The New World - Martin Hägglund

The Institute for Futures Studies together with Aftonbladet Kultur present The New World - a podcast series where great thinkers think (and talk) about the most pressing issues concerning our future.

Karin Pettersson, Martin Hägglund, Georg Diez The Institute for Futures Studies together with Aftonbladet Kultur are proud to present the new podcast collaboration: The New World - a podcast series whe

Frontiers in Psychology AbstractPeople often justify their moral opinions by referring to larger moral concerns (e. g., “It isunfairif homosexuals are not allowed to marry!” vs. “Letting homosexuals matraditions!”). Is there a general agreement about what concerns apply to different moral opinions? We used surveys in the United States and the United Kingdom to measure the perceived applicability of eight concerns (harm, violence, fairness, liberty, authority, ingroup, purity, and governmental overreach) to a wide range of moral opinions. Within countries, argument applicability scores were largely similar whether they were calculated among women or men, among young or old, among liberals or conservatives, or among people with or without higher education. Thus, the applicability of a given moral concern to a specific opinion can be viewed as an objective quality of the opinion, largely independent of the population in which it is measured. Finally, we used similar surveys in Israel and Brazil to establish that this independence of populations also extended to populations in different countries. However, the extent to which this holds across cultures beyond those included in the current study is still an open question.

Interest Groups & Advocacy volume 10, pp.47–67 AbstractThe weak correlation between lobbying and policy outcomes is puzzling. The main argument developed here is that the puzzle is partly caused by

Laura Valentini, Associate Professor of Political Science at London School of Economics ABSTRACTMany contemporary philosophers—of a broadly deontological disposition—believe that there exist some pre-i. In this paper, I defend this unpopular view. I argue that all rights are grounded in —namely, norms constituted by the collective acceptance of gives “oughts”—, provided the norms’ content meets some independent standards of moral acceptability. This view, I suggest, does justice to the relational nature of rights, by explaining how it is that right-holders acquire the authority to demand certain actions (or omissions) from duty-bearers. Furthermore, the view does not divest human beings of fundamental moral protections. Even if, absent some rights-grounding positive norms, obligations cannot be to others, we still have  (non-directed) placing constraints on how we may permissibly treat one Another.

Erik Angner, Professor of Practical Philosophy Abstract The nudge agenda due to Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein has proven polarizing. To advocates, nudging allows us to improve people’s choices and th

In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. 2021 Democracy is a term that is used to denote a variety of distinct objects and ideas. Democracy describes either a set of political institutions or an idea

What is it that makes discrimination wrong? We examine the concept of harm and its philosophical relevance, as well as the role it plays in discrimination.

Liberal nationalism

David Miller, Gina Gustavsson and Yael Tamir, discusses with Philippe van Parijs and moderator Lars Anell. Gustaf Arrhenius and Bengt Westerberg introduce the subject.

Cécile Laborde, Professor of Political Theory FBA, Nuffield Chair of Political Theory.ABSTRACTIn this talk, I ask whether liberal legitimacy requires secularism – or separation between state and relig