Marcus Arvan
@marcusarvan.bsky.social
Associate Professor of Philosophy: ethics, social-political philosophy, cognitive science, philosophy of AI, mind, and metaphysics
"Why It’s OK to Be a Moderate ... is a great book released at the perfect time, and I will be recommending it to students, family, and friends."
October 20, 2025 at 2:36 PM
"Why It’s OK to Be a Moderate ... is a great book released at the perfect time, and I will be recommending it to students, family, and friends."
Also, the happiest, most stable, and least corrupt societies in the world (in Northern Europe) are those that most closely conform to Rawls’ theory.
August 22, 2025 at 12:11 PM
Also, the happiest, most stable, and least corrupt societies in the world (in Northern Europe) are those that most closely conform to Rawls’ theory.
Imagine saying that an economic theory is wrong because politicians aren’t following it. That’s no reason to throw the theory under the bus. If it’s a good theory, it’s just a reason to get people to actually follow it.
August 22, 2025 at 11:58 AM
Imagine saying that an economic theory is wrong because politicians aren’t following it. That’s no reason to throw the theory under the bus. If it’s a good theory, it’s just a reason to get people to actually follow it.
Much of what the OP describes in their post has little to do with the theory at all, but rather inaccurate straw man interpretations of it.
August 22, 2025 at 11:56 AM
Much of what the OP describes in their post has little to do with the theory at all, but rather inaccurate straw man interpretations of it.
But that’s not the case here. A good theory of justice should do two things: describe an ideal society/world we should shoot for (ideal theory), and then show how to get there in a just way from where we are (nonideal theory). As I argue in my work, Rawls’s theory does both.
August 22, 2025 at 11:55 AM
But that’s not the case here. A good theory of justice should do two things: describe an ideal society/world we should shoot for (ideal theory), and then show how to get there in a just way from where we are (nonideal theory). As I argue in my work, Rawls’s theory does both.
Also, you say liberals need to show why liberalism is good for people. Okay, but this isn’t that hard to show: see philpapers.org/rec/ARVFRS
Marcus Arvan, From rational self-interest to liberalism: a hole in Cofnas’s debunking explanation of moral progress - PhilPapers
Michael Huemer argues that cross-cultural convergence toward liberal moral values is evidence of objective moral progress, and by extension, evidence for moral realism. Nathan Cofnas claims to debunk ...
philpapers.org
August 21, 2025 at 8:01 PM
Also, you say liberals need to show why liberalism is good for people. Okay, but this isn’t that hard to show: see philpapers.org/rec/ARVFRS
That it does so is an unfortunate yet fairly common misconception. Rawls provided an “ideal theory” of a fully just society—but when the framework is extended to unjust conditions, its implications are far more non-neutral on race, gender, and many other things as well.
August 21, 2025 at 7:35 PM
That it does so is an unfortunate yet fairly common misconception. Rawls provided an “ideal theory” of a fully just society—but when the framework is extended to unjust conditions, its implications are far more non-neutral on race, gender, and many other things as well.
Rawlsian liberalism (“Justice as fairness”) does not, for example, support neutrality on anti-black racism (something you imply it does in your piece).
August 21, 2025 at 7:32 PM
Rawlsian liberalism (“Justice as fairness”) does not, for example, support neutrality on anti-black racism (something you imply it does in your piece).
Your discussion here may be based on common interpretations of Rawlsian liberalism—but as I show in this published paper, those interpretations are largely wrong about how committed it is to neutrality under unjust conditions.
philpapers.org/rec/ARVAAO
philpapers.org/rec/ARVAAO
August 21, 2025 at 7:30 PM
Your discussion here may be based on common interpretations of Rawlsian liberalism—but as I show in this published paper, those interpretations are largely wrong about how committed it is to neutrality under unjust conditions.
philpapers.org/rec/ARVAAO
philpapers.org/rec/ARVAAO
Yes, when you click Donate on the GoFundMe page, it gives that as an option.
June 21, 2025 at 12:47 AM
Yes, when you click Donate on the GoFundMe page, it gives that as an option.
Whether the value is truth, morality, or whatever, there is no empirically tractable way to train these things to reliably give the right outputs. www.scientificamerican.com/article/ai-i...
AI Is Too Unpredictable to Behave According to Human Goals
AI “alignment” is a buzzword, not a feasible safety goal
www.scientificamerican.com
May 5, 2025 at 11:40 PM
Whether the value is truth, morality, or whatever, there is no empirically tractable way to train these things to reliably give the right outputs. www.scientificamerican.com/article/ai-i...