Happy Prisoner Festival
The Philosophy Foundation will put on the world's first philosophical enquiry festival online on Saturday March 27th. The festival will showcase philosophical conversations rather than two-sides debating and will give attendees an opportunity to think through matters of importance facing us all today, including:
- Free Speech.
- Ecological Grief.
- The Value of Work.
- Conspiracy Theories.
A man is taken in his sleep to a room and locked in with a friend whom he is longing to see. Upon awaking the man is so pleased to see his friend that even if he knew he was locked in the room, he would have no desire to escape. In this sense he is a ‘voluntary prisoner’: he cannot leave the room but he has no will to leave it anyway..
This scenario is John Locke's 'voluntary prisoner' thought experiment. It asks us to consider matters of freedom, determinism, voluntary actions and free will and to draw a distinction between different forms of freedom. We are all currently experiencing a lack of freedom due to lockdown – but like Locke's happy prisoner, can we be happy and free in our minds?
This Festival showcases free thinkers engaging together in important questions and gives the audience the opportunity to re-think current issues through philosophical enquiry.
All sessions will be facilitated by a professional philosopher, trained in philosophical enquiry with The Philosophy Foundation. There will be 4 guest speakers who will begin a conversation around the topic we are exploring. This will be the starting circle conversation and after half an hour the facilitator will invite the audience members, who have paid to be there on Zoom (£5 per ticket, limited to 20 per session), into the enquiry circle so they can ask questions, raise points or just continue to listen. These sessions will all be live streamed via The Philosophy Foundation's Facebook page.
This is a festival of ideas and conversations, and we will have a wide range of younger voices speaking as part of the starting circle. Philosophical enquiry dissolves the dichotomy of the usual debating format and takes enquirers and listeners further than you would go normally.
What is education – what do we, as a society try to achieve through education, and why? All parents have had to get used to homeschooling this year and are concerned that even more children will be left behind because of the digital divide. Are schools just about improving abilities, or is there more going on in terms of society and culture?
15:00-16.00 The Value of Work
We frequently take the necessity of work for granted. Many of us accept the need to spend at least forty hours a week in paid labour to obtain life’s necessities and pleasures. Work is also often seen as something that is good to do: an unwillingness to work is associated with laziness. The person who does not work supposedly does not contribute to society. Mahatma Gandhi, for instance, expounded the virtue of hard work to earn one’s livelihood.
Covid-19 has upended how many of us think about work. We are newly accustomed to thinking about “essential” and “non-essential” workers, for instance. Many of us now work from home full-time. Many others have lost their jobs or are in limbo. Philosophy can help us work through some of the questions about work raised in the last year: Is work necessary? Is work beneficial, and to whom? Are some kinds of work more valuable than others?
This conversation will be led by:
Simone Webb (Facilitator / Chair) - Philosopher at The Philosophy Foundation and PhD student in Gender Studies https://www.ucl.ac.uk/writing-lab/simone-webb
Orlando Lazar - Teacher of political theory at the University of Oxford, currently writing on domination and the future of work https://www.seh.ox.ac.uk/people/orlando-lazar
Amelia Horgan - PhD student, Writer and Researcher, author of Lost in Work out in June 2021. Interested in contemporary work practices and the philosophy of work https://www.essex.ac.uk/people/horga12204/amelia-horgan
Sarah Jaffe - Reporting fellow at Type Media Center and the author of Work Won't Love You Back: How Devotion to Our Jobs Keeps Us Exploited, Exhausted, and Alone https://sarahljaffe.com/
Tom O'Shea - Teacher of philosophy at the University of Roehampton and currently writing a book about socialism and economic freedom https://pure.roehampton.ac.uk/portal/en/persons/tom-oshea
16.30-17.30 Ecological Grief
The impact of climate change around the world is already damaging the mental health and well-being of those facing or fearing its consequences. Some people are now using the term ecological grief to describe the "experience or anticipation of ecological losses, including the loss of species, ecosystems, and meaningful landscapes due to acute or chronic environmental change”.
What are the differences and similarities between ecological grief and the grief we experience in bereavement? Should grief motivate a certain kind of engagement with ourselves, others and the world? How should we understand the relationship between ecological grief and the kind of actions required in the face of environmental disaster? With science at the forefront of tackling the climate crisis, perhaps ecological grief can appear “irrational, inappropriate, anthropomorphic” and, if so, should we aim to subdue or avoid it? Can ecological grief be good for us and good for the planet?
This conversation will be led by:
Grace Lockrobin (facilitator / Chair) - Founder & Director of Thinking Space, and philosopher at The Philosophy Foundation https://www.thinkingspace.org.uk/
Eleanor Byrne - Doctoral researcher at University of York https://york.academia.edu/EleanorByrne
Magid Magid - Former Gren Party MEP and TIMES 100 rising stars shaping the future of our world - https://www.magicmagid.com/
Elliot Woodhouse - PhD Climate Ethics and Enhanced Weathering at Leverhulme Centre for Climate Change Mitigation- http://lc3m.org/people/elliott-woodhouse/
Michael Cholbi - Philosopher of death & dying, grief - https://www.ed.ac.uk/profile/michael-cholbi
18.00-19.00 Free Speech
It is rare to find anyone speaking openly against ‘free speech’ in the West. To most, its value is undisputed, talked about with near-religious reverence. Indeed, arguing against it is likely to appear ironic and self-defeating. And yet, what actually is this thing we call ‘free speech’? Is speech ‘free’ if everyone has a platform or the ability to speak? Is it free only if there are no meaningful punishments or sanctions as a result of that speech? Or is it possible, as the philosopher Stanley Fish has argued, that no speech is truly free?
Recently the public debate has largely focused on limits to speech, the disagreement tending to escalate into a full-blown culture war. On one side there are those who argue against ‘cancel culture’ and ‘no platforming’, saying that overt censorship hampers the search for truth and stifles democratic debate. Others counter that a degree of censorship is a necessary corrective to the dominant culture, protecting minority rights and preventing harmful and offensive views from receiving a wider audience.
Should we judge speech by its consequences or by some principle? What should count as ‘harmful’ speech? Are we more likely to guarantee a thriving democracy by having few restrictions on speech or some censorship?
19.30-20.30 Conspiracy Theories
The rise of social media and fake news seems to have given life to new conspiracies. Narratives that used to be confined to private conversations and isolated eccentrics are now shouted out across the internet and anyone can search out a space where their beliefs are given air to breath and like-minded people congregate. And once beliefs are committed to and become part of an identity, they are hard to unpick. Are there basic beliefs we can take for granted? What’s the difference between a conspiracy theory and the truth? What makes a source worthy of trust?
 This John Locke thought experiment was adapted by Peter Worley in his book The If Machine, and called 'The Happy Prisoner'.