Art, Imagination, and Morality comprised a two-day conference held at Trinity College, Oxford, organised by Zoe Walker (Oxford) and Alex Fisher (Cambridge), which aimed to bring together early-career researchers working at the intersections of Aesthetics, Ethics and Philosophy of Mind.

Day 1

Alice Hilder Jarvis (Cambridge) began the conference with a discussion of when it is permissible for political protestors to attack artworks, followed by comments from Thomas Sinclair (Oxford), before Emily Kay Williamson (Central European University) gave a talk on discrepant affect – how our emotional responses to artworks and imagined contexts might differ from those towards real situations we are confronted with – with a response from Stephen Mulhall (Oxford). Anna Hotter (CUNY) examined how a comedian’s standing and personal history affects the permissibility of their joking about events such as sexual assault, with a response from organiser Zoe Walker (Oxford). Anna Morse (Virginia) then discussed how aesthetic properties of public art and architecture can undermine virtuous perception through obscuring morally significant features in the world, followed by a response from Michael Martin (Oxford). Ella Whiteley (Sheffield) concluded the first day with her keynote presentation, “Imaginings and Salience”, which argued that in aiming to overcome Philosophy’s systematic tendency to see women as women first, and philosophers second, socially progressive initiative like ‘Women in Philosophy’ can end up replicating the very salience structures they are trying to combat. A pub dinner at The Gardener’s Arms followed.

Day 2

Sam Rogers (NYU) began the second day by examining how works of fiction resolve an important conflict between ethics and epistemology, presenting an ethically acceptable body of public information about the private side of life, with a response from Robbie Kubala (UT Austin). Tareeq Jalloh (Sheffield) offered an examination and of the claim that drill music incites violence, which is frequently espoused by the Metropolitan Police in their extreme policing of young black musicians, with comments from Lucy McDonald (KCL). Caroline von Klemperer (Rutgers) turned to examine how respect for others incurs ethical demands on our imagination – both to imagine certain things and to refrain from imagining others – followed by comments from James Laing (Oxford). Maisie Luo (Rutgers) then discussed how fine art representations of animal suffering can be especially effective through softening its portrayal compared to more explicit documentary depictions, with a response from Alison Hills (Oxford). James Grant (Oxford) was unable to give his keynote talk entitled “Does it matter if beauty is objective?”, and so Zoe Walker closed the conference with a talk entitled “Dark Comedy: The Strange Relationship between Immorality and Funniness”, which argued that comedy can be immoral when it distracts our attention away from morally significant features of what is represented – and that this form of immorality facilitates funniness.

The organisers are especially grateful to each of their commentators for providing insightful and constructive feedback to speakers, and thank the Aristotelian Society, the British Society of Aesthetics, the Mind Association, the Society for Applied Philosophy, and Trinity College, Oxford for financial support of this conference.

Adherence to BPA/SWIP good practice guidelines:

The organisers took various steps to adhere to the BPA/SWiP Good Practice Scheme and Guidelines for Accessible Conferences:

  • They ensured that they invited a female keynote speaker – Ella Whiteley – and set the conference dates around her availability so she was definitely able to attend.
  • In assessing submissions, each organiser read them all blind to author details before making decisions. The submissions we had assessed as to be accepted ended up containing more female speakers than male speakers (6 female, 2 male).
  • They issued their Call for Papers and acceptance notifications in good time so as to allow speakers to organise travel.
  • They included a link to information about childcare in their Call for Papers for speakers/attendees who might need it – there are a number of options available in Oxford.
  • They did not charge an attendance fee and provided lunch on both days to make the conference more accessible to those without institutional funding. They further ensured that various options were available to those with dietary requirements, which they asked all participants to make us aware of.
  • When chairing each talk’s Q&A, the conference organisers tried to ensure that all attendees got an equal chance to ask questions and no one dominated the discussion. 
  • They publicised the accessibility information for the conference, such as that the conference meeting room is wheelchair accessible, so that potential speakers could ascertain whether they would be able to attend.

The programme had a roughly 50/50 gender balance across organisers (1M 1F), invited keynote speakers (1M 1F), accepted speakers (2M 6F) and commentators (5M 3F). The attendees also comprised a balanced gender distribution.