Call for Papers: “Lying and Hypocrisy in Politics and Morality”, II Braga Colloquium in the history of moral and political philosophy, Portugal, University of Minho, deadline: 15th September 2016

HiSoPo vous informe de l’appel à communications lancé par le groupe de théorie politique du CEHUM/University de Minho (Braga, Portugal) pour un colloque portant sur le mensonge et l’hypocrisie en histoire de la philosophie politique et morale.
“Lying and Hypocrisy in Politics and Morality”
University of Minho, Braga – Portugal 
12-13 January 2017
Keynote Speaker: Ruth W. Grant (Duke University)
Call for papers
The Political Theory Group of the University of Minho is delighted to announce the II Braga Colloquium in the History of Moral and Political Philosophy: an international annual conference held every year in January at the University of Minho in Braga, Portugal. The purpose of this conference series is to promote the study of the tradition of political and moral philosophy and its legacy in shaping our institutions, culture and beliefs. In this important respect, the conference series will focus on how this tradition can contribute to tackling the challenges our societies are facing today. Every year the conference will focus on a specific theme, which will be chosen by taking in consideration the current political situation in Europe (and beyond). In line with the spirit behind this new series of conferences, the second annual Braga Colloquium in the History of Moral and Political Philosophy will be dedicated to exploring the theme of “Lying and Hypocrisy in Politics and Morality.”
“No one has ever doubted that truth and politics are on rather bad terms with each other, and no one, as far as I know, has ever counted truthfulness among the political virtues. Lies have always been regarded as necessary and justifiable tools not only of the politician’s or the demagogue’s but also of the statesman’s trade.” (Hannah Arendt)
Hypocrisy, though inherently unattractive, is also more or less inevitable in most political settings. Political life is often a world ethically apart from normal human interactions. This contributes, however, to the creation of a cleavage between citizens and politicians.Those citizens who are disaffected with democracy and politicians do not question only their competence: they doubt their promises, because they question the quality of the political class in terms of their truthfulness and basic honesty, and this seems to hinder citizens’ ability to judge politicians. This problem is magnified in contemporary liberal democracies: a political system that, on the one hand, has transparency as one of its foundational values, and on the other, that is deeply influenced by the media and logics of spectacularization as it promotes a continuous search of consent and electoral competition. The desire to cut oneself off from political hypocrisy—by denouncing it, owning up to it, or seeking some sort of insulation from it—reminds us not to approach the problem of hypocrisy with false expectations about what can be achieved, ignoring the nuances that pervade political life.
We should not conflate the moral and political realms. Yet there is something both ethically and politically troubling about the ease with which modern political thinkers isolate norms of citizenship from the meaning and purpose of our lives as a whole: this habit of compartmentalizing “citizenship talk” from more holistic ethical aspirations discourages serious reflection on the ethical basis of civic life, an essential safeguard against the rise of manipulative and self-serving political ideologies.
We invite scholars interested in these topics to propose papers that interrogate the history of moral and political thought in order to illuminate our current predicament. We especially hope for communications on ancient, modern, and contemporary thought
 addressing themes such as:
  • The ethical value of citizenship;
  • The value of integrity in the social and political order;
  • The uses of hypocrisy in political life;
  • The role and nuances of political deceit and the need for compromises;
  • The replacement of the people’s voice through elections by the eyes of the people;
  • Citizens as spectators of politics;
These topics are, however, no more than suggestions, and we encourage the most diverse approaches to the problem.
Submission guidelines
Abstracts, of no more than 500 words, should be sent to:
Deadline: 15th September 2016
In addition to the abstract, please include in your proposal your academic title, name, affiliation, and the title of your contribution. The presentations at the conference will be 20 minutes long with 20 minutes reserved for discussion. The official language of the conference will be English.

AAC Sections thématiques, 14e Congrès de l’AFSP, Montpellier, deadline: 15 octobre 2016

HiSoPo vous informe de l’organisation de plusieurs sections thématiques (ST) organisées dans le cadre du prochain congrès de l’Association française de science politique (AFSP), qui aura lieu à Montpellier du 10 au 12 juillet 2017, et qui ont trait à l’analyse des idées politiques. La date limite d’envoi des propositions de communication est le 15 octobre 2016.

La ST3, présentée par HiSoPo et co-organisée par Isabelle Gouarné (CNRS/CURAPP) et Mathieu Hauchecorne (UNiversité Paris 8, CRESPPA-LabTop), met au cœur de sa réflexion la question: “Que faire des traditions politiques en histoire sociale des idées?” Vous trouverez ci le texte de l’appel à communications: AAC_ST3. Les propositions de communications doivent être envoyées par courriel aux adresses suivantes: et

La ST 74, co-organisée par Gwendal Châton (Université d’Angers) et Sébastien Caré (Université Rennes 1) est intitulée « Le séminaire : un nouvel objet pour l’histoire des idées politiques ».  Vous trouverez ici le texte de l’appel à communications: AAC_ST74. Les propositions de communications doivent être envoyées par courriel aux adresses suivantes: et

La ST 76, co-organisée par Gérald Hess (Université de Lausanne) et Carolin Lejeune (Sciences Po Lille, CERAPS), porte sur les “Contributions et perspectives critiques des éthiques environnementales dans la pensée politique”. Vous trouverez ici le texte de l’appel à communications: AAC_ST76. Les propositions de communications doivent être envoyées par courriel aux adresses suivantes: et Gé

Call for Papers: “Dialogues in Critical Theory”, Revista Ideias, Submission deadline: 15th August 2016

HiSoPo vous informe du lancement d’un appel à contribution pour la revue Revista Ideias sur les dialogues et controverses au sein de la Théorie critique.


Call for Papers and Reviews

Revista Ideias (vol. 7, n. 2, Dec. 2016)

Special Issue:



The Editorial Board would like to inform our readers that the Call for Papers and Reviews for the next issue of Revista Ideias (special issue: DIALOGUES IN CRITICAL THEORY) is open.

(For detailed information on the journal and the call for papers, go to:


  1. Original papers are the result of empirical or conceptual research. Submitted papers must include an abstract (max. 640 characters) and three to six keywords. The paper (including abstract, keywords, references, footnotes, etc.) should be no shorter than 30,000 and no longer than 40,000 characters (including spaces);
  2. Book reviews are critical presentations of works published in the last three years (max. 15,000 characters, including spaces).
  3. Papers must be submitted without any information that may lead to the identification of the author(s). The author’s name, as well as their academic titles, institutional affiliation, and any additional information should be sent in a different file;
  4. Submitted files should be in the format *.doc or *.docx;
  5. The font should be Times New Roman, size 12, spacing of 1,5 between lines;
  6. Papers must be submitted exclusively to the email: (submissions via postal address or the website will not be considered);
  7. Submitting a paper implies the authorization and exclusivity of its publication, as well as agreement that the publication of accepted papers is subjected to the decision of the Editorial Board of the journal.
  8. Submission deadline: 15th August 2016



The aim of the special issue DIALOGUES IN CRITICAL THEORY lies in exploring, with conceptual rigor, some of the debates that have had an impact on the consolidation and development of the Critical Theory of society or on the intellectual trajectory of one or more author in this tradition. The idea is to show that the making of social theory and philosophy is not a solitary activity, but involve, in most cases, a dynamic process of critical interaction not only with other thinkers, but with other theoretical traditions as well.

This is certainly true of all branches of the philosophical practice. Although not holding exclusivity in this respect, Critical Theory can be said to have always offered a highly/exceptionally fertile ground for the flourishing of theoretical debate: since the publishing in 1937 of Max Horkheimer’s seminal essay, Critical Theory has sought to establish itself as opposed to what was called “traditional theory,” which gave rise to numerous controversies with authors affiliated to different philosophical traditions. The relationship between “traditional” and Critical Theory, however, has not only taken the shape of an opposition, but involves likewise the (critical) appropriation of the most productive aspects of theoretical strands that do not fall under a stricter definition of the critical field. In addition to that, it should also be pointed out that the critical framework itself consists of a deeply diverse theoretical corpus. In this regard, it is not rare that among critical theorists disagreements and differences assume the form of more or less heated debates. For these reasons, it can be said that conceptual exchanges and controversies are not only part of the developmental dynamics of Critical Theory: they lie at its very basis.

The thematic scope of the special issue DIALOGUES IN CRITICAL THEORY is therefore fairly wide, provided one does not lose sight of the dialogical aspect of the selected topic. The very definition of “dialogue” or “debate” should not be very restrictive: possible objects of analysis are theoretical exchanges involving one or more thinkers linked to the critical field, which may have been recorded in books, letters, lectures and conferences, joint volumes, media interventions, intellectual biographies, memoirs, interviews, etc. The theoretical dialogues addressed in the submitted paper may have assumed the form of a dialogue in the literal sense of the term, but they can also have unfolded indirectly, in a veiled, involuntary, or even unilateral and imaginary form – one might think here of the famous metaphor by Albert Salomon according to which Max Weber wrote a great part of his work debating with Marx’s ghost.

Priority will be given to articles that do not merely present or reconstruct an already relatively well known debate, but provide substantial contributions to understanding conceptual aspects of an author’s theoretical corpus or of a thematic area privileged by Critical Theory.

Some possible approaches to the issue are:

1) the relationship between Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer,

2) the exchanges between Walter Benjamin and Bertolt Brecht, Siegfried Kracauer, Gershom Scholem or Adorno, chronicled for example in the correspondence between the authors;

3) the debate between Horkheimer and representatives of the Vienna Circle (such as Otto Neurath) or the controversy between Adorno and Karl Popper;

4) the disagreements between Georg Lukacs and Ernst Bloch, between Franz Neumann and Friedrich Pollock, between Herbert Marcuse and Erich Fromm or Jürgen Habermas;

5) Habermas’ discussions with Richard Rorty, Hans-Georg Gadamer or John Rawls, or controversy between Axel Honneth and Peter Sloterdijk;

6) debates on feminism and other issues between Seyla Benhabib, Judith Butler, Iris Young and Nancy Fraser;

7) “intergenerational” critiques, such as Habermas’ objections to the first generation of critical theory, Honneth’s objections to Habermas, as well as those of the most recent generation (which include Rahel Jaeggi, Nancy Fraser and Robin Celikates, among others) to both Honneth and Habermas.

15th June 2016
Editorial Board
Revista Ideias
ISSN: 2179-5525

Avis de soutenance: Emmanuel Monneau, Institutionnalisation et le déclin d’économies critiques dans le champ universitaire français, Amiens, Université de Picardie, 21 juin 2016

HiSoPo vous informe de la soutenance récente de la thèse d’Emmanuel Monneau sur l’institutionnalisation et le déclin d’économies critiques dans le champ universitaire français. Contribution à une histoire sociale des sciences sociales, elle ne peut qu’intéresser l’histoire sociale des idées politiques.



Publication poste: Research Associate in International Political Theory, Goethe-University Frankfurt, deadline: September 2016

HiSoPo vous informe de cette annonce de  contrat post-doctoral à l’Université Goethe de Francfort.

The chair of International Political Theory, Prof. Darrel Moellendorf, Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders” at Goethe-University Frankfurt is offering a position as Research Associate (PhD) to begin in September 2016:

Eine Stelle als wissenschaftliche/-r Mitarbeiter/in (E 13 TV-G-U, 100 %). The appointment is limited until 31 October 2017. Applicants should have a PhD in political philosophy or political theory and research interests in international political theory and/or climate change and justice. A thorough knowledge of English and significant international experience is expected. The language ability to work well in a German speaking environment is desirable.

Applications should be submitted in English and should include a cover letter, curriculum vitae, and a writing sample. The deadline for receipt of applications is 24 July 2016.

Exzellenzcluster Normative Orders, Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, Sekretariat Prof. Dr. Moellendorf, Max-Horkheimer-Str. 2, Hauspostfach EXC 14, 60323 Frankfurt,

Call for Papers: Concepta Research Seminar “Comparing the Concepts of Representation”, deadline: 15 September 2016

HiSoPo vous informe du présent appel à publications pour des journées d’étude qui se tiendront à Paris les 18 et 19 novembre 2016 sur le thème “Comparing the Concepts of Representation”, organisées par le projet Civic Constellation, le réseau Concepta, le projet ANR-DFG CLAIMS et le groupe de projet de l’AFSP HiSoPo. Centrées sur l’histoire conceptuelle comparée, ces journées sont ouvertes à toutes les contributions pouvant éclairer la diversité dans le temps et l’espace des usages du concept de représentation.

Call for Papers

Comparing the Concepts of Representation

SciencesPo, Paris, Friday 18 and Saturday 19 November 2016

Organized by the Civic Constellation II project, Concepta: International Research School in Conceptual History and Political Thought, the CLAIMS project (ANR-DFG) and HiSoPo (AFSP)

Representation is a core concept in modern politics. Since the revolutions of the 17th and 18th century, representation has become the main principle organizing and legitimizing political systems. Social movements themselves are based on representation – of workers, of women, of minorities – as are aesthetics, linguistics or psychology. As a result of this centrality, the concept of representation can be hard to grasp; ubiquitous, its meaning is deeply contentious.

It is ever more so the case as we enlarge the scope of analysis from English to other languages. While in English or in French a single signifier, representation or représentation, can refer to several signified (incarnation, delegation, mental images, pictorial or theatrical reproduction and so on), Italian distinguishes between rappresentazione and rappresentanza, German between Repräsentation, Vertretung, Darstellung and Vorstellung, for example. And this is not to mention non-European languages, in which sometimes the Western concept of representation was imported (such as daibiao in Chinese).

Facing this plurality and ambiguity of meanings, several strategies are possible: one is exemplified by Hanna Pitkin’s 1967 seminal work, The Concept of Representation, which delineates a single concept of representation – admittedly offering a range of interpretations – as ‘the making present in some sense of something which is nevertheless not present literally or in fact’. While useful in political philosophy, this approach can lead to historical misconceptions. The purpose of this seminar is more aligned with another classic work, namely, Hasso Hofmann’s 1974 Repräsentation. Studien zur Wort- und Begriffsgeschichte von der Antike bis ins 19. Jahrhundert. Accordingly, we intend to explore the plurality of ways in which the concept of representation is used in the languages of politics.

This Research Seminar will bring together scholars from different disciplines at all stages of their career to provide the first elements for a comparative history of political representation. As such, while the focus of the contributions will not necessarily be strictly linguistic and can include institutions and practices, authors will nonetheless be expected to take into account the discursive dimension of the studied phenomenon and to expose and discuss the meanings of the concept of representation in the context(s) of their study. Even if there is no preferred geographical or temporal setting, we will consider very favourably papers that study political representation in non-European areas.

Keynote lectures will be delivered by Dr. Rochana Bajpai (SOAS, University of London) and Prof. Yves Sintomer (Paris 8 University, IUF).

Language: English – no attendance fee.

To apply please send your paper proposal in a Word file, of up to 500 words, before 15 September 2016 to both convenors: Samuel Hayat, CNRS/CERAPS ( and José María Rosales, University of Málaga (

To prepare the sessions debates, enlarged abstracts/outlines/papers of up to 1500 words should be sent to both convenors by 28 October 2016.