during the contentious presidency of Mohammad Khatami. I also worked as a senior editor in Reuters Washington bureau, before taking up my last foreign assignment, in Jakarta in 2006, covering radical Islamic movements across Southeast Asia.’
Following a presentation, Dr Lyons will be available for questions and discussions of trends, developments and policy issues in this area.
Dr Lyons is an internationally respected commentator on Islam and the West and currently a Visiting Scholar at Monash University.
This paper suggests that a key challenge confronting comparative scholarship on Western thought and Asian wisdom traditions involves the question of hospitality, or more precisely what might be called critical hospitality. The question of critical hospitality is summoned by the sacred truth claim, posited by Buddhism for example, of an unmediated or unconditioned awareness. From a broadly social constructivist perspective committed to challenging absolutising truth claims, this proposition about unmediated awareness represents one such totalising claim which has to be refused, or at least be subject to scrutiny. But does this commitment necessarily require one to reject the possibility of cultivating an awareness of experience that would be unmediated by language or cultural conditioning? Given that the received distinction in modern Western thought between the sacred and secular or religion and philosophy does not exist as such in Buddhism, if we reject wholesale the claim about unmediated awareness do we risk betraying the ethico-political commitment to honouringdifference, and perhaps even reenact symbolic violence? To what extent are we subordinating Asian traditions under the will to knowledge-power of a scholarly paradigm whose own truth claims are conditioned by a Eurocentric cultural and intellectual history? If so, are we really engaging in dialogue? Are we performing an exchange or a takeover? This question becomes crucial: as we seek to maintain fidelity towards the principles of our scholarly vocation how might our interrogations also be hospitable towards sacred claims, which even if incommensurable with our own discourses, nevertheless find reality as the horizon of hope for others in non-Western lifeworlds, many of whom have been subjected to centuries of colonial oppression and the ideological subversion of their traditions by Westerners who have claimed to know better? I will explore a way forward towards greater critical hospitality by reading Buddhist understandings (specifically the bodhisattva ideal of the Mahayana tradition) alongside a Derridean deconstructive ethic of responsibility, both of which I would describe as a pledge of unconditional unconditionality unconditionally.
Edwin Ng is completing a PhD in the School of Communication and Creative Arts at Deakin University. His currentresearch explores the relationship between Buddhist understandings and poststructuralist-inspired critical theory so as to interrogate ethico-political debates about religion, spirituality, and the role of faith in academia and micropolitics more generally. He is ambivalent about being a postcolonial 'Western Buddhist' convert, and is curious to explore hospitable encounters between ancient and contemporary wisdom, sacred and scholarly pursuits - in all senses of the word, a profession of faith.
This thesis examines, within the broad area of EU foreign policy formulation and implementation, the nature of interactions between EU institutions, and the coordination between these institutions and EU member states. It seeks to understand how these interactions affect EU foreign policy formulation and implementation. In order to carry out such aims, this thesis uses the Iraq crisis of 2001-2009 as a case study.
The researcher uses the Iraqi crisis of 2001-2009 case study in order to answer the following research questions:
Any meaningful exploration of this case study requires the collection of qualitative data. Primary and a range of secondary data are used in this study. Semi-structured interviews with EU officials and experts are the key primary resource. The secondary data used in this study includes meeting records, governmental documents, EU declarations, debates, EU treaties, Council statements, newspaper articles and previous interviews with EU officials.
The multi-level governance approach is a relevant and useful framework for this study. This approach allows the researcher to examine, using multiple themes, the influence of the coordination and interaction between the EU's key actors' on foreign policy in general, and foreign policy towards Iraq in particular. The use of analytical themes allows the researcher to evaluate the EU’s foreign policy effectiveness. Such themes also provide coherent frames of reference for the discussion and conclusion of this article. These themes are not measurable, and as such may be seen as qualitative.
Saleem Aljebori currently is a PhD Candidate at Deakin University - Faculty of Arts and Education- School of Humanities and Social Sciences. He is interesting in European Union Foreign Policy in general and towards Iraq in Particular. He is working under Prf. Fethi Mansouri supervision. Saleem’s burn in Iraq and holds degrees in Political Sciences and International Politics from Al-Nahrain University- Iraq (BA in Political Sciences, MA in International Politics).
Before coming to Australia in late 2007, Saleem’s was one of the permanent staff at Faculty of Law-Karbala University-Iraq. Saleem’s was responsible on teaching many subjects such as, Political System, Democracy, Human Rights, National Culture, Constitutional Law and International Organizations. In addition, he was a Head of Political Department in Al- Furat Centre for Strategic and Development Studies. Saleem’s publish many articles in Arabic language and also he participated in eight conferences which held in Iraq and more recently presenting a paper in Europe in Crisis: Challenges and Opportunities conference which hosted by Monash University, Australia on 22-23 September 2011.Furthermore, he presenting a paper in Rethinking the grand strategy of the European Union conference which hosted by Loughborough University, UK on 25-26 May 2012.
The major task of a theory of democracy is to identify the conditions under which human beings are empowered to design, build and sustain institutions that allow for the expression of both their commonalities and differences and provide the setting for a shared life free of domination. Minimally but importantly, democracy has to do with selecting and authorizing the public officials who, on the basis of this authorization, are empowered legitimately (within political and legal limits) to exercise public authority. How this 'authorization' is instituted is a central characteristic of a system of rule. Arguably, democracy is thus more than a cluster of institutions, practices and processes for organising public accountability of power holders and it is also more than deliberation in the public sphere. In this talk, I reconsider the importance of the idea of ‘popular sovereignty’ for democratic theory and practice and argue for the continued relevance of understanding democracy as rule of the ‘people’.
After his PhD at the London School of Economics, Roland taught at the University of Aberdeen for 16 years. Roland joined the Department in 2005 as a Professor of Politics and International Relations. He held visiting appointments at Heidelberg University (Germany); Karl-Franzens University Graz (Austria); University of California, Los Angeles; and Deakin University, Melbourne. In 2011, he was a visiting professor at the University of Queensland in Brisbane (Australia). Currently, he is a visiting fellow at the Sydney Democracy Initiative at Sydney University.
'Multiculturalism is dead, long live Interculturalism!' Some people think that given the extensive critiques of multiculturalism have rightly finished it off, interculturalism is a suitable successor concept for productively engaging with the diversity that is a social fact in many of the large towns and cities of western Europe. Advocates of a political interculturalism wish to emphasise its positive qualities in terms of encouraging communication, recognising dynamic identities, promoting unity and critiquing illiberal cultural practices. Yet each of these qualities too are important (on occasion foundational) features of multiculturalism. At best, on this reading interculturalism would be a version or revision of multiculturalism not its successor. I explore some other readings of interculturalism to probe further why some might think or pretend otherwise. They may think interculturalism is about lived experience and locality. Or, they may think like their Quebecan counterparts, that interculturalism appropriately recognises the normative claims of a national culture (perhaps within a larger federation). Or, they may think that interculturalism is a much-needed rebranding of multiculturalism. While something can be learnt from each of these, none of them is able to substitute multiculturalism, which accommodates parts of the population that other modes of integration do not and so is indispensable to the integration of post-immigration 'difference' in Europe.
Tariq Modood is Professor of Sociology, Politics and Public Policy, and the founding Director of the Centre for the Study of Ethnicity and Citizenship at the University of Bristol, UK. He has led many research projects on ethnic minorities and Muslims in the UK and in Europe and has published extensively on these topics, especially on the theory and politics of multiculturalism. His latest books include Multiculturalism: A Civic Idea (2007), Still Not Easy Being British (2010); and as co-editor Secularism, Religion and Multicultural Citizenship (2009), Global Migration, Ethnicity and Britishness (2011) and European Multiculturalisms (2012). He is a regular contributor to the media and to policy discussions in Britain and was a member of the Commisson on the Future of the Multi-Ethnic Britain (the Parekh Report, 2000). He was awarded an MBE for services to social science and ethnic relations in 2001 and elected to the Academy of Social Sciences in 2004.
This paper addresses the neglected problem of elite sport in classical Athens. Democracy may have opened up politics to every citizen but it had no impact on sporting participation. The city’s sportsmen continued to be drawn from the elite. Thus it comes as a surprise that non-elite citizens judged sport to be a very good thing, rewarded victorious sportsmen lavishly and created an unrivalled program of local sporting festivals, on which they spent a staggering sum. They also shielded sportsmen from the public criticism which was otherwise normally directed towards the elite and its conspicuous activities. The work of social scientists suggests that the explanation of this problem lies in the close relationship which non-elite Athenians perceived between sporting contests and their own waging of war. The disturbing conclusion of this paper is that it was the democracy’s opening up of war to non-elite citizens which legitimised elite sport.
Dr David M. Pritchard is Senior Lecturer in the School of History, Philosophy, Religion and Classics at the University of Queensland and a member of the University’s Cultural History Project. He has held research fellowships at Macquarie University, the University of Copenhagen and the University of Sydney. He has authored Sport, Democracy and War in Classical Athens (Cambridge University Press: 2013 [in press]), edited War, Democracy and Culture in Classical Athens (Cambridge University Press: 2010) and co-edited Sport and Festival in the Ancient Greek World (Classical Press of Wales: 2003). He is currently finishing for Oxford University Press a co-authored book on public finance in ancient Athens.
The European unification has been foremost a project of whiteness. Notions of tolerance, multiculturalism and anti racism, somewhat popular in the 1980s, have all but disappeared from political agendas. The turn of the century has been witness to the emergence of what I call entitlement racism: the idea that majority populations have the right to offend and to humiliate the ‘Other’. Expressions of this form of racism vary according to racial, ethnic and religious group attributions and can range from assimilative paternalism to extreme cultural humiliation. The Netherlands is a case in point.
Philomena Essed has a PhD from the University of Amsterdam and an Honorary Doctorate from the University of Pretoria. At Antioch University, she is a professor of Critical Race, Gender and Leadership studies in the PhD in Leadership and Change Program. She is also an affiliated researcher at Utrecht University (The Netherlands) Graduate Gender Program.
Her research and teaching transcends national, cultural and disciplinary boundaries.
Well known for introducing the concepts of everyday racism and gendered racism in the Netherlands and internationally, her work has been adopted and applied in a range of countries, including the US, Canada, South Africa, Sweden, Finland, Russia, the UK, Switzerland and Australia.
She has lectured in many countries - from Germany to Brazil; from South-Africa to Canada - and published numerous articles in English and in Dutch, some of which have been translated into French, German, Italian, Swedish and Portuguese.
Her books include Everyday Racism; Understanding Everyday Racism and Diversity; Gender, Color and Culture. Co-edited Volumes: Race Critical Theories: Refugees and the Transformation of Societies and A Companion to Gender Studies ('outstanding' 2005 CHOICE award). A volume on Dutch Racism is in progress and another volume Clones, Fakes and Posthumans: Cultures of Replication is in press. Her current research focuses on social justice and dignity as experience and practice in leading change.
In addition to her academic work Philomena has been advisor to governmental and non-governmental organizations, nationally and internationally. Since 2004 she is Deputy Member of the Dutch Equal Treatment Commission where she serves as a panel member in hearings and investigations about structural discrimination, including race, gender, religion, age, sexual orientation and disability.
As an expert witness on race, gender and racism in Europe she addressed among others The European Parliament (Brussels, 1984); The United Nations Economic and Social Council (New York, 2001); The House of Representatives of the States-General (The Hague, the Netherlands, 2004) and the United States Helsinki Commission (Capitol Hill, Washington, 2008).
In April 2011 The Queen of the Netherlands honored Philomena with a Knighthood.