2.00pm to 2.45pm
1st Presentation by Mr Joshua Thong Zheng Jie
Title
The Bayesian and the Dogmatist.

Abstract:
The Dogmatist potentially faces two sources of conflict when trying to combine with Bayesianism: the Bayesian Objection (White, 2006) and the Weisberg Paradox (Weisberg, 2009). Miller (2016, 2017) has proposed two different ways on how to solve these conflicts. In my paper, I argue against Miller that none of his proposals work. The first proposal has no hope of resolving conflict with the Weisberg Paradox while the second violates Bayesianism itself, or more specifically, it violates Richard Jeffrey’s motivations for Jeffrey Conditionalization. I will also propose a new solution which has the potential to resolve these two sources of conflict, while addressing some objections it might face.

2.45pm to 3.30pm
2nd Presentation by Ms Puah Xin Yi
Title
Zhuangzi and the Skillful Killer

Abstract
In the Zhuangzi, one finds a collection of passages that depict skillful exemplars excelling at what they do. It is generally thought that these stories give an account, at least in part, of Zhuangzi’s positive ethical vision. In contemporary literature, a criticism, which I will call the skillful killer critique, has been raised against Zhuangzi’s account. This thesis aims to clarify the nature of the critique such that it can be better understood as a legitimate problem for Zhuangzi, and the possible replies available to address it. In particular, I explore in more detail the type of response that draws on sceptical resources in the Zhuangzi, assessing the viability of this sceptical response to the critique.

3.30pm tp 4.15pm
3rd Presentation by Ms Mah Wan Ying Sara
Title
The Public in Hume’s theory of Justice

Abstract
Hume’s theory of Justice was mainly discussed in the Treatise of Human Nature and in the Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. While his arguments focus on the nature of justice as being a virtue based on social conventions and being directed towards public interest, less words were spent on who constituted this society or public.

The main chapters of this thesis aim to answer the question “To whom are we supposed to be just?” Given his criteria for justice to be applied to free, civilised, equal people, Hume’s theory of justice presents many questions on what these criteria mean.

Hume briefly discusses some cases in Enquiry 3.18-19, namely those of the pseudo-human, the barbarian, and women. Using his arguments, I also extend these cases to animals, children, handicapped people, and immigrants since they in some way do not necessarily meet these criteria, as well as to some variations to the cases he does discuss. In doing so, I attempt to provide a way for Hume to give a satisfactory explanation for whether we need to treat these people justly and vice versa.

4.15pm to 5.00pm
4th Presentation by Mr Nicholas Khaw Hong Song
Title
A contextualist reading of Hume on miracles

Abstract
Hume’s work in part I if on miracles has traditionally been read as an objective attack against belief in miracles. This essay suggests that Hume’s piece might be much more subjective and contextualist in nature. A testimony concerning an act M might be a miracle to some people in a particular context and not to other people in a different context. I suggest that Hume’s arguments are only binding to people(s) who currently deem M as a miracle. Objections and how it ties in with part II are further discussed.