Sekter och salafister

Liselott Frisk och Susanne Olsson presenterar kort sina bidrag i boken Religionen tur och retur, en årsbok från Riksbankens Jubileumsfond.

in Philosophy Compass (2020) Abstract:Catastrophic risk raises questions that are not only of practical importance, but also of great philosophical interest, such as how to define 'catastrophe' and wha

Sekter och salafister. Inspelning från seminarium om boken Religion tur och retur

Det här är en inspelning av seminariet Sekter och salafister, om "Religion tur och retur", en årsbok från Riksbankens Jubileumsfond. Seminariet hölls på Institutet för Framtidsstudier 6 februari 2018.

The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axx035 Abstract According to the orthodox treatment of risk preferences in decision theory, they are to be explained in terms of th

Mårten Schultz: Risk and responsibility

Legal responsibility comes in different forms. Private law deals with questions of responsibility for harm that someone causes another. The responsibility requires three things: That someone was harme

Existential risks are those risks that threaten the entire future of humanity - not just the present generation, but all future generations. Despite their importance, issues surrounding human extincti

Economics & Philosophy Abstract Suppose that a decision-maker’s aim, under certainty, is to maximize some continuous value, such as lifetime income or continuous social welfare. Can such a decision-

Mårten Schultz is professor of law at Stockholm UniversityAbstractLegal responsibility comes in different forms. Private law deals with questions of responsibility for harm that someone causes another.

Garrett Cullity, Hughes Professor of Philosophy, School of Humanities, Faculty of Arts, The University of Adelaide, South Australia.Abstract When well-off individuals do not offset their own personal g

Synthese, doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-01929-5 Abstract A moderately risk averse person may turn down a 50/50 gamble that either results in her winning $200 or losing $100. Such behaviour seems rational i