written by Christopher Register Evangelicals and other pro-life advocates have underappreciated reasons to support in vitro fertilization (IVF) and funding for maternal health and reproductive technologies in general. These reasons stem from the surprisingly high rate of natural miscarriage. I suggest that advances in IVF technology may ultimately lead to fewer total embryos being miscarried… Read More »Should Evangelicals Support IVF?
Written by Rebecca Brown Imagine going to a cafe for a drink and snack. At some point you need the loo – you go to the bathroom but discover the toilet seat is higher than your waist! Somehow you manage to clamber up, unfortunately touching parts of a toilet you would prefer you didn’t have… Read More »Building A World People Can Use
A new branch of outreach from the Uehiro Centre By Joanna Demaree-Cotton From this summer, a number of our academics and graduate students will be swapping their offices and lecture halls to teach in a different kind of venue: UK prisons. Philosophy In Prison is a wonderful, small, UK-based charity. Run by philosophers, they organise… Read More »Philosophy in Prison
By Tess Johnson (Ethox Centre) and Alberto Giubilini (Uehiro Oxford Institute) On the 11th of June, 2024, members of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics (soon to become Uehiro Oxford Institute) and the Ethox gathered at St. Anne’s College for an afternoon discussion on the nature, value, and disvalue of moral disagreement, as part… Read More »The Fruits of Moral Disagreement: Conversations and Questions from the Inaugural Ethox-Uehiro Workshop on Moral Disagreement
by Neil Levy Doomsayers have always been with us. Equally, predictions of doom have always failed to materialise. Apocalyptic cults have been a recurrent feature of American society, in particular. Some have given specific dates for the destruction of the world, which the faithful would survive through preparation and prayer. The failures of the prophesied… Read More »Dreaming of the End of the World
In March, we were delighted to have the finalists of our annual Practical Ethics and Responsibility Competition (PERC) arrive in Oxford for a day of ethics and debate. Our four teams were from The Royal Latin School, The Laurels School, and Westminster. They earned their place at the Schools Day through their winning video entries… Read More »Practical Ethics Schools Day 2024
by Dominic Wilkinson In an interesting legal case earlier this year, the court held an emergency hearing about the medical care of a 16 year old, recently diagnosed with acute leukaemia. The hearing, conducted remotely in the middle of the night, was to decide whether she should have medical treatment imposed against her wishes. Should an “intelligent… Read More »Quasi-Refusal and Teens
written by Neil Levy and Keith Raymond Harris There’s a lot of debate over the harms of misinformation today: whether it is more prevalent now than in the past, how often it misleads people, whether people act on misleading misinformation, and on whether the costs of content moderation or algorithmic depriorisation mightn’t be higher than… Read More »Truthful Misinformation
In a recent paper I published with my colleagues Lavinia Marin (TU Delft) and Constantin Vica (University of Bucharest), titled “Digital Slot Machines: Social Media Platforms as Attentional Scaffolds” we take a step back from AI and return to an older problem in digital ethics, that despite its urgency, is often overlooked: the impact of… Read More »Social Media Platforms as Digital Slot Machines
This is the third in a series of blogposts by the members of the Expanding Autonomy project, funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council.
Written By: Oscar A. Piedrahita & Matthew Vermaire, COGITO, University of Glasgow.
Don’t you find that other people’s beliefs are always getting in the way of progress? They seem to be full of bad views about everything from geopolitics to zoning laws to the most bizarre conspiracy theories; and what’s worse is that they seem often perversely immune to rational methods of persuasion, bristling with a panoply of biases. It’s a free country and everyone’s entitled to their opinions. Wouldn’t it be nice, though, if—without having to resort to positively illiberal measures of censorship and forced re-education—we could get those opinions to be a little more tolerable? What if the secret is all in the way in which evidence and potential beliefs are presented to people, so that with more carefully calibrated interventions we could exert a noncoercive but significant influence toward the truth?Read More »Cross Post: Nudging for Better Beliefs
