�鶹��Ƶ

In this talk, Thimo will reconstruct this largely forgotten disagreement and argue that although both positions contain an important overstatement, each includes an important lesson for the contemporary debate on leisure and society. Join us for this free luncheon event, Tuesday, April 18, 2023 from 11:30 a.m.-1 p.m. in Wyndham Alumnae House, Ely Room. I hope you will join us for all or part of this event!

Joel Schlosser is an associate professor and chair of political science, whose teaching interests include democratic theory, ancient political thought, modern political thought, continental political thought, and constitutional law. He will discuss the difficulty of doing nothing. “Nothing is harder to do these days than nothing,” writes Jenny Odell in How To Do Nothing. Everything vies for our attention: important news, exciting updates from friends, advertisements. How could we possibly do nothing when there’s always something? And shouldn’t we be doing something?

This talk reflects on how and why doing nothing might be the most important thing to do at a time when it feels like there’s so much to do. Joel will share experiences teaching an ESem on "How to Do Nothing" as well as how in his research he has examined the ancient figure of Diogenes the Cynic who inspires contemporary critiques of the attention economy. The talk will also speak to the role that work plays in contemporary life and the capitalist imperative to be productive and keep busy; the resistance and refusal of “doing nothing”; and how we might imagine and pursue more ecological and just ways of living together.

Thimo Heisenberg is an assistant professor of philosophy whose teaching interests include German philosophy, social philosophy, and political economy. To us today, it seems intuitive that an ideal society would secure for its citizens some time for leisure (i.e., some time to do ‘whatever they want’ after having attended to their various responsibilities and natural needs.) But, in this talk, Thimo will argue that—in 19th century social philosophy—the status of leisure in an ideal society was actually surprisingly controversial: whereas J.G. Fichte makes a strong case for leisure as part of an ideal society, G.W.F. Hegel implicitly argues against this idea. For him, leisure is a crook that we only need as long as the social conditions are not sufficiently ideal—whereas a truly rational society would create a new type of work that subsumes the benefits of leisure into work itself.