"Infinite Ethics Meets Decision Theory"
Some classic forms of utilitarianism presume that the goodness of a state of affairs can be determined by adding up numerical representations of the welfare of each of the people. When a population is infinite, however, this doesn't yield useful results. But there have been suggestions for how to say when such states of affairs are better or worse, even without assigning numerical scores to them, particularly in a series of papers by Vallentyne and Kagan.
"The Modal Conception of Ideal Rational Agents: Objectively Ideal not Merely Subjectively Ideal, Advisors not Exemplars, Agentially Concerned not Agentially Indifferent, Social not Solitary, Self-and-Other-Regarding not Wholly Self-Regarding”
Talk by Stephanie Leary rescheduled for April 5th,2019
Talk by Tristram McPherson, The Ohio State University.
Talk by Sarah McGrath, Princeton University.
Religion and the Scope of the Moral Domain
According to Elliot Turiel, religious affiliation does not influence
the distinction between so-called “moral" and “conventional” norms. By
contrast, according to Jonathan Haidt, religious affiliation results
in a broadened moral domain: As he puts it, “big gods have big
moralities." This talk will present new data undermining both Turiel's
and Haidt’s views
De-Freuding Implicit Attitudes.
Abstract: Psychologists and philosophers treat implicit attitudes as
automatic and unconscious mental states—a view reminiscent of Freud’s
theory of unconscious desires and urges. I present a competing view
about the nature of attitudes, and show that it is better supported by
the empirical evidence.