Call for Papers

Following the work of Pierre Hadot, ‘philosophy as a way of life’ seeks to rediscover, investigate, promote and practice the ancient conception of philosophy, as radically different from its modern and contemporary form as a primarily academic and theory-oriented discipline:

“philosophy was a mode of existing-in-the-world, which had to be practiced at each instant, and the goal of which was to transform the whole of the individual’s life. [...] Philosophy was a method of spiritual progress which demanded a radical conversion and transformation of the individual’s way of being.” (Pierre Hadot, Philosophy as a way of life, p. 265)

Philosophy thereby stands in contrast with philosophical discourse as merely talking about philosophy, of which the ancients repeatedly warned that it is not philosophy itself – though it can easily become a substitute for philosophy. Although this danger of reducing philosophy to philosophical discourse is as old as philosophy itself, Hadot puts a special emphasis on the historical role of Christianity in the (near) disappearance of philosophy as a way of life. Precisely because Christianity presented itself as a philosophy, i.e. as a way of life which definitively answered ancient philosophy’s quest for wisdom and truth through a divine revelation, could it thereby reduce philosophy (as distinct from Christianity) to a merely preparatory theoretical exercise – e.g. to furnish theology with the necessary conceptual tools. Philosophy thereby became the mere ancilla theologiae, emptied of its practical way-of-life content which had – very successfully – been taken over by Christianity. Only in the monastic tradition, continues Hadot, did philosophy as a radical (Christian) way of life continue as indeed something “to be practiced at each instant, and the goal of which was to transform the whole of the individual’s life”. When philosophy ‘liberated’ itself from theology in the modern era, continues Hadot, it retained that theoretical focus.

This edition of the Sedes Sapientiae Symposium seeks to explore and develop a Marian approach to philosophy as a way of life, in critical dialogue with that historical account offered by Hadot. Odon of Canterbury’s call “philosophari debemus in Maria” was written from within that monastic tradition. Can ‘philosophising in Mary’ therefore also – or even primarily – be understood in precisely that practical sense? For, on the topic of ‘Christian philosophy’, Hadot noted the following:

“But if we consider, as we do, philosophy as a way of life, the problem [of Christian philosophy] is much more complex, because, in a certain sense, Christianity and philosophy are ‘totalitarian.’ Why would the Christian, if he lives his Christian life intensely, need to live a philosophical life? And, on the other hand, if the Christian truly wishes to be a philosopher, will he not transform his Christianity into philosophy, his Christian life into a philosophical life? I once heard Henri-Irénée Marrou make this remark: ‘It is often Neoplatonism that allows certain contemporary Christians to make their Christianity into a philosophy.’” (Pierre Hadot, Exercises Spirituels, p.318-319)

It is precisely at this nexus of theoretical questions, lived practices and historical evolutions, that a Marian approach to philosophy as a way of life is explored, encouraged and developed. In brief, can philosophy as a way of life provide more robust, philosophical, secular-psychological groundings for Marian piety and devotion? Conversely, can Marian piety and devotion serve as an immensely successful treasure-trove of concrete practices and lived experiences that take Mary as the very summit of the philosophical life? Can she even move beyond these ancient philosophies by providing a more fully human stoicism/epicureanism/…? Further questions can include, but are not limited to, the following:

Theoretical

• Is this duality of a ‘totalitarian’ Christianity-as-a-way-of-life versus philosophy-as-a-way-of-life something that can be explored and clarified through a Marian approach? That is, can the two persons of Christ and Mary model (or be modelled after) this intimately intertwined distinction between Christianity on the one hand, and (Christian) philosophy on the other hand? 

• Can this distinction between Christianity and philosophy be approached via, or modelled after, the distinction between the art and practice of questioning on the one hand and receiving, accepting and incorporating an answer on the other hand? 

• Is it possible, and if so under what conditions, that the question(ing) doesn’t disappear after a true answer has been given, but continually deepens the answer given – like Mary ‘pondering these things in her heart’ (cf. Luke 2)? 

• In what way can the quality of the question(ing) – like its intensity and purity as manifested in a concrete way of life – determine the fruitfulness of the answer given? Can that be related to the permanent and indispensable role of Mary as the (Immaculate and chaste) questioner? 

Practical

• For Hadot, ancient philosophy was first and foremost a series of ‘spiritual exercises’. Can certain examples of Marian piety or Marian devotion be understood as a form of spiritual exercise in this specific sense? Can these Marian devotions learn something from this philosophical tradition, and vice versa?

• Is there evidence from Marian devotion and Marian shrines that Mary as a figure represents or encourages a typically ‘philosophical’ way of, or approach to, life – distinct from, yet in close connection to, Christ and the hierarchical Church?

• Hadot mentioned the work of Paul Rabbow on the Greco-Roman roots of the Ignatian spiritual exercises. Are there Marian elements in this historical connection, or in the Ignatian tradition of spiritual guidance in general, that could be of interest for this philosophical approach? 

• Are there insights and practices from contemporary philosophical counseling and way-of-life philosophies that can be related to the figure of, and devotion to, Mary? Are there avenues for mutual strengthening and enrichment?

• How can or does Mary as the ‘Mater et Magistra’ (mother and teacher) teach and promote practical wisdom and a concrete way of life through her shrines, symbols, imagery and devotion, thereby institutionalising and embodying a philosophical school and way of teaching that has infinitely surpassed Plato’s Academy or Aristotle’s Lyceum?

• If Mary is showing us the true meaning of creation and proper attitude towards (the good) life and God – in the face of suffering and life’s trials – can public Marian shrines (chapels), devotions (processions) and days (Saturday) be seen as forms of public philosophy or collective spiritual exercises?  Do chapels represent and embody in space what Saturdays represent and embody in time, namely as a kind of public Sabbath and point of rest in creation, in preparation and anticipation for the Creator?

Mary’s life and the lives of the philosophers

• In what way and at which specific points did Mary’s life exemplify key philosophical virtues? Have they been incorporated into Marian devotional practices, and if so, (how) can they be distinguished and emphasized? 

• How does Mary standing under the cross (or her sorrows more broadly) relate to Stoicism? Are there (other) ways where she exemplifies, surpasses or contradicts the very best of Stoicism as an effort to constantly live and think ‘sub specie aeternitatis’? How does this change given her relation to the incarnated Eternal Wisdom or Logos?

• Epicureanism was famous for the zeal of its followers, including the daily use of statues and images. How do these philosophical practices relate to the use of Marian statues and imagery? Moreover, his teaching centered around (common life in) a garden, learning to enjoy the best – but eventually, most simple – things in life like friendship and the mere joy of existence. Can we relate this to Mary as a paradisiacal ‘garden enclosed’, the monastic life in general, and (the other) Mary choosing ‘the best part’ (Luke 10:42)?

• Cynicism shunned or at least disregarded social conventions and ‘worldly wisdom’. Can we recognize the very best of this independent-minded tradition in Mary’s counter-cultural life-choice to “know not man” (Luke 1:34)? In radically surpassing the usual understanding of motherhood, from the seemingly disparaging “Who is my mother?” (Mt.12:48) remark applied to her to “Behold thy mother” (John 19:27)? In her standing next to her crucified Son, condemned by all the religious and worldly authorities?

• Can we recognise a form of scepticism – as a critical, though non-inquisitive, non-rationalistic philosophical school – in the attitude of her question “How shall this be done?” (Luke 1:34) and subsequently ‘pondering this in her heart’ (Luke 2:19,51)? Can scepticism in that sense be re-interpreted through the lens of epistemic humility?

• In the modern era, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche exemplified two closely related but very distinct ways of living a philosophical life that had broken with the ancient and medieval optimistic and rationalistic  tradition, putting a strong emphasis on the (general or personal) ‘will’. How can we relate and contrast Mary’s ‘Fiat’ to such a voluntaristic conception of the philosophical life, accepting as well as fully, freely and personally ‘embodying’ this universal (divine) will in one’s own life? Can the countless Hail Mary’s, especially as a practice for one’s own countless ‘Fiat’s’, be seen in light of Nietzsche’s ‘eternal recurrence’?

• Abstracts of 300-500 words can be submitted contact@sedessapientiae.be  

• Abstracts that take a more 'practical' approach than standard academic papers are, given the theme of the conference, certainly welcome.

• Deadline to submit an abstract is June 30th, 2026.

• Notification of acceptance by July 15th, 2026. 

• Registration open by June 30th, 2026.

• Registration closes October 15th, 2026.