My research interests are in Moral and Political Philosophy. My PhD Thesis was in the field of Population Ethics, and in particular the interpretation of Derek Parfit's 'Repugnant Conclusion' and its implications. This research also includes insights from related fields including Value Theory, the Philosophy of Economics and the Personal Identity. More broadly I am interested in subjects concerning future generations and long term political decision making.
I take a highly analytical approach to my research. I focus on mapping out the logically possible solutions to a problem and then considering different methodologies to choose between them. Some key questions I have considered so far include 'Assuming that the Repugnant Conclusion is very hard to accept, how can we explain why it is so?', 'How can we characterize the features of intuitions that make them easy to reject in a way that allows us to reject some of our intuitions but not others?' and 'What sort of egalitarian theory, if any, could both avoid the 'Leveling Down Objection and explain the moral permeability of 'Mere Addition'.
The following working papers give a good indication of the scope of my research interests at present
Perfectionism and the Repugnant Conclusion (Under Consideration)
What is bad about bad brute luck: an intergenerational puzzle (Under Consideration)
Fairness and the Future: Evaluating Extreme Technological Risks
Is the lifetime well-being of persons all that matters in population axiology? (extended abstract)
Valuing Affects – (Person) affecting principles and population ethics (extended abstract)
Paradoxes of Future Fairness and the Value of Mere Addition
What is repugnant about the Repugnant Conclusion
The Dilemma of Discounting: The impossibility of setting a single, context independent, non-zero discount rate for human wellbeing. (Published in Rareum Causae, the LSE Philosophy Journal)
I have an MSc in Philosophy and Public Policy from the London School in Economics (2011) and a BA in Philosophy, Politics and Economics from the University of Oxford (2007). Outside of philosophy I have had work published by the Journal of General Management and the Journal of Inclusive Practice in Further and Higher Education.
I take a highly analytical approach to my research. I focus on mapping out the logically possible solutions to a problem and then considering different methodologies to choose between them. Some key questions I have considered so far include 'Assuming that the Repugnant Conclusion is very hard to accept, how can we explain why it is so?', 'How can we characterize the features of intuitions that make them easy to reject in a way that allows us to reject some of our intuitions but not others?' and 'What sort of egalitarian theory, if any, could both avoid the 'Leveling Down Objection and explain the moral permeability of 'Mere Addition'.
The following working papers give a good indication of the scope of my research interests at present
Perfectionism and the Repugnant Conclusion (Under Consideration)
What is bad about bad brute luck: an intergenerational puzzle (Under Consideration)
Fairness and the Future: Evaluating Extreme Technological Risks
Is the lifetime well-being of persons all that matters in population axiology? (extended abstract)
Valuing Affects – (Person) affecting principles and population ethics (extended abstract)
Paradoxes of Future Fairness and the Value of Mere Addition
What is repugnant about the Repugnant Conclusion
The Dilemma of Discounting: The impossibility of setting a single, context independent, non-zero discount rate for human wellbeing. (Published in Rareum Causae, the LSE Philosophy Journal)
I have an MSc in Philosophy and Public Policy from the London School in Economics (2011) and a BA in Philosophy, Politics and Economics from the University of Oxford (2007). Outside of philosophy I have had work published by the Journal of General Management and the Journal of Inclusive Practice in Further and Higher Education.
