Philosophers take on the world PDF
Preview Philosophers take on the world
OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,30/6/2016,SPi PHILOSOPHERS TAKE ON THE WORLD OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,30/6/2016,SPi OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,30/6/2016,SPi Edited by D A V I D E D M O N D S PHILOSOPHERS TAKE ON THE WORLD 1 OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,30/6/2016,SPi 3 GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,, UnitedKingdom OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford. ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship, andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries ©Theseveralcontributors Themoralrightsoftheauthorshavebeenasserted FirstEditionpublishedin Impression: Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted bylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe addressabove Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherform andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY,UnitedStatesofAmerica BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData Dataavailable LibraryofCongressControlNumber: ISBN –––– PrintedinGreatBritainby ClaysLtd,StIvesplc LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork. OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,30/6/2016,SPi ’ EDITOR S PREFACE Thepointofphilosophy,thought Karl Marx,isnotjusttointerpret theworld, buttochangeit.It’san obligationthat seemsespecially relevant to a subcategory within philosophy, Applied Ethics. There doesn’t seem much point philosophizing about contested moral issues—whetherit be free speech, gun control, euthanasia, ordrugs in sport—ifithasnoinfluenceondebate.Yet,althoughthere’sfascinating academic work in all areas of applied moral philosophy, little of it reaches a wider public. The media is full of commentators holding forth on subjects in which philosophers specialize, but philosophers themselvesarerarelycalledupontocomment. Toalargeextentthat’sthefaultofphilosophers—whooftenexpress themselvesinabstruseandtechnicallanguage,inaccessibletoanybody beyondtheacademy.Thisisnot,Ihope,achargethatcanbelevelledat contributorstothisbook. AllthesecontributorshaveanOxfordconnection.InAppliedEthics, Oxford University has an outstanding reputation. Much of the credit for this rests with the Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics. In the UehiroCentresetupadailybloginwhichphilosophersgivetheirtake onastoryinthenews.ThePracticalEthicsBloghasnowhadnearlytwo thousandposts,whichhavehadmillionsofpageviews.FortheUehiro Centre the blog has become a central part of its outreach activities, showcasing its work to a broader public. It’s also proved a fertile and experimentaloutletforideas.Ablogistheantithesisofapeer-reviewed journal.ThePracticalEthicsBloghasgivenphilosopherstheopportunity to float new, often counter-intuitive arguments, and in a more free- flowing style than would be appropriate in an academic publication. Many posts appearing in this book have gone on to have an afterlife afterbeingpickedupelsewhereinthemedia. This book is a selection from the best and most thought-provoking posts.Someofthesepostsappearherelittlealteredfromtheiroriginal; manyothershavebeensubstantiallyreworked. v OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,30/6/2016,SPi ’ Thisvolumecoversmanytopicsinmoralphilosophybut,ofcourse, it’snecessarilyselective.ResearchattheUehiroCentrefocusesnotjust onperennialtopicsinmorality,butemergingonestoo.Andsoit’snot surprisingthatonesignificantstrandinthisbookishowweshoulddeal withnoveldilemmasthrownupbyourmodernworld:internetshaming, threebiological-parentfamilies,enhancementdrugs.Oftentheseprob- lems are particularly taxing, since advances in science and technology seemtooutpacetheintuitionswehavetodealwiththem.Butthatalso givesthemparticularurgency. Almost alloftheposts were inspired by someevent in thenews. In writingaboutmoralphilosophy,philosopherstypicallyusenotrealcases butthought-experiments,oftenhighlystylizedthought-experiments:the runawaytrainthatisgoingtokillfivepeopleunlessyouflickaswitchto turn it down a spur, where one person is tied to the track and will die. Acommonchargelevelledatthesethought-experimentsisthattheyare absurdly unrealistic. Our intuitions about thought-experiments, critics say,cannotbetransplantedinanyusefulwaybackontotherealworld. Thecasesdiscussedinthisbookdon’tjustbeararesemblancetoreal life, they are real life. That presents a moral conundrum of its own. Behind these philosophical musings are true stories about real people, people who deserve better than to have their stories coldly and intel- lectuallydissectedasifbyapathologistperforminganautopsy.Allthe writersherehave,Ibelieve,treatedthesubjectsoftheirdiscussionwith appropriate respect. But ultimately, practical ethics, if it’s to serve any usefulfunction,hastobeaboutrealpeoplewithrealfeelingswhoface realtroublesandrealdilemmas. The Practical Ethics Blog, meanwhile, is ongoing. You can access it at <http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk> , @davidedmonds vi OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,30/6/2016,SPi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS When the idea of this book came up—a book requiring cooper- ation from numerous philosophers—the term ‘herding cats’ sprangimmediatelytomind. Myfearswereunwarranted.Contributorsinthisvolumerangefrom philosopherswithinternationalreputationstothosejuststartingouton theiracademiccareers.Theyhave,withoutexception,beenadelightto workwith.Mythankstothemall. Althoughitwasmyjobtomaketheinitialselectionofposts,several philosophersactedasrefereestoprovideavaluablesecondopinion.So I owe a debt of gratitude to Steve Clarke, Roger Crisp, Tom Douglas, Brian Earp, Neil Levy, Hannah Maslen, Ingmar Persson, Janet Radcliffe Richards,RebeccaRoache,JulianSavulescu,andDominicWilkinson. For years now I have been privileged to hold a senior research fellowship at Oxford’s Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics. I would like to thank all the administrative staff at the centre, particularly Rachel Gaminiratne, Deborah Sheehan, Rocci Wilkinson, and Miriam Wood. The sine qua non of the centre is Director Julian Savulescu, who first proposedthisbookandwhohasenthusiasticallychampioneditthrough- out. Mostofall,I wouldliketothank theUehiro FoundationonEthics andEducationformakingallthispossiblebythegeneroussupporttothe centreandallitsstaff. IwouldliketothankVeroniqueBaxteratDavidHigham;mymother, Hannah Edmonds, for copyediting, as usual; and the OUP team, Matthias Butler, Eleanor Collins, Lisa Eaton, Jen Moore, and rock-star editorPeterMomtchiloff. ‘Why,why,why?’Goodquestions.Thisbookisdedicatedtobudding philosophersSaulandIsaacEdmonds. vii OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,30/6/2016,SPi OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,30/6/2016,SPi CONTENTS Crime and punishment . Time to reconsider the penal code? Anders Herlitz . Enhanced punishment: can technology make life sentences longer? Rebecca Roache . Degrees of sexual harm Brian D. Earp Terrorism, guns, and war . A challenge to gun rights Jeff McMahan . McMahan’s hazardous (and irrelevant) thought experiment Allen Buchanan and Lance K. Stell . Travel, friends, and killing Seth Lazar . The courageous suicide bomber? Roger Crisp . Chemical weapons: in defence of double standards Owen Schaefer . Looted artworks: a portrait of justice Cécile Fabre ix
The list of books you might like
