The explanationist argument for moral realism

In this paper I argue that the explanationist argument in favour of moral realism fails. According to this argument, the ability of putative moral properties to feature in good explanations provides strong evidence for, or entails, the metaphysical claims of moral realism. Some have rejected this argument by denying that moral explanations are ever good explanations. My criticism is different. I argue that even if we accept that moral explanations are (sometimes) good explanations the metaphysical claims of realism do not follow

Non-monetary Trade and Differential Access to Credit in the Russian Transition

The unusual rise and fall of non-monetary trade (NMT) in the Russian transition has been a subject of heated debates. Yet, this phenomenon is often viewed as a peculiarity that one cannot explain by economic considerations alone. In this paper we show that the resort to NMT was a rational, albeit spontaneous, reaction of industrial enterprises to the outflow of liquidity, which in turn was precipitated by the combination of persistent budgetary deficit and strict monetary policy. The IMF pledge to stand by if the government became insolvent made this policy credible. Several mechanisms contributed to the development of credit rationing of enterprises. First, the abandonment of implicit guarantees on loans extended to enterprises by the Central Bank of Russia prompted commercial banks to shift credit to other groups of borrowers. Second, when the Federal Government moved to finance its budgetary deficit through open-market operations, it crowded out commercial credit. Third, public money was transferred predominantly to households who partially lent it back to the government. Fourth, the policy of low exchange rate kept the balance of payment close to zero, which prevented the monetary base from growing. The default of August 1998 constituted a clear structural break. It prompted modifications in monetary and fiscal policies. The collapse of the market for state securities led to widespread bank failures. The CBR abandoned its policy of non-intervention in fiscal affairs and cleared debts that the governments and enterprises accumulated. In addition, money supply expanded because increased inflows of foreign currency were incompletely sterilized. The combination of a lesser government presence at credit markets, clearance of debts, and increase in money supply injected liquidity in domestic producers and they abandoned NMT. Statistical evidence supports the claim that NMT was caused by credit rationing experienced by enterprises. A GLS model with four explanatory variables (and dummies accounting for a structural break of August 1998) explains more than 90% of monthly changes in NMT for the period of February 1992 – December 2001. The collapse of the market for government loans appears to be the most significant event accountable for the structural break.Non-monetary trade, structural break, Russian transition

Financial Power and Democratic Legitimacy

To what extent are questions of sovereign debt a matter for political rather than scientific or moral adjudication? We answer that question by defending three claims. We argue that (i) moral and technocratic takes on sovereign debt tend to be ideological in a pejorative sense of the term, and that therefore (ii) sovereign debt should be politicised all the way down. We then show that this sort of politicisation need not boil down to the crude Realpolitik of debtor-creditor power relations—a conclusion that would leave no room for normative theory, among other problems. Rather, we argue that (iii) in a democratic context, a realist approach to politics centred on what Bernard Williams calls ‘The Basic Legitimation Demand’ affords a deliberative approach to the normative evaluation of public debt policy options

Modality

A survey of the connection between grounding and modality, in particular supervenience. The survey explores three possible connections between grounding and supervenience: (1) supervenience can be analyzed in terms of grounding, (2) grounded facts supervene on their grounds, and (3) grounding and supervenience overlap in their theoretical roles

A Case for Removing Confederate Monuments

A particularly important, pressing, philosophical question concerns whether Confederate monuments ought to be removed. More precisely, one may wonder whether a certain group, viz. the relevant government officials and members of the public who together can remove the Confederate monuments, are morally obligated to (of their own volition) remove them. Unfortunately, academic philosophers have largely ignored this question. This paper aims to help rectify this oversight by moral philosophers. In it, I argue that people have a moral obligation to remove most, if not all, public Confederate monuments because of the unavoidable harm they inflict on undeserving persons. In the first section, I provide some relevant historical context. In the second section, I make my unique harm-based argument for the removal of Confederate monuments. In the third section, I consider and rebut five objections

How to do things with modals

Mind &Language, Volume 35, Issue 1, Page 115-138, February 2020