We need to talk about Wittgenstein: The practice of dialogue in the classroom and in assessment

Is philosophy the pursuit of knowledge, as first year students with a dictionary sometimes write? With an aim to inspire and encourage philosophical inquiry, offering an invitation to participate in a process of discovery? Or are philosophers charged with teaching the history of such pursuits – who argued, proved, disproved what? On the first account, philosophy is a subject that resists information-transmission, and requires exploration, creativity, discussion and dialogue. On the second, teaching centres on information-transmission, etching old ideas into the minds of budding scholars, in short time slots. Though there need not be a division, there is a need to recognise where approaches differ. In this way, we can ensure sufficient time and space for the sometimes unquantifiable: imaginative, creative pursuits in philosophy, with space for independent, original thinking. This paper explores these ideas alongside approaches to teaching, and offers a paradigm for incorporating dialogue in the learning and practice of philosophy. </jats:p

Hyper-ambition and the Replication Crisis:Why Measures to Promote Research Integrity can Falter

This paper introduces the concept of ‘hyper-ambition’ in academia as a contributing factor to what has been termed a ‘replication crisis’ across some sciences. The replication crisis is an umbrella term that covers a range of ‘questionable research practices’, from sloppy reporting to fraud. There are already many proposals to address questionable research practices, some of which focus on the values, norms, and motivations of researchers and institutes, and suggest measures to promote research integrity. Yet it is not easy to promote integrity in hyper-competitive academic environments that value high levels of ambition. I argue that in such contexts, it is as likely that a kind of hyper-ambition is fostered that (inadvertently or otherwise) prioritises individual success above all, including to the detriment of scientific quality. In addition, efforts to promote values like integrity falter because they rely on sufficient uniformity in motivations or tendencies. Codes and guidance promoting integrity are, however, likely to influence those for whom such values are not optional, while others simply find ways around them. To demonstrate this I offer a thought experiment in which we consider the imaginary working situations of two ordinary academics. I conclude that tackling questionable research practices in the light of the replication crisis requires robust ‘top down’ measures that expect and accommodate a broader range of academic values, motivations, and tendencies, while challenging those that help to promote hyper-ambition.</p

Is it Ever Right to Lie? How Ethical Questions Bring us to Philosophy of Mind

Moral and ethical agreements require sufficiently shared values, or at least some common ground. We might think of this in terms of a shared 'form of life', 'lebensform', as Wittgenstein describes it in his Philosophical Investigations. Yet it is not clear what will be sufficient, nor how to bridge gaps when disagreement occurs, for instance on whether it is ever right to lie. Ethical and moral theories offer some guidance, but there is no guide for which theory one ought to follow. Whether you favour eudaimonist (flourishing, well-being), deontological (duty), or utilitarian (consequentialist) principles, the selection of a philosophy says much about who you are (preferences, judgements, beliefs) and your context (social, political, cultural). More than this it can indicate certain psychological and personal dispositions, whether defined as brain states, mental states, or personalities. In this article I outline some arguments for why ethics might need a philosophy of mind, and why this poses problems for ethical and moral theory building.</p

An ethical assessment of powered exoskeletons:Implications from clinical use to industry and military contexts

Exoskeletons are technologies that can help to increase or improve mobility, dexterity, and strength. They can be used as assistive devices, to restore lost affordances, or for rehabilitation. While mechanical exoskeletons are passive and rely on the body's power for movement, powered exoskeletons are active mechanical systems that can assist or enhance a user's capacity, including in strength and performance. They also offer scope to augment or enhance beyond simple medical support, with potential in the future for superhuman power and strength. While these technologies present promising clinical opportunities, including for those who want to regain walking capacity, they also bring ethical questions, such as about data privacy and accessibility. In addition, the physical features of the technology can prove mentally, physically, and financially demanding, and may be deployed in contexts where user choice and autonomy is constrained. In this article, we discuss these issues, and raise some pertinent ethical questions, not all of which can be easily answered. We touch upon medical and therapeutic uses, for industrial and workplace settings, and in military contexts specially, given these are contexts where such technology may be required or even imposed. We argue that reasonable optimism for such technologies needs to be tempered by sufficient ethical assessment to identify and address barriers to research, development, and use. As well as managing any impacts and expectations for the health and wellbeing of users, the potential impact on autonomy and the risk of coercion, we have to consider what kind of data may be recorded or used, and the risk that these technologies could exacerbate existing inequalities or harms.</p

Promoting ethics for human enhancement technologies

Human enhancement is a modification aimed at improving human performance beyond what is typical or average, brought about by science-based and/or technology-based interventions in or on the human body. Some forms of human enhancement (e.g., cosmetic surgery, doping in sports), have existed for a long time. Recent developments in science promise substantial advancements. Developments in genomics, pharmaceutics, prosthetics, neurotechnology, biomedical engineering, human-machine interaction, artificial intelligence and nanomedicine have unlimited potential to create future humans with superhuman physical and mental abilities. Some human enhancement is controversial socially and morally. They promise the advancement of humanity, but also introduce serious risks to health and well-being, freedom, and equality. Human enhancement research and development can be missed in ethical and legislative review. The field is broad, and enhancement potential can be difficult to predict, especially if such potential is not actively sought. In all cases, guidance is needed. SIENNA research has identified that there is insufficient guidance available for responsible decision-making on these topics, whether in research, development, deployment or use of technologies with enhancement potential. This brief presents some urgent actions and recommendations for policy makers

Ethical guidance for research with a potential for human enhancement

This guidance document aims to help researchers to consider, examine, and address ethical issues associated with human enhancement. Human enhancement refers to a wide field of interventions and technologies that aim at improving human beings beyond what might otherwise be considered typical or average. The guidance in this document is designed to be cross-disciplinary, and not limited to a particular field of science, engineering or medicine. It aims to cover all fields in research and development (R&D) where human enhancement potential may occur. Although it has wider application, this document has been composed for Horizon Europe ethics review and it thereby also complements other documentation for the ethics review procedure in Horizon Europe. This document is intended for the following types of projects: (1) Projects in which human enhancement is an explicit aim, either through research intended to facilitate human enhancement applications, or through the development of products or techniques intended for human enhancement; (2) Projects that have unforeseen, unpredicted or unintended potential enhancement applications, by which is meant that research and/or development is undertaken for therapeutic or other non-enhancement purposes, but the results of the project also have a clear potential for human enhancement