Information
Philosophy in the Community is a lecture and discussion series organized by the Philosophy Department at the University of Saskatchewan. It is in place as a public service, so that we may share the rewards and pleasures of philosophical reflection with the members of our community. Philosophical thinking, reading and analysis is part of the life well-lived.
This series is free, no registration is needed. No philosophical background is required; intellectual curiosity is. Coffee provided.
*This event is in the basement of Emmanuel Anglican Church. The standard way to enter is on the southwest side of the building via a flight of stairs. People with mobility issues are welcome to send a note to emer.ohagan@usask.ca to arrange for other access. Please do this well in advance of the event. An external ramp on the north side of the building provides entry to the church, and from there an elevator can be used to get to the basement
For more information, contact: emer.ohagan@usask.ca
| Location | The Refinery Emmanuel Anglican (formerly St. James) Church Basement 607 Dufferin Avenue (at 12th Street, just off Broadway) |
| Time | 7:00 – 9:00 PM |
| Dates | Second Friday of each month, September through March. |
Philosophy in the Community 2025- 26
Fall & Winter Series
|
Sept. 12th, 2025 What’s Wrong With Lying? Emer O'Hagan, Professor, Philosophy |
It is generally believed that lying is sometimes, or always wrong. But what is wrong with it? In this talk I’ll explain what lying involves, present Immanuel Kant’s interesting but not entirely persuasive account of the wrongness of lying, elaborate on some revisions advanced by contemporary Kantians, and open things up for small group discussion. |
|
Oct. 10th, 2025 How does Culture Regulate Our Actions? Why does this Matter? Valery Chirkov, Professor, Psychology |
Why do people think, feel, and behave the way they do? The pursuit of answers to this question fuels research in psychology and attracts young people to psychology departments. Mainstream psychologists seek these answers by studying the human mind and brain in depth. These psychologists believe that the drives of human behaviour reside exclusively in the individual minds of people and should be studied there. Such an approach is often referred to as methodological individualism. Another way of thinking is rooted in a sociocultural approach to understanding sources of human actions. According to this approach, the primary determinants and regulations of people’s actions should be found in the sociocultural communities in which they were born and socialized. Only within the incorporated communal sociocultural regulatory matrix do community members develop their individual, idiosyncratic, and autonomous actions. In his presentation, Dr. Chirkov will elaborate on the sociocultural perspective in psychology and discuss how culture enters our minds and regulates our actions. He will discuss the evolutionary roots of the sociocultural regulation of human behaviour. Specifically, he will focus on the theory of sociocultural models that explains the mechanisms and dynamics of sociocultural regulation. He will conclude his presentation by discussing the application of sociocultural ideas in psychology and their relevance to understanding the challenges immigrants face during acculturation. |
|
Nov. 14th, 2025 Generative AI and Intellectual Property Rights: Some Worries and some (possibly unexpected) Implications Will Buschert, Professor, Philosophy |
Generative AI (GenAI) is a form of artificial intelligence that can produce content, such as text, images, or music. It works by learning underlying patterns in existing data and then using those patterns to generate new, similar data. Some recent (and possibly familiar) examples include ChatGPT, Gemini, and Grok. In this talk I’ll be looking at two main questions concerning GenAI and intellectual property rights (IPRs). First, do GenAIs wrongfully infringe the copyright of works created by human beings that have been incorporated into GenAI training data? (Or, as some critics have put it, are GenAIs ‘stealing’ from human artists, writers, and composers?) By looking at the two most widely-accepted moral justifications for IPRs (as well as some recent U.S. court cases), I’ll argue that the answer, at least in general, is ‘no’. Second, can GenAIs themselves be bearers of IPRs – i.e., can a GenAI rightly hold a copyright (or, potentially, a patent) in their works? I’ll argue, with reference to those same moral justifications, that the answer is (probably) ‘yes’. If those conclusions seem shocking or abhorrent, it might be that the development of GenAI provides an occasion for reconsidering, and possibly revising, our moral justifications for recognizing IPRs in the first place. |
|
Dec. 12th, 2025 What Marx Got Right About Our Current Moment Will Robbins, MA Philosophy |
|
|
Jan.9th, 2026 How Does Propaganda Work? Pierre-Francois Noppen, Professor, Philosophy |
|
|
Feb. 13th, 2026 Is Growth Good? Diana Heney, Professor, Philosophy |
|
|
Mar 13th, 2026 Morality, God, and the Tasks and Limits of Philosophy John Liptay, Professor, STM Philosophy |