Nudges and other moral technologies in the context of power: Assigning and accepting responsibility

Strawson argues that we should understand moral responsibility in terms of our practices of holding responsible and taking responsibility. The former covers what is commonly referred to as backward-looking responsibility , while the latter covers what is commonly referred to as forward-looking responsibility . We consider new technologies and interventions that facilitate assignment of responsibility. Assigning responsibility is best understood as the second- or third-personal analogue of taking responsibility. It establishes forward-looking responsibility. But unlike taking responsibility, it establishes forward-looking responsibility in someone else. When such assignments are accepted, they function in such a way that those to whom responsibility has been assigned face the same obligations and are susceptible to the same reactive attitudes as someone who takes responsibility. One family of interventions interests us in particular: nudges. We contend that many instances of nudging tacitly assign responsibility to nudgees for actions, values, and relationships that they might not otherwise have taken responsibility for. To the extent that nudgees tacitly accept such assignments, they become responsible for upholding norms that would otherwise have fallen under the purview of other actors. While this may be empowering in some cases, it can also function in such a way that it burdens people with more responsibility that they can (reasonably be expected to) manage

Immorality and Irrationality

Does immorality necessarily involve irrationality? The question is often taken to be among the deepest in moral philosophy. But apparently deep questions sometimes admit of deflationary answers. In this case we can make way for a deflationary answer by appealing to dualism about rationality, according to which there are two fundamentally distinct notions of rationality: structural rationality and substantive rationality. I have defended dualism elsewhere. Here, I’ll argue that it allows us to embrace a sensible – I will not say boring – moderate view about the relationship between immorality and irrationality: roughly, that immorality involves substantive irrationality, but not structural irrationality. I defend this moderate view, and argue that many of the arguments for less moderate views turn either on missing the distinction between substantive and structural rationality, or on misconstruing it

Fichte and Hegel on Recognition

In this paper I provide an interpretation of Hegel’s account of ‘recognition’ (Anerkennung) in the 1802-3 System of Ethical Life as a critique of Fichte’s account of recognition in the 1796-7 Foundations of Natural Right. In the first three sections of the paper I argue that Fichte’s account of recognition in the domain of right is not concerned with recognition as a moral attitude. I then turn, in section four, to a discussion of Hegel’s critique and transformation of Fichte’s conception of recognition. Hegel’s transformation consists, I argue, in the claim that a comprehensive account of recognition in the domain of right must be concerned with recognition as a moral attitude

Adam Smith and Colonialism

In the context of debates about liberalism and colonialism, the arguments of Adam Smith have been taken as illustrative of an important line of anti-colonial liberal thought. The reading of Smith presented here challenges this interpretation. It argues that Smith’s opposition to colonial rule derived largely from its impact on the metropole, rather than on its impact on the conquered and colonised; that Smith recognised colonialism had brought ‘improvement’ in conquered territories and that Smith struggled to balance recognition of moral diversity with a universal moral framework and a commitment to a particular interpretation of progress through history. These arguments have a wider significance as they point towards some of the issues at stake in liberal anti-colonial arguments more generally

Development and validation of a physical model to investigate the biomechanics of infant head impact

Head injury in childhood is the single most common cause of death or permanent disability from injury. However, despite its frequency and significance, there is little understanding of the response of a child's head to injurious loading. This is a significant limitation when making early diagnoses, informing clinical and/or forensic management or injury prevention strategies. With respect to impact vulnerability, current understanding is predominantly based on a few post-mortem-human-surrogate (PMHS) experiments. Researchers, out of experimental necessity, typically derive acceleration data, currently an established measure for head impact vulnerability, by calculation. Impact force is divided by the head mass, to produce a "global approximation", a single-generalised head response acceleration value. A need exists for a new experimental methodology, which can provide specific regional or localised response data. A surrogate infant head, was created from high resolution computer tomography scans with properties closely matched to tissue response data and validated against PMHS head impact acceleration data. The skull was 3D-printed from co-polymer materials. The brain, represented as a lumped mass, comprised of an injected gelatin/water mix. High-Speed Digital-Image-Correlation optically measured linear and angular velocities and accelerations, strains and strain rates. The "global approximation" was challenged by comparison with regional and local acceleration data. During impacts, perpendicular (at 90°) to a surface, regional and local accelerations were up to three times greater than the concomitant "global" accelerations. Differential acceleration patterns were very sensitive to impact location. Suture and fontanelle regions demonstrated ten times more strain (103%/s) than bone, resulting in skull deformations similar in magnitude to those observed during child birth, but at much higher rates. Surprisingly, perpendicular impacts produced significantly greater rotational velocities and accelerations, which are closer to current published injury thresholds than expected, seemingly as a result of deformational changes to the complex skull geometry. The methodology has proven a significant new step in characterising and understanding infant head injury mechanics

Responsibility and appropriate blame: The no difference view

How do the fact that an agent is morally responsible for a certain morally objectionable action and the fact that she is an appropriate target of blame for it relate to each other? Many authors inspired by Peter Strawson say that they necessarily co‐occur. Standard answers to the question of why they co‐occur say that the occurrence of one of the facts explains that the other obtains. This article presents a third option: that they are one and the same fact. There is no difference between the fact that a person is an appropriate target of blame for an objectionable action and the fact that she is morally responsible for it. This view has the advantage of being metaphysically more parsimonious and of answering, in an elegant and plausible way, an interesting question about which many standard theories of responsibility keep silent: what is it to be morally responsible simpliciter

Development and validation of a physical model to investigate the biomechanics of infant head impact

Head injury in childhood is the single most common cause of death or permanent disability from injury. However, despite its frequency and significance, there is little understanding of the response of a child’s head to injurious loading. This is a significant limitation when making early diagnoses, informing clinical and/or forensic management or injury prevention strategies. With respect to impact vulnerability, current understanding is predominantly based on a few post-mortem-human-surrogate (PMHS) experiments. Researchers, out of experimental necessity, typically derive acceleration data, currently an established measure for head impact vulnerability, by calculation. Impact force is divided by the head mass, to produce a “global approximation”, a single-generalised head response acceleration value. A need exists for a new experimental methodology, which can provide specific regional or localised response data. A surrogate infant head, was created from high resolution computer tomography scans with properties closely matched to tissue response data and validated against PMHS head impact acceleration data. The skull was 3D-printed from co-polymer materials. The brain, represented as a lumped mass, comprised of an injected gelatin/water mix. High-Speed Digital-Image-Correlation optically measured linear and angular velocities and accelerations, strains and strain rates. The “global approximation” was challenged by comparison with regional and local acceleration data. During impacts, perpendicular (at 90°) to a surface, regional and local accelerations were up to three times greater than the concomitant “global” accelerations. Differential acceleration patterns were very sensitive to impact location. Suture and fontanelle regions demonstrated ten times more strain (103%/s) than bone, resulting in skull deformations similar in magnitude to those observed during child birth, but at much higher rates. Surprisingly, perpendicular impacts produced significantly greater rotational velocities and accelerations, which are closer to current published injury thresholds than expected, seemingly as a result of deformational changes to the complex skull geometry. The methodology has proven a significant new step in characterising and understanding infant head injury mechanics

Marketing Renewable Energy in the United Kingdom

This chapter focuses on the renewable energy market in the UK. First we discuss the impact of privatization, then show what preconditions might be important. The main conclusion drawn from the analysis is that in the UK, as well as in other countries, new policy frameworks need to guide the transition from an energy system designed to achieve short-term efficiencies through market operation to a long-term approach that would embrace new uncertainties. Both market interests and environmental protection need to be secured in order to guarantee the levels of investment needed in the UK’s renewable energy market