Philosophical
Society: Oxford
DEV website instance
The Philosophical Society: Oxford
“PHILOSOPHY FOR THE FUTURE”
To book a place, please use this on-line booking form. The future is not just what lies ahead—it is the very ground on which we think and act today. As we move deeper into a century defined by transformation, “the future” itself demands philosophical attention. The current discourse on the future is one of entangled crises, emergent technologies, hope, and a compelling moral claim. We find ourselves at the border of a paradigm shift. Philosophers like Donna Haraway, Bruno Latour, Timothy Morton, Nick Bostrom, and Achille Mbembe argue that converging transformations—in technology, ecology, and politics—are fundamentally reshaping the way we think about our world. With a quarter of the 21st century behind us, this is the moment to wield philosophy as our essential tool: to question established frameworks, to speculate responsibly about the paths not yet taken, and to navigate uncertainty with intellectual courage. The Future, of course, is a very broad subject, that sparks imagination in many different directions. For the 2026 Members weekend, we welcome explorations across many different disciplines, as well as interdisciplinary projects. We look forward to meeting you all the weekend in person or remotely. Thank you Marta Vecchio & Renske van Vroonhoven
PRESENTATIONS A detailed time table will follow closer to the weekend. Cachules, T. & van Vroonhoven, R.T. “Beauty in the 21st Century: Reclaiming the Implicit and Unseen” There is a sadness to walking into an antique shop cluttered with orphaned, patinated things that were once people’s prized possessions. Before the ‘quality revolution’ of the Industrial Age, beauty was integral to the crafting of even the most ordinary objects of domestic life. An engraved silver case for matches, a hand carved wooden spoon. Now these beautiful things evoke a sense of loss. A world in which objects carried layers of meaning, attention, and implicit value has receded to high-gloss shopping malls where the dominant demand is immediacy, insatiability, and short-term emotional payoff. We are losing beauty. This loss is not limited to the objects we experience in our everyday lives, but the very spaces we inhabit and encounter in public life. Buildings have become more machine-like, full of technical elements that attempt to sate the material needs of modernity. Yet, without any integral beauty, these spaces serve to entrench us in a disposable, self-focused, chaotic churn of “progress.” Consider the opposite. Upon entering Christ’s Church or being met with King’s Choir even song, we are momentarily suspended in awe. We feel a sense of elevation. If only briefly, we are reminded that we are a part of a whole, and that we may participate in its beauty merely by attending to it. This project argues that beauty is not a frivolous luxury that we no longer need, but a quality and mode of perception that is essential to the implicit and unseen value of life itself. Drawing on Platonic and Byzantine concepts of beauty, Edmund Burke, Baruch Spinoza, Iain McGilchrist, William Morris, Martin Shaw, Jean Baudrillard, Byung-Chul Han, and Simone Weil this project investigates the importance of beauty in the 21st century and how we might reclaim its role through our daily objects and environments. We explore the ethical and perceptual orientation that beauty demands: one that resists reduction, invites contemplation, and opens us to the implicit and unseen. Ultimately, it argues that beauty reminds us that we are part of a whole, which is an essential wisdom to counterbalance the solipsism of modernity. Biographies Tina Cachules is a philosophical artisan exploring the metaphysical value of beauty in handmade objects and sacred environments. Her current work includes the cra ing of small, silk-bound books as authentic “social media” and contemplation vessels. She seeks to support and contribute to the lineage of makers and writers who have used cra to re orient people to the transcendent. Her research centers around the potential for mythopoetic thought and artistic symbolism to fuel a renaissance of the transcendentals in an increasingly technological, atomised world. She is currently enjoying a deep dive into Byzantine aesthetics as part of her lifelong fascination with cultures that produced beautiful objects and spaces imbued with meaning. Renske van Vroonhoven is a postgraduate philosophy researcher at Cambridge, experience designer, and perfumer, as well as Chair of the Cambridge Applied Philosophy Society (CAPS) and Program Lead of the Odyssean Institute’s Aeonic Flourishing Program. Her work explores what gets lost when people are forced to translate themselves into forms legible to data-driven, bureaucratic systems, focusing on tacit, embodied, and relational knowledge that resists codification. Through rituals, scent, play, and contemplation, she helps people encounter the intangible. She writes on ritual, aliveness, meaning-making, beauty, the fragrant, and the politics of aention. Aleksi Ivanov Gramatikov “From Having and Being to a Philosophy of Becoming: What is the value of Change?” In Erich Fromm’s seminal work, To Have or to Be?, two modes of existence are contrasted against each other. The first mode is characterised by selfish interest, an obsession with power and control. The second mode is of ‘being’, which Fromm characterises as one centred on love, mutual productivity and sharing. With these beginnings, this paper wishes to survey both modes of existence found in Fromm’s text and thereby introduce a notion of becoming. Amidst our age of uncertainty it seems the future is not a promised destination but an ever changing, growing and daunting thing to consider. Nonetheless, our human sense of hope persists. In a way, nothing has changed, and perhaps it is still hope that allows for the toleration of many injustices. Emphasising the continued resilience of humanity against the imagined absoluteness of current economic and political forces, this paper wishes to explore a philosophy of becoming inspired by the tradition of process philosophy, up to and with particular focus on the later work of Max Scheler. This paper’s argument will focus not on the perceived akrasia of the human person. Rather, we wish to emphasise the honesty required in admitting the open ended nature of fate, destiny and of course our ideas of the future. Bibliography Fromm, Erich (2021). To have or to be? Bloomsbury Academic. (Original work published 1976) Scheler, Max (2009). The Human Place in the Cosmos. trans. Evanston: Northwestern University Press. (Original work published 1928) Scheler, Max, and Manfred S. Frings (1994). Ressentiment. Milwaukee, WI: Marquette University Press. (Original work published 1912) Biography Aleksi Ivanov Gramatikov completed his Bachelor of Arts International Degree (2025), dual majoring in Anthropology and Philosophy, and is currently a PhD student, at Maynooth University, Ireland. PhD thesis working title: Philosophy of Becoming in the Thought of Max Scheler: From Vom Ewigen im Menschen to Die Stellung des Menschen im Kosmos. He is co-supervised by Dr Susan Gottlöber & Dr David O’Brien, Maynooth University. He is Founder and Editor in Chief of Maynooth Philosophy Supplement. Most recent edited volume: Gramatikov, Aleksi Ivanov and Oisín A. Raymond (eds.), Philosophy and Ecology, Maynooth Philosophy Supplement, vol. 3 (2026) https://philpapers.org/rec/GRAPAE-4 Damian K. F. Pang “Surviving in a Data-Driven World: The Need for a Philosophy of Data” We live in a data-driven world. Quantitative metrics govern fields as diverse as healthcare, public policy, and corporate management, and data is powering the AI revolution. Yet, despite its growing influence, there has been relatively little philosophical enquiry into data itself, distinct from its use in specific fields like science and AI. I propose that we need to reappraise our understanding of data as we move into an ever more data-driven future. Building on Bogen and Woodward’s (Phil. Rev. 97:303, 1988) seminal distinction between data and phenomena and Leonelli’s (Routledge Handb. Phil. Info., 2016) relational view of data, I argue that the data used in decision-making often represents something very di erent from what it is intended to capture. There is a substantial ontological distance between data acquisition, its transformation into information, and its application in complex contexts (Floridi, Phil. of Info., 2011). Misunderstanding these di erences brought us to the brink of nuclear Armageddon in 1980, when a faulty computer chip led the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) to believe that a Soviet missile attack was underway. At the heart of the problem was a systemic disconnect between data acquisition and information interpretation. Similarly, flawed data-driven risk modelling was a key factor in the Great Recession. Whether in global security or corporate decision-making, fundamental misunderstandings of data ontology— propagated through systems—have led to countless suboptimal and often dangerous outcomes. We need a new philosophy of data to survive and ultimately thrive in an increasingly data-driven world. Biography Damian pursued his boyhood dream by becoming an airline pilot but recently transitioned to full-time research as a DPhil (PhD) candidate in cognitive neuroscience at the University of Oxford (Christ Church). His main interests are in consciousness, perception, and memory, where his research has uncovered a new type of memory that briefly retains sensory information without conscious access and forms a crucial step towards conscious perception. Other interests include philosophy and the similarities and di erences between human and AI cognition. Damian is originally from Switzerland but trained in Australia, worked in Hong Kong, and is now based in the UK. Fauzia Rahman-Greasley “‘Philosophy for the Future’: What are we talking about?” To mitigate confusing and misleading, I shall start from the indisputable truth of disagreements amongst philosophers (both past and current) on diverse topics, including the nature of philosophy and of Time. My first aim is to show that contemporary disagreements are traceable to a disagreement between Plato and Aristotle about what later English-speaking philosophers generally call the ‘Form of Good’. Next, I aim to show that exploration of past disagreements and their practical consequences sheds light on current conceptualizations of philosophy whilst simultaneously generating different methodological approaches for conceptualising Philosophy. Finally, I propose a methodology for conceptualising our shared world and which, thereby, both dissolves the apparent crises of post-truth and motivates discussion of philosophy for the future. Whether my thesis passes the test of coherence, I shall leave for the audience to evaluate! Biography Fauzia Rahman-Greasley developed a keen interest in philosophy whilst studying and practicing medicine. Her main interests are the concepts of Health, Causation, Good, God, and Justice. She attained a MA in Philosophy (Birkbeck, 2010) following which she took on the role of Course Director of the Gerrards Cross Philosophy Group (www.gxpg.co.uk). She is a former Chairman of the Philosophical Society and a former Editor of the Review. As a passionate believer in laughter as the best medicine, she enjoys writing farce. Jean Paul Rodriguez Aulet “Against Longevity Science: Deontology, Consequentialism, and the Ethics of Death” Recent defenses of longevity science increasingly justify anti-aging research through both consequentialist and deontological arguments, presenting extended lifespan as a moral good grounded in reduced suffering, expanded autonomy, and the intrinsic value of life itself. This project critically examines the shared assumptions underlying these defenses. I argue that contemporary debates in favor of longevity science frequently converge upon an excessively individualistic and pathologized conception of otherwise necessary biological processes, erroneously treating death as harm and aging as dysfunction. Bridging philosophy of biology, environmental ethics, biopolitics, and complex systems theory, this project questions how emerging biotechnologies increasingly reshape future-oriented conceptions of human flourishing, sustainability, and governance. I argue that mortality may not merely represent the negation of individual flourishing, but a constitutive feature of living systems themselves. Biological processes such as adaptation, succession, ecological renewal, and intergenerational continuity depend upon embedded life cycles and defined death events. From this perspective, the pursuit of indefinite lifespan extension raises broader questions concerning welfare misalignment between individuals and the systems that sustain collective flourishing. The research therefore examines whether contemporary longevity ethics can coherently account for the ecological, social, and even political conditions under which human life remains sustainable and meaningful. Biography Jean Paul Rodriguez Aulet is an MSc Philosophy of Science student at the London School of Economics with academic background in cellular and molecular biology, medicine, and biomimicry. Prior to transitioning into philosophy, he conducted biomedical research at Harvard Medical School and the National Institutes of Health (USA), focusing on genetics, translational medicine, and emerging biotechnologies. His formal philosophical education began through the University of Oxford Department for Continuing Education, where his essay in scientific realism received a Marianne Talbot Prize in 2025. His current research at LSE bridges philosophy of biology, bioethics, and biopolitics in examining the ethical implications of future-oriented biotechnologies, which form the basis of his developing dissertation research on longevity science. Bob Stone “The Future of Happiness” A. Discussion of what ‘happiness’ means: psychological or value term? Here it will be used as a psychological term B. Traditional views of what people imagine will make them happy” Health, stable and successful career, ever-increasing salary/wage, spouse and children, eternal love, leisure activities, blissful retirement. A sort of mirror image of the narrative view of oneself, except in the future rather than in the past. Problems: length of life (failing health, bored with long marriage, having aged parents to look after) Some recent(ish) adaptations: from the 1960s . . . the pill and women’s employment mean less emphasis on marriage and stability More recent: the pace of technological change is so fast that the idea of a long career, with clear stages, is less plausible The key aims of stability and improvement through life are now less attainable C. Predictors for someone’s future happiness Level of happiness depends almost entirely on things that happen in the womb and the first few months and years of life, not to mention current social developments and 3 million years of evolutionary history: so says recent research in psychology and neuroscience (summed up by Hannah Critchlow’s title: The science of Fate). I’ll cite some of the research. Whether we like it or not, it is becoming less and less plausible to believe that individuals have – or ever had – a significant capacity to increase their own happiness. Our future is out of our control. Sorry! Biography Bob Stone has been a member of Philsoc for about 16 years. After gaining a degree in Classics, with special attention to Greek philosophy, he taught classics in schools for 35 years and has since then devoted his non-cricket-watching time to studying philosophy and holding forth about it, both aloud and on paper; he now has 350 CATS points with OUDCE! He considers himself ‘happy’ . . . but who is he to know? Andrew Wilson “AI-based Technologies and the Fragmentation of the Self” This paper examines whether Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based technologies lead to the fragmentation of the self. As we have increasingly come to rely upon AI-based digital tools, devices, and systems for memory, navigation, interpretation, and communication, we have become dependent upon technologies that shape our thinking. While these seem to expand human capabilities, they also potentially undermine the continuity, autonomy, and narrative wholeness traditionally associated with personal identity. The paper starts by considering contemporary humanist philosopher perspectives on the nature of the self and what is considered essential for coherent identity. For Charles Taylor, sustained frameworks of meaning and social recognition are fundamental, while, according to Bernard Williams, moral responsibility and authentic agency are key. In both cases, technologically mediated cognition threatens to undermine the enablement of these essential elements of the self. The paper then looks at Ivan Illich’s critique of technological dependence and argues that, even in a pre-AI world, technology has monopolized cognitive functions once considered integral to the self. Bernard Stiegler’s account of technics and memory is then introduced to reinforce how digital technologies externalize human thought and risk producing cognitive disorientation and diminished reflection. Finally the paper discusses whether fragmentation necessarily constitutes a loss of self. The thinking of Bruno Latour and Donna Haraway challenges the conventional in considering the emergence of hybrid networks of humans and technologies. From this perspective, technologically distributed cognition may represent not the destruction of identity but the development of relational and posthuman forms of subjectivity. Biography Andrew is a (mostly) retired technology risk specialist. He first dabbled in AI as an undergraduate in the 1980s and is glad to say that things have moved on considerably since then (but not necessarily in the right way). Andrew’s current research interests include the philosophy of technology, philosophy of risk, epistemology, ethics, aesthetics, and philosophy of mind. Andrew holds an Honours degree in Psychology, a Masters degree in Risk Management, and a Masters degree in Philosophy. Suggested Readings
Politics, Society & Ethics:
Human Nature & Future Thinking:
On Human Enhancement:
On Climate & Environment:
Broader Visions:
|
