Our 21st century lives make it increasingly difficult to live as humans. From social media to Zoom meetings to fitness trackers, we live our lives in digital spaces, and in doing so, lose our grip on what is most real. Trends like these are not waning, but rather accelerating, spurred by AI and other new technologies. Most of these technologies are not intrinsically problematic and some can be used for good. Yet as our lives become increasingly digitized, the most human aspects of our lives atrophy. For the Catholic, moreover, since the sacraments meet us in our humanity, the patterns of 21st-century life threaten to undermine a sacramental outlook. In the Magi Project Fall Lecture, Professor Joseph M. Vukov, author of the recent book Staying Human in an Era of Artificial Intelligence, discussed his diagnosis of our current situation, and issued a call to action to resist problematic trends in it. Professor Vukov is an Associate Professor of Philosophy Department and the Associate Director of the Hank Center for the Catholic Intellectual Heritage at Loyola University Chicago. He serves on the AI Research Group for the Dicastery for Culture and Education and is the current President of Philosophers in Jesuit Education.

Director of the American Identity Project at the Progressive Policy Institute, Richard Kahlenberg provided groundbreaking testimony that played a pivotal role in persuading the Supreme Court to strike down racial affirmative action, dismaying – and outraging – his own progressive circle. Yet, his conviction that economic disadvantage provides a better, more fair way to achieve diversity is unwavering.  In his new book, Class Matters: The Fight to Get Beyond Race Preferences, Reduce Inequality, and Build Real Diversity at America’s Colleges, Professor Kahlenberg made the definitive case for adopting a class-based approach to college admissions, giving more people a place at the table and more opportunity to “swim in the river of power.” He included an analysis of the preliminary admission results following the Supreme Court’s ruling, which indicate that colleges can achieve racial and economic diversity without explicit racial preferences. Professor Kahlenberg presented the case of Class Matters at this special event of Princeton University’s James Madison Program, co-presented with the new Spirited Debate Initiative of the University of Pennsylvania’s Program for Research on Religion and Urban Civil Society (PRRUCS). Kahlenberg’s opening remarks were followed by comments from Professor Marta Tienda (Princeton University) and Professor John McWhorter (Columbia University and New York Times). The conversation was moderated by Professor Robert P. George, Faculty Director of the James Madison Program.

In this first annual meeting of the International Society for MacIntyrean Enquiry (ISME) since the passing of Alasdair MacIntyre,  this 3-day conference aimed to explore MacIntyre’s rich conceptualization of tradition and tradition-constituted enquiry, inviting discussions on the diverse interactions, conflicts, and potential reconciliations between various intellectual paradigms. Special attention was paid to how the contemporary moral philosophy and (and contemporary moral challenges) relate to classical virtue ethics, an ethical tradition reclaimed in the 20th century by MacIntyre and Elizabeth Anscombe, whose archive is held in Penn Special Collections through a partnership with PRRUCS.

Last spring two Penn faculty members, Ezekiel Emanuel (Med) and Harun Küçük (Hist & Soc of Science), co-authored a New York Times Op-Ed, “Higher Education needs more Socrates and Plato.”  Here is how it begins:

“The right attacks colleges and universities as leftist and woke. Progressives castigate them as perpetuating patriarchy and white privilege. The burdens of these culture war assaults are compounded by parents worried that the exorbitant costs of higher education aren’t worth it. No wonder Americans’ faith in universities is at a low.  Only 36% of Americans have confidence in higher education…”

How in the world could Socrates be a plausible solution to this crisis in trust?  And even if he somehow were, how might a remedy in that philosopher’s name correspond to the path of study outside the Humanities — to the natural sciences and the professional schools?  Moreover, the university context in spring 2024 appears very different than the one in spring 2025: to what extent might last year’s suggestions for strengthening the university remain relevant?

This informal colloquium convened a diverse group of scholars to reflect on the current relevance and practicality of “reasserting the liberal arts idea” proposed by the NYT essay co-authors.

The Anscombe Reading Group is an opportunity for scholars, students, and interested readers to come together virtually three times during the Fall and three times during the Spring to discuss the philosophy of Elizabeth Anscombe, one of the seminal thinkers of the 20th century.

This Spring’s instantiation of the Anscombe Reading Group continues last year’s dive into the philosophical treasure trove that is the Collegium Institute Anscombe Archive, with a special focus on the subject of bioethics. Across three sessions, we will read hand-picked selections from the Archive.