Online June Annual Meeting 2026 Program Book

This paper argues that Tao Yuanming’s work provides distinct methodological resources that we can employ as we face challenges in our lives. The first is the creative use of moral exemplars from the past; the second is grounding ethical reflection in everyday experience. Tao never arrived at a single definitive resolution to human problems. What he did develop, however, was a distinctive way of living with these challenges.

This paper builds on previous scholarship that sees Tao as a philosopher of humanistic endurance by arguing that Tao makes an important and distinctive contribution to ethical and existential thought through his orchestration of methodological approaches. Tao draws on multiple philosophical traditions as well as his own lived experience to develop responses to the vicissitudes of life. While I do not argue that Tao’s conclusions are universally applicable, I do argue that the methodology he employs is worthy of emulation.

The role of common people within the ethical and socio-political framework of early Chinese thought remains largely underexplored, partly because they are often assumed to have been treated merely as passive subjects within a meritocratic order. Yet the two major early Chinese traditions, Confucianism and Mohism, propose markedly different forms of meritocratic governance. Mozi portrays ordinary people as participants in political life, arguing that the ruler should be a virtuous worthy whom everyone can recognize and endorse. By contrast, Confucian thinkers such as Xunzi emphasizes the ruler's duty to ensure the basic welfare of the common people instead of recognizing their political agency. Many scholars attribute this difference to their distinct ethical theories. I argue instead that the key divergence lies in their political epistemologies—specifically, whether ordinary people can understand the proper organization of socio-political life in accordance with Heaven’s processes.

There is a plurality of work dealing with the concept of moral progress, but from among these texts we can isolate two main camps. On the one hand, you have teleological conceptions of progress. Moral progress, these thinkers, involves transformations in social practices that move us closer to some defined end. On the other hand, you have pragmatic conceptions of progress, which see moral progress as movement away from problems into an open-ended future, not constrained by definite ends.

My paper seeks to bring Confucius into the scholarly debate, in order to complicate the narrative of progress. Specifically, this paper posits that Confucius’ relationship to the Zhou dynasty provides a model for thinking about progress that is not cleanly captured by either the teleological or the pragmatic models of moral progress.

Aaron Stalnaker states in his book, Mastery and Dependence, that many people question the existence of “ethical experts” (Stalnaker, 2). Stalnaker pushes back on this sentiment and argue for the existence of (also the need for) ethical masters. Even with the existence of moral experts, however, the question of “what motivates people to want to learn from them” remains to be answered. I argue the answer is in seeing moral teachers as idols.

Agreeing with Stalnaker on the belief that moral teachers are important for society, I explore the gravitas of moral excellence, which some ancient Greek and Confucian thinkers see as motivation to follow moral teachers. This attraction evolves into idolization for one’s teacher, which is key to moral pedagogy.

This paper argues that Tao Yuanming’s work provides distinct methodological resources that we can employ as we face challenges in our lives. The first is the creative use of moral exemplars from the past; the second is grounding ethical reflection in everyday experience. Tao never arrived at a single definitive resolution to human problems. What he did develop, however, was a distinctive way of living with these challenges.

This paper builds on previous scholarship that sees Tao as a philosopher of humanistic endurance by arguing that Tao makes an important and distinctive contribution to ethical and existential thought through his orchestration of methodological approaches. Tao draws on multiple philosophical traditions as well as his own lived experience to develop responses to the vicissitudes of life. While I do not argue that Tao’s conclusions are universally applicable, I do argue that the methodology he employs is worthy of emulation.

The role of common people within the ethical and socio-political framework of early Chinese thought remains largely underexplored, partly because they are often assumed to have been treated merely as passive subjects within a meritocratic order. Yet the two major early Chinese traditions, Confucianism and Mohism, propose markedly different forms of meritocratic governance. Mozi portrays ordinary people as participants in political life, arguing that the ruler should be a virtuous worthy whom everyone can recognize and endorse. By contrast, Confucian thinkers such as Xunzi emphasizes the ruler's duty to ensure the basic welfare of the common people instead of recognizing their political agency. Many scholars attribute this difference to their distinct ethical theories. I argue instead that the key divergence lies in their political epistemologies—specifically, whether ordinary people can understand the proper organization of socio-political life in accordance with Heaven’s processes.

There is a plurality of work dealing with the concept of moral progress, but from among these texts we can isolate two main camps. On the one hand, you have teleological conceptions of progress. Moral progress, these thinkers, involves transformations in social practices that move us closer to some defined end. On the other hand, you have pragmatic conceptions of progress, which see moral progress as movement away from problems into an open-ended future, not constrained by definite ends.

My paper seeks to bring Confucius into the scholarly debate, in order to complicate the narrative of progress. Specifically, this paper posits that Confucius’ relationship to the Zhou dynasty provides a model for thinking about progress that is not cleanly captured by either the teleological or the pragmatic models of moral progress.

Aaron Stalnaker states in his book, Mastery and Dependence, that many people question the existence of “ethical experts” (Stalnaker, 2). Stalnaker pushes back on this sentiment and argue for the existence of (also the need for) ethical masters. Even with the existence of moral experts, however, the question of “what motivates people to want to learn from them” remains to be answered. I argue the answer is in seeing moral teachers as idols.

Agreeing with Stalnaker on the belief that moral teachers are important for society, I explore the gravitas of moral excellence, which some ancient Greek and Confucian thinkers see as motivation to follow moral teachers. This attraction evolves into idolization for one’s teacher, which is key to moral pedagogy.

Debates about artificial intelligence tend to revolve around a recurring set of concerns: agency, consciousness, and the proper locus of responsibility. This paper brings classical Yogācāra philosophy into conversation with these discussions — not as a metaphysical doctrine but as a conceptual toolkit for analyzing layered cognitive structures. Drawing on Yogācāra accounts of recursive conditioning and appropriative self-grasping, I argue that advanced AI systems are better understood as stratified architectures of patterned activation than as emergent subjects. This framing makes the distinction between functional recursion and reflexive appropriation philosophically available in a way that much current discourse lacks. By situating technological systems within a model of conditioned emergence, the paper redistributes agency across socio-technical networks and refines ethical analysis without attributing subjectivity to machines — demonstrating, in the process, how Buddhist philosophical resources can function as genuine conceptual engineering within contemporary technology discourse.

In this paper, we propose ways theologians might respond to questions of human distinctiveness that arise from reports of religion-focused interactions with generative artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Through thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2012), we examine two data sets: Reddit users’ reports of their or others’ religion-focused interactions with generative AI systems; and app descriptions, reviews, and commentaries associated with generative AI systems designed for religion-focused interactions (e.g., Bible Chat). Preliminary analyses suggest that users of generative AI systems disregard distinctions between human-human interaction and human-computer interaction (HCI) in such religion-focused exchanges.

Disregard for distinctions between human-human interaction and HCI poses a problem for theologians. Human distinctiveness has traditionally been central to theological anthropology, but recent critiques of modernity question strategies that bolster the category of the human. How might we address the question of human distinctiveness posed by religion-focused interactions with generative AI systems without replicating the harms of modernity?

A NYC subway sign reads: "friend: [noun] someone who listens, responds, and supports you." The advertisement is for friend.com, which promotes an AI friend that you can wear as an always-listening pendant around your neck. What draws the eye, however, is not the advertisement but the words "not your" added above the website. Another graffitied friend advertisement reads, "JOIN THE LUDDITE RENAISSANCE." This paper explores anti-AI movements and their raison d'être and considers Luddism as an ethical response to the many dangers of AI. I engage the Hebrew Bible narrative of the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11, in which humans seek to build a tower to reach the heavens, i.e., the arrogant pursuit of fame and power. In an age of globalization and technological advancement, a careful reading of the text can lead us into important considerations about hubris and progress. 

Twenty-first-century leadership is often characterized by a "Machiavellian pragmatism" that prioritizes the accumulation of power over communal flourishing. Grounded in the bifurcations of Enlightenment dualism, this leadership void has left both civic and ecclesial spheres struggling with deep polarization and systemic disintegration. This paper proposes a restorative model of kenotic facilitation as a framework for missional leadership and prophetic witness.

By integrating the relational ontology of John Zizioulas with the historical exemplar of St. Francis of Assisi, I argue that spiritual leadership find its most potent expression through the voluntary self-emptying (kenosis) of positional power. Drawing on lived experience and qualitative data from Participatory Action Research (PAR), the study brings Foucault’s theories of power into dialogue with Habermasian communicative action. The result is a praxiological model that empowers the community to move beyond hierarchy toward a perichoretic, interdependent pursuit of shalom in a disrupted cultural landscape.

This paper examines how clergy and lay leaders tend to the spiritual wellbeing of congregations that have experienced numerical decline. It provides analysis from a pilot study including long-form interviews from revitalizing and redeveloping parishes in the Episcopal Church. The analysis considers practices intended to promote spiritual revitalization for the whole parish as well as the devotional, prayer, and self-care practices that sustain church leaders during times of transition that can be challenging to them personally, spiritually, and vocationally. This paper is intended to establish the scaffolding and parameters for a larger-scale, ecumenical study to advance academic knowledge and support religious communities by describing and analyzing best practices to promote spiritual well-being for their constituents amidst organizational change. 

In our increasingly volatile world, Christianity needs leaders prepared to stand firm in the maelstrom of change. Recent leadership scholarship emphasizes complexity, adaptive systems, and the need for leaders not only to permit but also to embrace and maintain tension. Complexity scholars assert that organizations transform within “adaptive spaces” where perspectives collide, conflict, and connect. Such spaces are chaotic and can tear organizations apart, but when held properly, they innovate without sacrificing continuity. Organizations, including churches, therefore, depend on leaders to create and hold these spaces for their communities. But what type of leader is needed to facilitate and hold these tense spaces without resorting to control, withdrawal, or burnout?

This paper puts complexity leadership scholarship in conversation with the mystical theology of St. John of the Cross. It suggests that St. John’s spirituality offers a vision and an itinerary for standing within chaos without succumbing to it. 

The analysis of digital capitalism has explored how capitalist apps and platforms exploit gig workers, including through poor working conditions, low pay, continuous surveillance, and the lack of benefits. However, the ecological impact is yet to be explored. This paper explores how food delivery apps not only contribute to the exploitation of workers but also to ecological destruction through increased CO2 emissions, packaging waste, food waste, and other impacts.  The paper argues that the exploitation of digital labor and ecological destruction are interconnected as platform owners profit massively. Therefore, deep solidarity is necessary to advocate for a just economy. The first part of the paper explores the interconnected impacts of food delivery apps from labor and ecological perspectives. The second part demonstrates how deep solidarity among delivery drivers, restaurants, and consumers can be imagined as they comprise the majority of people living in the Capitalocene of platform capitalism.  

Tourism in Bali has become a destructive force that disturbs living harmony in the local context, in terms of Balinese people, culture, and nature, for capital accumulation. In contrast to this, Bali has the concept of "Tri Hita Karana," which views all beings as subjects for mutual respect. However, the state has been treating Bali’s cultural harmony as reproductive labor that exists behind them, naturalizing it as “domestic labor”. I want to highlight these tourism aspects and tendencies to create an ontological resistance that shapes Bali tourism's existence as an essential subject with complete agency. I argue that the concealment of domestic labor creates the atmosphere that produces and sustains the assumption of a global commodity, ‘paradise’. The recognition of living culture as economic value, in which culture exists as a primary source, is substantial in determining the value of socio-ecological religious existence in tourism.