Author Archives: Christoph Schmidt-Petri

CFP: Robust Demands of the Goods (new deadline)

In The Robust Demands of the Good: Ethics with Attachment, Virtue, and Respect (OUP 2015), Philip Pettit argues that robust goods are central to a human life well lived, including such goods as friendship, love, honesty, fidelity, and respect. Pettit traces the implications of valuing such goods across a wide range of important topics, including whether doing evil is structurally dissimilar from doing good, whether we can act based on dispositions yet still be guided by moral principles, and how we ought to reconcile the demands of personal attachments with morality’s more impersonal demands.

read more...

Posted in Calls for Papers, Journals | Leave a comment

CFP: Normative Aspects of International Trade Agreements

Moral Philosophy & Politics invites contributions to a special issue focusing on the normative aspects of international trade agreements.

Mega-regional trade deals such as TPP, TTIP, CETA and TISA have become the focus of intense public debate as well as a central theme in populist politics. The US 2016 elections have created further uncertainty about the fate of some of the proposed deals. There is however an undiminished necessity to address enduring normative questions concerning the current infrastructure of world trade. Many advocacy groups’ criticisms of trade deals such as TTIP are not founded on fundamental opposition to free trade. They support free trade but insist that trade agreements must be made consistent with democratic regulation, the reduction of economic inequalities, and effective consumer, labour and environmental standards.

read more...

Posted in Calls for Papers, Notices | Leave a comment

CFP: What, if anything, is wrong with paternalism?

Moral Philosophy And Politics
Call for Papers

What, if anything, is wrong with paternalism?

Until not so long ago, “paternalism” was commonly used as a term of disparagement. In the course of debates ensuing from the publication of Nudge by Thaler and Sunstein, however, a more multifarious picture began to emerge. Philosophers claiming that at least some forms of paternalistic intervention are permissible, maybe even morally required, are no rarity any more. More recently, Sarah Conly’s book Against Autonomy even went a step further than Thaler and Sunstein and defended not only the skilful design of choice architectures but the head-on use of coercion in order to protect people from their ill-conceived plans and choices. Autonomy, Conly says, is overrated.

read more...

Posted in Notices | Leave a comment