miércoles, 29 de febrero de 2012

Convocatoria: Revista Pensamiento Jurídico - Universidad Nacional de Colombia

Por Jorge Luis Fabra Zamora (jorgefabraz@gmail.com)


Agradezco a Hjalmar Newark por esta info:

Estimado Doctor:

La Revista Pensamiento Jurídico de la Facultad de Derecho, Ciencia Política y Sociales de la Universidad Nacional de Colombia, es una revista académica, científica y arbitrada con una periodicidad de tres revistas anuales, indexada por COLCIENCIAS; dirigida a juristas, investigadores, abogados profesionales, estudiantes, instancias de la rama judicial, legislativa y ejecutiva y, en general, a todos aquellos interesados en el fenómeno jurídico tratado desde una perspectiva interdisciplinaria tanto en el país, como en el extranjero. Cubre una amplia gama de campos de las ciencias sociales y jurídicas, entre ellos: la filosofía e historia del derecho, la sociología, el derecho constitucional, el derecho y la política y la teoría jurídica. Al difundir las contribuciones más relevantes en los temas objeto de estudio, busca convertirse en un espacio de divulgación, examen y debate que permita el fortalecimiento de la comunidad académica. Nuestra publicación, recibe artículos académicas de reconocidos investigadores a nivel nacional e internacional.

Actualmente nos encontramos en el proceso de convocatoria y recepción de artículos para nuestra revista No. 34 (mayo - agosto) de 2012 y 35 (septiembre - diciembre) de 2012 y 36 (enero – abril) 2013.

Dada su trayectoria académica, nos gustaría poder contar con su colaboración en nuestra publicación y en consecuencia, le invitamos a enviarnos uno o más artículos de su autoría, relacionado(s) con las siguientes temáticas: Ley de Víctimas, Ley de Tierras, Reforma a la Justicia, Justicia Transicional y derecho ambiental. El o los artículos deberán remitirse a más tardar el día 30 de Abril, 31 de julio y 30 de Noviembre de 2012, respectivamente; para ello encontrarán como anexos las normas de publicación, con el fin de disponer de una mayor información. En cualquier caso, la revista recibirá permanentemente materiales destinados a publicarse en los números subsiguientes.

Asimismo, quisiéramos extender una invitación especial a sus colegas investigadores, que usted piense puedan estar interesados en enviar sus artículos para nuestra revista. Cualquier inquietud al respecto puede contactarnos vía e-mail:insisjpg_bog@unal.edu.co, y revistapensamientojuridico0@gmail.com.

Agradecemos su atención y esperamos contar con su participación y la de sus colegas.



Cordialmente,



MARIA CRISTINA PATIÑO GONZÁLEZ
DIRECTORA
Revista Pensamiento Jurídico
Instituto Unidad de Investigaciones Jurídico - Sociales "Gerardo Molina" - UNIJUS
Facultad Derecho, Ciencias Políticas y Sociales
Universidad Nacional de Colombia

Michael Ignatieff en Mcmaster

Por Jorge Luis Fabra Zamora (jorgefabraz@gmail.com)


***********************************************************************

The Wilson Institute for Canadian History and the Department of History
are pleased to announce a public lecture by Dr. Micheal Ignatieff on
Thursday 1 March at the University Club at 7:30 pm.

Dr Ignatieff will speak on:

'The Rights Revolution Revisited: How we got here, where we got next'

This event is free and open to all members of the McMaster Community.
Seating is limited.

This public lecture kicks off the Taking Liberties Workshop on
Historicizing Human Rights.

A poster for the event is attached.




Convocatorias en España

Por Jorge Luis Fabra Zamora (jorgefabraz@gmail.com)

Aquí.

Conferencia: Acto Administrativo Electrónico - Universidad Seguiro Arboleda

Por Jorge Luis Fabra Zamora (jorgefabraz@gmail.com)


La Escuela de Derecho de la Universidad Sergio Arboleda Santa Marta y el grupo de Investigaciòn JOAQUÍN AARÓN MANJARRÉS, tiene el gusto de invitarlos a la Conferencia sobre EL ACTO ADMINISTRATIVO ELECTRÓNICO, próximo a realizarse, el dia 1 de MARZO del presente año, de 5:00 P.m a 7 p.m, en el Salon B-202 de nuestra institución.

Esta conferencia estará a cargo del  DR. OSCAR IBÁÑEZ PARRA.Abogado Universidad de la Sabana , diplomado en Arbitraje Comercial Internacional de la Escuela de Leyes de American University de Washington, en Derecho Administrativo de la Universidad del Rosario,  Magister en Derecho de la Universidad Sergio Arboleda, D.E.A. de la Universidad Alfonso X “El Sabio”, doctor en Derecho de la Universidad Alfonso X “El Sabio” con la distinción “Magna Cum Laude”.


Anexo invitación y agradezco su asistencia


Máster en Derechos Humanos

Por Jorge Luis Fabra Zamora (jorgefabraz@gmail.com)

Un nuevo máster en Derechos Humanos del Centro Europeo Inter-Universitario en Derechos Humanos y Democratización:

The European Inter-University Centre for Human Rights and Democratisation (EIUC) is proud to launch the 2012/2013 European Master’s Degree in Human Rights and Democratisation (E.MA). 

The call for application has already begun, and the deadline is 31st of March; please find the newsletter at this link: 

http://us2.forward-to-friend.com/forward/show?u=3cefac4691384778fc236322b&id=8a59ebe366 

E.MA is an intensive one-year master's programme (see enclosed) aimed at educating professionals in human rights, democracy, peace and development. The programme offers an action- and policy-oriented approach to learning which combines interdisciplinary perspectives with skills building activities. 

Students have the opportunity to share knowledge and skills with leading academics, representing the 41 European universities participating in the programme, as well as officials of international organisations, NGO experts and human rights activists.

martes, 28 de febrero de 2012

Este Mundo Moderno

Por Jorge Luis Fabra Zamora (jorgefabraz@gmail.com)

A Través de Feminist Philosophers, aquí...



La División Analítico - Continental

Por Jorge Luis Fabra Zamora (jorgefabraz@gmail.com)

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/bridging-the-analytic-continental-divide/

February 19, 2012, 5:00 PM

Bridging the Analytic-Continental Divide

The Stone
The Stone is a forum for contemporary philosophers on issues both timely and timeless.
Many philosophers at leading American departments are specialists in metaphysics: the study of the most general aspects of reality such as being and time. The major work of one of the most prominent philosophers of the 20th century, Martin Heidegger, is “Being and Time,” a profound study of these two topics.  Nonetheless, hardly any of these American metaphysicians have paid serious attention to Heidegger’s book.
The standard explanation for this oddity is that the metaphysicians are analytic philosophers, whereas Heidegger is a continentalphilosopher.  Although the two sorts of philosophers seldom read one another’s work, when they do, the results can be ugly.  A famous debate between Jacques Derrida (continental) and John Searle (analytic) ended with Searle denouncing Derrida’s “obscurantism” and Derrida mocking Searle’s “superficiality.”

The distinction between analytic and continental philosophers seems odd, first of all, because it contrasts a geographical characterization (philosophy done on the European continent, particularly Germany and France) with a methodological one (philosophy done by analyzing concepts).  It’s like, as Bernard Williams pointed out, dividing cars into four-wheel-drive and made-in-Japan.  It becomes even odder when we realize that some of the founders of analytic philosophy (like Frege and Carnap) were Europeans, that many of the leading centers of “continental” philosophy are at American universities, and that many “analytic” philosophers have no interest in analyzing concepts.
Leif Parsons
Some attention to history helps make sense of the distinction.  In the early 20th century, philosophers in England (Russell, Moore, Wittgenstein) and in Germany and Austria (Carnap,  Reichenbach, Hempel — all of whom, with the rise of the Nazis, emigrated to the United States) developed what they saw as a radically new approach to philosophy, based on the new techniques of symbolic logic developed by Frege and Russell.
The basic idea was that philosophical problems could be solved (or dissolved) by logically analyzing key terms, concepts or propositions.  (Russell’s analysis of definite descriptions of what does not exist — e.g., “The present King of France” — remains a model of such an approach.)  Over the years, there were various forms of logical, linguistic and conceptual analysis, all directed toward resolving confusions in previous philosophical thought and presented as examples of analytic philosophy.  Eventually, some philosophers, especially Quine, questioned the very idea of “analysis” as a distinctive philosophical method.  But the goals of clarity, precision, and logical rigor remained, and continue to define the standards for a type of philosophy that calls itself analytic and is dominant in English-speaking countries.
At roughly the same time that analytic philosophy was emerging, Edmund Husserl was developing his “phenomenological” approach to philosophy.  He too emphasized high standards of clarity and precision, and had some fruitful engagements with analytic philosophers such as Frege.  Husserl, however, sought clarity and precision more in the rigorous description of our immediate experience (the phenomena) than in the logical analysis of concepts or language.   He saw his phenomenology as operating at the fundamental level of knowledge on which any truths of conceptual or linguistic analysis would have to be based.  In “Being and Time” Husserl’s student, Heidegger, turned phenomenology toward “existential” questions about freedom, anguish and death.  Later, French thinkers influenced by Husserl and Heidegger, especially Sartre and Merleau-Ponty, developed their own versions of phenomenologically based existentialism.
The term “continental philosophy” was, as Simon Critchley and Simon Glendinning have emphasized, to an important extent the invention of analytic philosophers of the mid-20th century who wanted to distinguish themselves from the phenomenologists and existentialists of continental Europe.  These analytic philosophers (Gilbert Ryle was a leading figure) regarded the continental appeal to immediate experience as a source of subjectivity and obscurity that was counter to their own ideals of logical objectivity and clarity.  The analytic-continental division was institutionalized in 1962, when American proponents of continental philosophy set up their own professional organization, The Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy (SPEP), as an alternative to the predominantly (but by no means exclusively) analytic American Philosophical Association (APA).
The claim that working in the analytic mode restricts the range of our philosophical inquiry no longer has any basis.
Over the last 50 years, the term “continental philosophy” has been extended to many other European movements, such as Hegelian idealism, Marxism, hermeneutics and, especially, poststructuralism and deconstruction.  These are often in opposition to phenomenology and existentialism, but analytic philosophers still see them as falling far short of standards or clarity and rigor.  As a result, as Brian Leiter has emphasized, “continental philosophy” today designates “a series of partly overlapping traditions in philosophy, some of whose figures have almost nothing in common with [each] other.”
The scope of  “analytic philosophy” has likewise broadened over the years.  In the 1950s, it typically took the form of either logical positivism or ordinary-language philosophy, each of which involved commitment to a specific mode of analysis (roughly, following either Carnap or Wittgenstein) as well as substantive philosophical views.  These views involved a rejection of much traditional philosophy (especially metaphysics and ethics) as essentially meaningless.  There was, in particular, no room for religious belief or objective ethical norms.  Today, analytic philosophers use a much wider range of methods (including quasi-scientific inference to the best explanation and their own versions of phenomenological description).  Also, there are analytic cases being made for the full range of traditional philosophical positions, including the existence of God, mind-body dualism, and objective ethical norms.
Various forms of empiricism and naturalism are still majority views, but any philosophical position can be profitably developed using the tools of analytic philosophy.  There are Thomists and Hegelians who are analytic philosophers, and there is even a significant literature devoted to expositions of major continental philosophers in analytic terms.  The claim that working in the analytic mode restricts the range of our philosophical inquiry no longer has any basis.
This development refutes the claim that analytic philosophers, asSantiago Zabala recently put it, do not discuss “the fundamental questions that have troubled philosophers for millennia.”  This was true in the days of positivism, but no more. Zabala’s claim that analytic philosophers have not produced “deep historical research” is similarly outdated.  It was true back when the popularity of Russell’s “A History of Western Philosophy” signaled the analytic disdain for serious history.  Now, however, even though many analytic philosophers still have little interest in history, many of the best current historians of philosophy employ the conceptual and argumentative methods of analytic philosophy.
Because of such developments, Leiter has argued that there are no longer substantive philosophical differences between analytic and continental philosophy, although there are sometimes important differences of “style.”  He has also suggested that the only gap in principle between the two camps is sociological, that (these are my examples) philosophers in one camp discount the work of those in the other simply because of their personal distaste for symbolic logic or for elaborate literary and historical discussions.
Some continental approaches claim to access a privileged domain of experience.
I agree with much of what Leiter says, but think there are still important general philosophical differences between analytic philosophy and continental philosophy, in all their current varieties.   These differences concern their conceptions of experience and of reason as standards of evaluation. Typically, analytic philosophy appeals to experience understood as common-sense intuitions (as well as their developments and transformations by science) and to reason understood as the standard rules of logical inference.   A number of continental approaches claim to access a privileged domain ofexperience that penetrates beneath the veneer of common sense and science experience. For example, phenomenologists, such as Husserl, the early Heidegger, Sartre and Merleau-Ponty try to describe the concretely lived experience from which common-sense/scientific experience is a pale and distorted abstraction, like the mathematical frequencies that optics substitutes for the colors we perceive in the world.  Similarly, various versions of neo-Kantianism and idealism point to a “transcendental” or “absolute” consciousness that provides the fuller significance of our ordinary experiences.
Other versions of continental thought regard the essential activity of reason not as the logical regimentation of thought but as the creative exercise of intellectual imagination.  This view is characteristic of most important French philosophers since the 1960s, beginning with Foucault, Derrida and Deleuze.  They maintain that the standard logic analytic philosophers use can merely explicate what is implicit in the concepts with which we happen to begin; such logic is useless for the essential philosophical task, which they maintain is learning to think beyond these concepts.
Continental philosophies of experience try to probe beneath the concepts of everyday experience to discover the meanings that underlie them, to think the conditions for the possibility of our concepts.  By contrast, continental philosophies of imagination try to think beyond those concepts, to, in some sense, think what is impossible.
Philosophies of experience and philosophies of imagination are in tension, since the intuitive certainties of experience work as limits to creative intellectual imagination, which in turn challenges those alleged limits.  Michel Foucault nicely expressed the tension when he spoke of the competing philosophical projects of critique in the sense of “knowing what limits knowledge has to renounce transgressing” and of  “a practical critique that takes the form of a possible transgression.”  However, a number of recent French philosophers (e.g., Levinas, Ricoeur, Badiou and Marion) can be understood as developing philosophies that try to reconcile phenomenological experience and deconstructive creativity.
In view of their substantive philosophical differences, it’s obvious that analytic and continental philosophers would profit by greater familiarity with one another’s work, and discussions across the divide would make for a better philosophical world.  Here, however, there is a serious lack of symmetry between analytic and continental thought.  This is due to the relative clarity of most analytic writing in contrast to the obscurity of much continental work.
Because of its commitment to clarity, analytic philosophy functions as an effective lingua franca for any philosophical ideas.  (Even the most difficult writers, such as Sellars and Davidson, find disciples who write clarifying commentaries.)  There is, moreover, a continuing demand for analytic expositions of major continental figures.  It’s obvious why there is no corresponding market for, say, expositions of Quine, Rawls or Kripke in the idioms of Heidegger, Derrida or Deleuze.  With all due appreciation for the limits of what cannot be said with full clarity, training in analytic philosophy would greatly improve the writing of most continental philosophers.
RELATED
More From The Stone
Read previous contributions to this series.
Of course, analytic philosophers could often profit from exposure to continental ideas.  Epistemologists, for example, could learn a great deal from the phenomenological analyses of Husserl and Merleau-Ponty, and metaphysicians could profit from the historical reflections of Heidegger and Derrida. But in view of the unnecessary difficulty of much continental writing, most analytic philosophers will do better to rely on a second-hand acquaintance through reliable and much more accessible secondary sources.
It may be that the most strikingly obscure continental writing  (e.g., of the later Heidegger and of most major French philosophers since the 1960s) is a form of literary expression, producing a kind of abstract poetry from its creative transformations of philosophical concepts.   This would explain the move of academic interest in such work toward English and other language departments.  But it is hard to see that there is much of serious philosophical value lost in the clarity of analytic commentaries on Heidegger, Derrida, et al.
There are some encouraging recent signs of philosophers following philosophical problems wherever they are interestingly discussed, regardless of the author’s methodology, orientation or style.  But the primary texts of leading continental philosophers are still unnecessary challenges to anyone trying to come to terms with them.  The continental-analytic gap will begin to be bridged only when seminal thinkers of the Continent begin to write more clearly.

Gary Gutting
Gary Gutting is a professor of philosophy at the University of Notre Dame, and an editor of Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. He is the author of, most recently, “Thinking the Impossible: French Philosophy since 1960,” and writes regularly for The Stone.

lunes, 27 de febrero de 2012

Franco sobre Pensiones

Por Jorge Luis Fabra Zamora (jorgefabraz@gmail.com)

Javier Franco Mongua - Análisis Económico del Derecho, Universidad Militar, sobre el tema de las pensiones públicas. Aquí.

Hay Festival: Guardiola Rivera, Yolanda Reyes, Mario Mendoza y Mario Abello

Por Jorge Luis Fabra Zamora (jorgefabraz@gmail.com)


Oscar Guardiola-Rivera, Yolanda Reyes, Mario Mendoza and Jordi Puntí with Jaime Abello

“In situations like the present, there should be no space for resignation or apathy,” states Stéphane Hessel in his bookTime for Outrage!. It is clear that voices calling for a regeneration of the democratic and economic system, and more participative public policies, are growing. Governments, on their side, seem increasingly dependent on the markets, and further from social needs. There is more need than ever to discuss these burning issues once again.
Disponible: Aquí.


domingo, 26 de febrero de 2012

CFP: PERSP Legal Philosophy (Cambridge)

Por Jorge Luis Fabra Zamora (jorgefabraz@gmail.com)


First PERSP Legal Philosophy Workshop: Perspectival Legal Discourse

WHEN:Back to Calendar »July 5, 2012 – July 6, 2012 (all-day)
WHERE:Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge
Click to view map
CONTACT:The Consolider-Ingenio PERSP Project (WPS3)
perspworkshop@gmail.com
Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge
July 5th and 6th, 2012
The organisers invite submissions for an international workshop on ‘Perspectival Legal Discourse’. The workshop will take place in Cambridge on July 5th and 6th, 2012.
Is legal discourse perspectival? Does the sincere utterance of statements of law hinge on the adoption of any particular point of view? Do we appeal to a distinctively legal viewpoint when we speak of our legal duties, rights, or powers? More generally, is the truth (or even the truth-value) of propositions of law dependent on any characteristic perspective, presupposition, fiction, or standpoint?
These have been important questions in legal theory and philosophy of law at least since HLA Hart’s 1961 The Concept of Law. Hart’s views on such issues were subject to much exegetical and critical scrutiny over the past decades, as were Hans Kelsen’s or Joseph Raz’s. This workshop aims to move the debate further by discussing original papers that directly tackle the general topic of perspectival legal discourse in any of its aspects.
Detailed abstracts (around 800 words) prepared for blind review should be submitted to perspworkshop@gmail.com until April 30th, 2012. Six to eight papers will be selected for presentation, and authors will be notified of decisions by May 11th, 2012. Drafts of the selected papers, to be circulated in advance among all the participants, are to be submitted by June 22th, 2012.
Accommodation (3 nights) and meals will be provided for accepted speakers. Very limited funding is also available to help fund speakers’ travel expenses; preference will be given to junior scholars. Candidate speakers who wish to be considered for this support should declare so (and briefly state their reasons) at the moment of submitting their abstracts.
This workshop is sponsored by:
The Consolider-Ingenio PERSP Project (WPS3)
The Cambridge Forum for Legal and Political Philosophy
The CCCOM (Communication in Context) Project
Organised by: Jordi Ferrer (Girona), José Juan Moreso (Barcelona), Luís Duarte d’Almeida (Girona and Cambridge), and Matthew H. Kramer (Cambridge)
For more information please contact:
perspworkshop@gmail.com

Becas Post-Doctorales en Francia - FMSH, Bourses Fernand Braudel-IFER

Por Jorge Luis Fabra Zamora (jorgefabraz@gmail.com)


English version:
Presentation:
The Fondation Maison des Sciences de l’Homme (FMSH, Paris) offers postdoctoral fellowships for researchers in the social and human sciences for periods of nine months within the framework of its “Fernand Braudel-IFER” (International Fellowships for Experienced Researchers) programme.

This programme is supported by the European Union (Action Marie Curie – COFUND – 7th EU Research Framework Programme), the French Ministry of Higher Education and Research (MESR), the Institute for SHS at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) and the Fritz Thyssen Foundation (Cologne), and is carried out in collaboration with the Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst (DAAD).

  • The Fernand Braudel-IFER programme breaks down into two sections:
  • The Fernand Braudel-IFER incoming programme for residencies in France (for researchers that belong to a foreign research centre).
  • The Fernand Braudel-IFER outgoing programme for research stays in other European countries (for researchers that belong to a French research centre).
Call for applications:
The Fernand Braudel-IFER programme offers postdoctoral fellowships to researchers in the social and human sciences (SHS) that wish to work in an international research setting.
  • The Fernand Braudel-IFER incoming programme is intended for foreign researchers that would like to benefit from a research stay in France.
  • The Fernand Braudel-IFER outgoing programme is intended for researchers residing inFrance that would like to benefit from a research stay in another European country (EU Member States or affiliates). 
  • Applicants that wish to go to Germany should apply for the Fernand Braudel-IFER outgoing programme/Clemens Heller sub-programme.
These research stays are designed to enable researchers to:

  • Carry out an individual research project at a host laboratory;
  • Integrate scientific networks in France or other European countries;
  • Build lasting partnerships between their home institution and the host institutions.
Host laboratories in France (namely research centers attached to universities, the CNRS or an MSH institution belonging to the national MSH network) are chosen by the researchers themselves.

Outgoing researchers must be affiliated with a research laboratory at a university or other research entity in the host country.

Applicable scientific disciplines:
All social and human science disciplines are eligible. An interdisciplinary approach to research topics is encouraged.
Length of the fellowship:

9 months (however, the length of the research stay can be adjusted if warranted for scientific reasons)
Amount of the fellowship:
The amount of the monthly stipend for room & board and living expenses is €2,000 (euros).
The cost of medical insurance is covered for researchers hosted in France.
Travel expenses (return travel fare) between the researcher’s country of residence and France or between France and the host country will be covered, subject to prior approval.
Upon request, additional funding may be granted to cover documentation costs or participation in scientific events held in France (or in the host country).
Calendar:
Two calls for applications per year (deadlines for applications are 31 March and 30 September, as attested by date on postmark)

Eligibility criteria for the Fernand Braudel-IFER incoming programme
Applicants must reside outside France and belong to a non-French research institution (university, academy of sciences, or other research organism).
Foreign candidates that reside in France or have resided there in the year preceding the deadline for applications are not eligible. Lecturers, fellowship-holders and those holding teaching positions in a French institution or research centre are considered to be French residents.
Applicants must hold a PhD (or equivalent) as at the date of application (i.e. dissertation successfully defended).
The application must be submitted within six years of defending their doctoral dissertation. Exceptions may be granted for some cases of career breaks (e.g. interruptions due to maternity leave, illness, etc.).
Applicants must be fluent in one of the working languages of the host laboratory; fluency in French or English is preferable.

Any laboratory in which the applicant has already worked at any time during his/her scientific experience (including during doctoral studies) is not eligible as a host laboratory.
Due to the limited number of fellowships available, applicants residing abroad but that completed their doctoral studies in France are not given priority.

Eligibility criteria for the Fernand Braudel-IFER outgoing programme
Candidates must have resided in France and been affiliated with a university or other research laboratory in France for at least two years, regardless of their nationality.
Applicants must hold a PhD (or equivalent) as at the date of application (i.e. dissertation successfully defended).
The application must be submitted within six years of defending their doctoral dissertation. Exceptions may be granted for some cases of career breaks (e.g. interruptions due to maternity leave, illness, etc.).
Applicants must be fluent in one of the working languages of the host laboratory; fluency in the language of the host country is preferable.
Due to the limited number of fellowships available, stays at French-speaking universities in countries neighbouring France are not given priority.
Due to the limited number of fellowships available, stays in the applicant’s home country are not given priority.
A French research institute abroad is not sufficient as a host laboratory unless a local host laboratory is also chosen.

Application procedure
Applications must be submitted both electronically and by post.
Each application file must include:

  • An application form (to be downloaded from: http://www.msh-paris.fr/en/research/mobility/fernand-braudel-ifer-fellowships/application-procedure/).
  • Curriculum vitae.
  • List of publications.
  • Detailed research project proposal (5-8 pages long, plus a bibliography of 2 pages maximum), in English or French.
  • Copy of the doctoral diploma.
  • Summary of the applicant’s doctoral dissertation (2 pages maximum) in English or in French.
  • Two (2) letters of recommendation from scientific scholars from France or elsewhere.
  • A welcome letter from the director of the institution or research laboratory that agrees to host the applicant and direct his/her research for the duration of the fellowship.
  • A copy of the dissertation defence report (if the dissertation was defended in France).The project proposal must be written in French, along with a version in the host country’s language or in English.
Sending your application:
Fondation Maison des Sciences de l'Homme, Scientific Direction – Fernand Braudel-IFER programme (incoming or outgoing), 190, Avenue de France, 75013 Paris France

Fichier à télécharger (site de Calanda.org):
Contact
Raquel Sanz Barrio - ifer.outgoing@msh-paris.fr - FMSH, Bourses Fernand Braudel-IFER outgoing, 190, avenue de France, 75648 Paris cedex 13
Fréderique Louveau - ifer.incoming@msh-paris.fr - FMSH, Bourses Fernand Braudel-IFER incoming, 190, avenue de France, 75648 Paris cedex 13

URL

Source: «Bourses postdoctorales Fernand Braudel-IFER», Bourse, prix et emploi, Calenda, publié le mercredi 15 février 2012,http://calenda.revues.org/nouvelle22775.html

Publicidad del Blog

20% discount for the readers of "Filosofía del Derecho Colombia" blog in Hart's Publishing legal philosophy catalogue. Use the code FDDBLOG in your purchase. Follow this link.

Les comparto que Hart Publishing ha extendido la oferta de ofrecer un descuento del 20% a los lectures de este blog a todos los lectores de este blog en su catálogo de este libros. Los interesados deben utilizar el códigoFDDBLOG en su compra. Nótese que el descuento no aparecerá directa en la orden, pero será aplicado cuando la orden sea procesada. Más info, aquí y el catálogo de libros con descuento aquí.