»Visiting Lecturers


Toggle Section

Calendar of Events


Toggle Section

2025 Spring

Christopher Bush

Lecture: "The Troubled Present" : Haiku as World Literature between the World Wars

March 18, 2025 • 4:00pm • Wilkinson Hall 221


Abstract: During and shortly after the First World War, the haiku went from being almost unknown outside of Japan to becoming a generative literary form for poets writing in a wide range of languages. Far from limiting themselves to exoticist themes, these poets (some now canonical, but many not) engaged with central issues of modernist poetics and indeed of modernity more broadly. Despite the form’s well-known tendency to focus on the here and now of a fleeting moment, these modernist-era haiku often sparked grand, even grandiose, conversations about history, the nation, and the overall fate of a globalizing world.

Following a brief opening example from China, my talk will focus on three distinct literary-critical contexts in which haiku were written and written about during this period: France during the First World War; Central Europe during the interwar period; and early 1920s Brazil, during the birth of a self-consciously national modernismo. In dialogue with the work of such theorists such as Peter Osborne, my conclusion argues that the modernist haiku can best be understood less in terms of the modern—breaking with the past to create something new—and more in terms of the contemporary: figuring a complex present in which everything everywhere is happening in the same, shared time.

Bio: Christopher Bush (Ph.D. in Comparative Literature, UCLA) is Associate Professor of French and Comparative Literary Studies at Northwestern University. His research and teaching focus on transnational and interdisciplinary approaches to literary modernisms, especially the connections between Western European and East Asian avant-gardes, aesthetic theory, and media. Book projects include one on the modernist haiku as world literature, and another on Japanese cinema in European film theory. He has recently published articles in Esprit créateur (on Proust), T. S. Eliot Studies Annual, and the Surrealism Beyond Borders exhibition catalog. He was coeditor of the journal Modernism/modernity from 2016 to 2021 and continues to serve on its editorial board. Academic honors include funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities, a Fulbright research grant, the Princeton Society of Fellows, the Aldo and Jeanne Scaglione Prize for a Translation of a Literary Work, and a Mellon New Directions Fellowship.


Joshua Tasoff

Lecture: "Moral Preferences and the Marketplace of Ideas"

March 5, 2025 • 4:00pm • Wilkinson Hall 221

 
Abstract:In the marketplace of ideas, advocates attempt to shift norms and behaviors through their rhetoric, sometimes precipitating tremendous change (e.g. abolitionism, women’s suffrage). In the context of factory farming, we conduct an individual-choice lab experiment to understand take-up of messages and those messages’ induced moral costs. Subjects mostly avoid messages about the harms to animals in factory farms and there is some selective search for countervailing information. We find that the factory-farm message, when viewed, imposes fixed costs on eating meat, consistent with deontological morals, and quantity costs on eating meat, consistent with utilitarian morals, significantly reducing meat consumption. We then consider a policymaker with a limited budget who wishes to reduce harmful commodity consumption. We conduct structural counterfactual analysis to model the market for meat and the marketplace of ideas, and solve for the optimal policy. We find that a policymaker who neglects the marketplace of ideas mismanages policy, leaving feasible harm mitigation on the table. In contrast, the policymaker who mistakenly presumes all consumers have utilitarian-like quantity moral costs makes near-zero policy error, making this standard assumption in the discipline an appropriate approximation.
 
Bio:Joshua Tasoff is an Associate Professor in Claremont Graduate University’s Department of Economic Sciences. His research focus is in behavioral economics, a subfield of economics that focuses on enriching economic analysis with psychology.

aidin-h-headshotAidin Hajikhameneh

February 1-28, 2025

In-Class Collaboration: ECON/ENG/PHIL 357: "The Rules of the Game"

 

Bio: Aidin Hajikhameneh is an Associate Professor of Economics at San Jose State University and co-director of the Spartan Experimental Economics Lab (SEEL). His research spans experimental economics, behavioral economics, and economic history, with a current emphasis on how culture, religion, and enforcement institutions impact decision-making.


andrew-wilkins-headshot

Andrew Wilkins

Lecture: "Allodial vs Feudal, Ancient vs Modern: Dynamism, History, and the Possibility of Freedom in Smith's Stadial Theory"

February 20, 2025 • 4:00pm • Wilkinson Hall 221

 
Abstract: This article explicates Smith’s stadial theory, and through it his broader conception of history, by examining both his concrete deployment of the theory, namely through his stadial account of the history of Europe, and his broader polemical concerns. Smith’s actual use of stadial theory in his account of the development of Europe is doubly sufficient evidence against any simplistic whiggish interpretation, or a derived rejection of his actual belief in the theory. Smith’s account of the transition of ancient commercial society to the allodial form of agricultural society, its own transition to the feudal form, and the emergence of a new, modern commercial society without slavery is key to Smith’s belief in the unique potential of his age to surpass the ancient problems of slavery and trade, empire and freedom. Far from disproving grand theories of history, the roundabout, “retrograde,” path of history is necessary for both the robustness of any theory of history and its potential for that most enlightened goal, the amelioration of the condition of man.
 
 
Bio: Andrew Wilkins is the Postdoctoral Scholar in History at Ohio University. He specializes in British and Irish Economic History, the history of Political Economy, the emergence of social, economic, and political modernity, empire, industrialization, and the Enlightenment.
 

john-wallis-headshotJohn Wallis

January 15-17, 2025

In-Class Collaboration: ECON/ENG/PHIL 357: "Equality" & PHIL 318: Political/Legal Philosophy

 

Bio: John Wallis is Professor of Economics at the University of Maryland and a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. He is economic historian and institutional economist whose research focuses on the dynamic interaction of political and economic institutions over time. An American economic historian, he collected large data sets on government finances and on state constitutions. His early research focused on the New Deal, and then his focus shifted to research on the early 19th century, the collapse of state government finances in the 1840s, and the constitutional changes in states that followed. Over the last two decades his research has expanded to cover a longer period, wider geography, and more general questions of how societies use institutions of economics and politics to solve the problem of controlling violence and, in some situations, sustaining economic growth. He published Violence and Social Orders: A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting Recorded Human History with Douglass North and Barry Weingast, Cambridge University Press, 2009 and In the Shadow of Violence: Politics, Economics, and the Problem of Development, edited with Douglass North, Steven Webb, and Barry Weingast, CUP, 2013. He edited Organizations, Civil Society, and the Roots of Development, with Naomi Lamoreaux.  Chicago: NBER/University of Chicago Press, 2017.  In the 2022/23 academic year he was the Pitt Professor of American History and Institutions at Cambridge University, and from 2018 to 2023 he was the Mancur Olson Professor of Economics at the University of Maryland. He is currently working on a new book examining the emergence of impersonal rules and the nature of modern development: Leviathan Denied: Rules, Organizations, and Governments  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Toggle Section

2024 Fall

holly-lawford-smith-headshot

Holly Lawford-Smith

November 12, 2024

In-Class Collaboration: FFC 100 "Dangerous Ideas"

Bio: Holly Lawford-Smith is an Associate Professor in Political Philosophy at the University of Melbourne. She is the author of Not in Their Name (2019), Gender-Critical Feminism (2022), and Sex Matters: Essays in Gender-Critical Philosophy (2023), all with Oxford University Press; and Is It Wrong To Buy Sex? A Debate (2024), written together with Angie Pepper and published with Routeledge. She teaches courses on feminism, everyday ethics, and free speech and hate speech. Her current research project is considering the place of feminism in relation to the left-right policical spectrum.


garett-jones-2

Garett Jones

October 29, 2024

In-Class Collaboration: FFC 100 "Dangerous Ideas"

Bio: Garett Jones is Professor of Economics at George Mason University, specializing in macroeconomics, political economy, and the role of cognitive factors in economic development. He is the author of 10% Less DemocracyThe Culture Transplant, and Hive Mind, and his research often explores the intersection of economic growth, institutional design, and human capital.

 


aidin-hAidin Hajikhameneh

October 1-31, 2024

In-Class Collaboration: FFC 100 "Choice in Economics and The Sandman"

Lecture: "Uncertainty, Superstition, and Endogenous Group Formation: An Intergenerational Experiment"

October 16, 2024  • 4:00pm  • Wilkinson Hall 221

Abstract: I report on an intergenerational lab experiment that adapts the classic public goods game by adding a computer algorithm that adjusts the payoffs. Adjustments were additive, reported separately from the contribution decisions, and unbeknownst to the subjects, random. Subjects were incentivized to advise future participants on how to play the game and reveal their beliefs about the underlying mechanism of the adjustments. In the second generation, subjects with superstitious beliefs contribute more to the public good than others. In the two supplementary treatments, the subjects had the option of sacrificing their personal gains to form new groups. Superstitious subjects were more willing than others to sacrifice and contribute to the public good. Hence, by sacrificing their personal gains, superstitious subjects endogenously form ultrasocial groups that, on average, contribute 85% of their endowments to the public good, fostering the highest level of collective welfare across all treatments.

Bio: Aidin Hajikhameneh is an Associate Professor of Economics at San Jose State University and co-director of the Spartan Experimental Economics Lab (SEEL). His research spans experimental economics, behavioral economics, and economic history, with a current emphasis on how culture, religion, and enforcement institutions impact decision-making.


brian-marein-headshotBrian Marein

October 1, 2024

In-Class Collaboration: FFC 100 "Dangerous Ideas"

Bio: Brian is an assistant professor of economics at Wake Forest University. He holds a PhD and MA in economics from the University of Colorado Boulder and a BS in economics and Spanish from the Ohio State University. Before joining Wake Forest, Brian was a visiting assistant professor at the University of Toronto. His research interests are in economic history and development, with a focus on Latin America, the Caribbean, and the United States in the early 20th century.


adam-martin-headshotAdam Martin

September 23-27, 2024

In-Class Collaboration: FFC 100 "Choice in Economics and The Sandman"

Lecture: "The (Tragic) Necessity of Consumer Sovereignty"

September 25, 2024 • 4:00pm • Wilkinson Hall 221

Abstract: Markets give us what we want. Economists refer to this feature of market systems as consumer sovereignty. But it is not always a good thing. Behavioral paternalists, deep ecologists, post-liberals, and others have raised various challenges to the idea that individuals getting what they want is a good thing. This essay grants that consumers often want bad things and that it is bad when they get them, but argues that consumer sovereignty is still a (perhaps tragic) standard worth defending when evaluating market institutions. I imagine an alternative to a free market system that I call market paternalism, which is the opposite of the older idea of market socialism. Market socialism uses the tools of state planning to satisfy consumer preferences, while market paternalism uses rivalrous competition to satisfy planners’ preferences for what individuals should consume. Like market socialism, market paternalism fails to deliver the innovation and adaptation that allow free market systems to deliver the possibility of human flourishing. Consumers contribute more than just passive preferences to the market process. I contrast market paternalism with yet another alternative, market fraternalism, and deliver some good and bad news. Market fraternalism curbs some of consumers’ bad choices. It also obtains for most people in wealthy nations, and is in most circumstances institutionally identical to individualistic free markets. But it also amplifies some of our bad choices. It is still probably the best we can do.

Bio: Adam Martin is a Research Fellow at the Free Market Institute and an Associate Professor in the department of Agricultural and Applied Economics at Texas Tech University. His research interests focus on the intersection of philosophy, politics and economics and economic methodology, economic development and public choice. He serves as the Vice President for the Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, a research fellow at the Independent Institute, and a fellow of the Public Choice and Public Policy Project at the American Institute for Economic Research.