I'm still waiting for my long-running Fabre review to come out in print, but since it led me to subscribe to Journal of Value Inquiry email updates, I saw their latest issue (some sort of double issue) is on the very related theme of 'Markets and Medicine' (link, subscription required).
Table of Contents:
Volume 40 Number 2-3 of "The Journal of Value Inquiry" is now available on the SpringerLink web site at http://springerlink.com/openurl.asp?genre=journal&issn=1573-0492
By clicking on the URLs below you can access the abstracts for each article. If your browser does not support direct URL access, please copy and paste the selected URL to your web browser.
IN THIS ISSUE:
Introduction: Markets and Medicine
Author(s): James Stacey Taylor
Page: 149 - 154
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9033-4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Collapsing Goods in Medicine and the Value of Innovation
Author(s): Thomas Magnell
Page: 155 - 168
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9032-5
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Collapsing Goods, Innovation, and Precaution
Author(s): Chris Macdonald
Page: 169 - 179
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9052-1
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Collapsing Goods and the Milieu of Innovation
Author(s): William Kline
Page: 181 - 193
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9039-y
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Research, Development, and the Availability of Health Care Products: The Market, Regulation, and Legal Liability
Author(s): Ana S. Iltis
Page: 195 - 208
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9042-3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Medical Innovation, Collapsing Goods, and the Moral Centrality of the Free-Market
Author(s): Mark J. Cherry
Page: 209 - 226
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9043-2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Innovation and the Persistent Challenge of Collapsing Goods
Author(s): Benjamin Hippen
Page: 227 - 233
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9044-1
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sinister Innovations: Beware the Co-optation of Clinical Ethics Consultation
Author(s): Lisa M. Rasmussen
Page: 235 - 242
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9049-9
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Individual Goods, Collective Goods, and the Aims of Medicine
Author(s): Daniel E. Palmer
Page: 243 - 258
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9048-x
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unusual Requests and the Doctor-Patient Relationship
Author(s): Nafsika Athanassoulis
Page: 259 - 278
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9053-0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
In Defense of the Commercial Provision of Blood: Reactions to Voluntarism in the United States National Blood Policy in the Early 1970s
Author(s): Jeremy Shearmur
Page: 279 - 295
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9058-8
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Organ Procurement, Altruism, and Autonomy
Author(s): Sarah Mcgrath
Page: 297 - 309
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9050-3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Morality of an Internet Market in Human Ova
Author(s): Amy E. White
Page: 311 - 321
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9047-y
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Social Constraint, Emergent Goods, and Human Kidney Markets
Author(s): Paul M. Hughes
Page: 323 - 340
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9041-4
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Commercial Medicine and the Ethics of the Profit Motive
Author(s): Adrian J. Walsh
Page: 341 - 357
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9046-z
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Politics of Medical and Health Ethics: Collapsing Goods and the Moral Climate
Author(s): Bob Brecher
Page: 359 - 370
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9045-0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Justice in Health Care
Author(s): Jan Narveson
Page: 371 - 384
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9051-2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rights, Values, Regulation, and Health Care
Author(s): Tibor R. Machan
Page: 385 - 391
DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-007-9040-5
Too bad my review didn't make it, because it does seem related, but looks like there was no space for any book reviews in this special issue.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Return to Oxford Confirmed
This morning I got an email finally telling me for certain that I have a room in Ship Street for next year, so I'll definitely be returning to Oxford in 0th week. (Probably not until Monday or Tuesday). Just as well as I'd already begun teaching preparation (mostly for a Classical Political Thought-lite paper for a visiting student), which included reading Rawls' Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy (just £16.92 on Amazon) for Chris Brooke's seminar (lecture lists available here). Hopefully I'll find some time to work on my thesis, which has lapsed a bit while I've been home...
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Porto 1-1 Liverpool
If a draw was reasonably satisfactory at Portsmouth then here, clearly the toughest game of the CL group, it was something I'd happily have settled for prior to kick off - and, following the match, was practically delighted to achieve.
Sadly, despite being restored to 'full strength' our team never looked at the races, and by the time they scored we could already have been 3-0 down. I suppose it's a positive that Reina has so far only conceded goals to penalties, but we are giving away a penalty every other game... Not that there's any doubt about this one, or Pennant's second yellow - which was an obvious accident waiting to happen.
Thankfully, Porto - a bit like Man Utd at the moment - are a team full of creative flair players but with no one there to provide the real cutting edge in the box, and they couldn't make us pay even when we were down to ten men.
Sadly, despite being restored to 'full strength' our team never looked at the races, and by the time they scored we could already have been 3-0 down. I suppose it's a positive that Reina has so far only conceded goals to penalties, but we are giving away a penalty every other game... Not that there's any doubt about this one, or Pennant's second yellow - which was an obvious accident waiting to happen.
Thankfully, Porto - a bit like Man Utd at the moment - are a team full of creative flair players but with no one there to provide the real cutting edge in the box, and they couldn't make us pay even when we were down to ten men.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Portsmouth 0-0 Liverpool
Grrr, Blogger just lost a rather lengthy post, so briefly:
- Fratton Park tough place to go.
- Selection dodgy, but dictated I feel by international week more than Porto.
- Crouch more effective in Europe; pace would've been more of a threat to Campbell/Distin.
- We still could've won and hit woodwork.
- Penalty was by letter of the law, but if it was applied consistently you'd see a lot more of them given.
- Academic given Reina's save.
- Can't object to Alonso's booking either, but you see Man Utd and Chelsea haranguing officials all the time...
- We need to learn how to score undeserved late winners.
- Fratton Park tough place to go.
- Selection dodgy, but dictated I feel by international week more than Porto.
- Crouch more effective in Europe; pace would've been more of a threat to Campbell/Distin.
- We still could've won and hit woodwork.
- Penalty was by letter of the law, but if it was applied consistently you'd see a lot more of them given.
- Academic given Reina's save.
- Can't object to Alonso's booking either, but you see Man Utd and Chelsea haranguing officials all the time...
- We need to learn how to score undeserved late winners.
Temporary Jobs
After my recent post about uncertainty, I thought it worth some further comment on short-term job contracts. It looks like I might face such uncertainty for some time, hopping between temporary jobs.
Jobs.ac.uk has a new article on the challenges this raises, although in truth it's somewhat banal - stating a lot of obvious problems, including lack of summer/sick pay, job insecurity, increased need for teaching preparation hindering research and inability to buy a house, though without really exploring them in much detail or offering much worthwhile advice (other than 'stick at it and build up experience/contacts').
The Guardian reports that we could be facing a shortage of PhD-qualified researchers, following raised undergraduate tuition fees, which could be a mildly positive thing for those of us already further down that road.
Jobs.ac.uk has a new article on the challenges this raises, although in truth it's somewhat banal - stating a lot of obvious problems, including lack of summer/sick pay, job insecurity, increased need for teaching preparation hindering research and inability to buy a house, though without really exploring them in much detail or offering much worthwhile advice (other than 'stick at it and build up experience/contacts').
The Guardian reports that we could be facing a shortage of PhD-qualified researchers, following raised undergraduate tuition fees, which could be a mildly positive thing for those of us already further down that road.
Friday, September 14, 2007
Signing the Obvious
I predict the next sign to read 'Do As You're Told'...
Quite interesting actually, as I've recently been having a discussion with my friend Pavel about morality. I'm not really sure whether his position is that morality is some kind of sham or just that you don't have reasons to comply/be motivated without enforcement, but having just re-read Machiavelli's Prince I was reminded of it.
UPDATE: Another similar example over at CT.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Methods in Political Theory
Especially for anyone about to start grad school and sit through a bunch of courses on methodology... CT debates the methodology of political theory/philosophy. I seem to recall that the feeling of me and my fellow students was very much 'we don't have methodology, we just do it'.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Uncertain Future
My return to Oxford is still somewhat up in the air. Since I'm beyond fee liability, I'm no longer automatically entitled to the college accommodation I've enjoyed for the last 7 years and, because I was applying for jobs outside Oxford, I didn't make any alternative arrangements. As it is, I suppose I'm now technically house-hunting, although I wouldn't rule out occasional commuting from Colchester, given that I can live rent free with my parents.
Anyway, the ideal would be room in Oxford, preferably with flexibility on the lease (possibly only for MT). After months of uncertainty, last I'd heard from college was that there may be some spare rooms after allocating freshers. They were supposed to be able to let me know by 1st September, however apparently our accommodation officer is now off ill (I'd guess caused by all the stress she has around this time of year), so I still haven't had any confirmation of whether I can get a college room.
Consequently, I still don't know where I'll be when term starts in around a month's time. I'm keeping my fingers crossed I can get that room, in which case I guess I'd move in around 0th week (so I'm not really inconvenienced yet). It does, however, present difficulties for my planning and preparation.
I've noticed one real problem for people around my career stage is the inability to make long-term plans. Previously I'd been aware of things like the difficulty buying a house with short term job contracts, but recently I've seen how - while I was waiting on other jobs applications - a lot of teaching work that was available has already gone to people willing and able to commit early. It seems an uncertain future forces short termism in decision making, which may be an example of rational 'maximin' decision making but effectively rules out certain ideal outcomes.
This is, of course, the kind of thing I've long been generally aware of, but some more personal experience had really reminded me how undesirable it can be. This has also had me thinking about social arrangements. One consequence of the random decision mechanism I examine in my thesis, lottery-voting, is that future outcomes are always unpredictable. Would this uncertainty be bad for all involved? I have a number of quick responses:
i) Uncertainty is not always bad. Sometimes we enjoy surprise and excitement. Often we don't want to know everything about our future - a particularly good example being when we're going to die.
ii) When it is bad, I think the effects of uncertainty are often worsened by inequality. For instance, I didn't commit to teaching because I'm not certain to be in Oxford, while other people could because they are. If no one was certain, then no one would miss out.
ii) Uncertainty may be the lesser evil, compared to be certain loser. At least minorities under a scheme of lottery-voting can hope to get their way, and this is an important reason for them to continue to 'play the game'.
Ironically, if there are fewer college rooms than applicants waiting/hoping for them, my return to Oxford may come down to a random ballot...
Anyway, the ideal would be room in Oxford, preferably with flexibility on the lease (possibly only for MT). After months of uncertainty, last I'd heard from college was that there may be some spare rooms after allocating freshers. They were supposed to be able to let me know by 1st September, however apparently our accommodation officer is now off ill (I'd guess caused by all the stress she has around this time of year), so I still haven't had any confirmation of whether I can get a college room.
Consequently, I still don't know where I'll be when term starts in around a month's time. I'm keeping my fingers crossed I can get that room, in which case I guess I'd move in around 0th week (so I'm not really inconvenienced yet). It does, however, present difficulties for my planning and preparation.
I've noticed one real problem for people around my career stage is the inability to make long-term plans. Previously I'd been aware of things like the difficulty buying a house with short term job contracts, but recently I've seen how - while I was waiting on other jobs applications - a lot of teaching work that was available has already gone to people willing and able to commit early. It seems an uncertain future forces short termism in decision making, which may be an example of rational 'maximin' decision making but effectively rules out certain ideal outcomes.
This is, of course, the kind of thing I've long been generally aware of, but some more personal experience had really reminded me how undesirable it can be. This has also had me thinking about social arrangements. One consequence of the random decision mechanism I examine in my thesis, lottery-voting, is that future outcomes are always unpredictable. Would this uncertainty be bad for all involved? I have a number of quick responses:
i) Uncertainty is not always bad. Sometimes we enjoy surprise and excitement. Often we don't want to know everything about our future - a particularly good example being when we're going to die.
ii) When it is bad, I think the effects of uncertainty are often worsened by inequality. For instance, I didn't commit to teaching because I'm not certain to be in Oxford, while other people could because they are. If no one was certain, then no one would miss out.
ii) Uncertainty may be the lesser evil, compared to be certain loser. At least minorities under a scheme of lottery-voting can hope to get their way, and this is an important reason for them to continue to 'play the game'.
Ironically, if there are fewer college rooms than applicants waiting/hoping for them, my return to Oxford may come down to a random ballot...
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Student Loan Interest Doubles
I wasn't actually aware of this until my mum told me last night, but the interest on student loans increased this month from 2.4% to 4.8%. There's a group on Facebook warning/protesting about the change but, though it was in The Guardian, I don't beleive it's been well-publicized - I certainly could find anything on the BBC website, though they did report on the same thing happening in 2003.
I've never complained about paying interest on my loan, because I always knew it was inflation-linked so my debt (about £13,000) isn't growing in real terms. Moreover, I know the reason for the sudden hike is, in part, that the rate changes only once a year. If inflation had been a steady 3%, then the SLC would've been making a loss on my money all last year.
However, I don't think much of the way the SLC is run. The first time this personally affected me was when they notified me I was entitled to an extra £200 in my second year then refused to give it to me. Generally, since I haven't been paying off, I haven't had much dealing with them, but I've heard a few nasty stories. This large and almost unpublicized rate increase is just what I'd expect.
Also, I can't remember the difference between the RPI and CPI, but I'd like to know why this is tied to the former, which is much higher. The government takes the CPI as its measure of inflation, and is targeting 2% (though it's been between 2 and 3% most of the year). Why then is the inflation figure used for our loan 4.8?
(Still, the good news is many savings accounts can still beat that - in part due to higher interest rates to keep the inflation down)
I've never complained about paying interest on my loan, because I always knew it was inflation-linked so my debt (about £13,000) isn't growing in real terms. Moreover, I know the reason for the sudden hike is, in part, that the rate changes only once a year. If inflation had been a steady 3%, then the SLC would've been making a loss on my money all last year.
However, I don't think much of the way the SLC is run. The first time this personally affected me was when they notified me I was entitled to an extra £200 in my second year then refused to give it to me. Generally, since I haven't been paying off, I haven't had much dealing with them, but I've heard a few nasty stories. This large and almost unpublicized rate increase is just what I'd expect.
Also, I can't remember the difference between the RPI and CPI, but I'd like to know why this is tied to the former, which is much higher. The government takes the CPI as its measure of inflation, and is targeting 2% (though it's been between 2 and 3% most of the year). Why then is the inflation figure used for our loan 4.8?
(Still, the good news is many savings accounts can still beat that - in part due to higher interest rates to keep the inflation down)
Sunday, September 02, 2007
NHS and Postcode Lotteries, Again
This is becoming a recurring theme (e.g. here, here and generally), but while regional differences in NHS provision may violate the principle of generic consistency, postcodes aren't a lottery. Nonetheless, BBC are repeating the fallacy again.
In fact, since you can change where you live (like religion, but unlike skin colour), it could be argued you can move to reflect the healthcare provision you desire (or require), although this might lead to local NHS decisions affecting house prices - which would be like allowing rich parents to buy good school places through purchasing houses in local catchement areas (see the Brighton case).
If postcodes were assigned by lottery, then this would seem a perfectly rational way of rationing scarce treatment/drug supplies. As it is, if we want to end the unequal treatment of people with the same conditions, it seems our only option is to do away with decentralized decisions, so the same NHS policy applies to everyone.
It seems those bringing this challenge don't even understand the notion of scarcity. "The Department of Health said... [trusts] should not refuse to pay because a drug is too expensive." So, if it would cost the NHS £20 million to keep me alive - albeit poorly - for an extra six months, is that something they should do? You could buy Fernando Torres for that...
In fact, since you can change where you live (like religion, but unlike skin colour), it could be argued you can move to reflect the healthcare provision you desire (or require), although this might lead to local NHS decisions affecting house prices - which would be like allowing rich parents to buy good school places through purchasing houses in local catchement areas (see the Brighton case).
If postcodes were assigned by lottery, then this would seem a perfectly rational way of rationing scarce treatment/drug supplies. As it is, if we want to end the unequal treatment of people with the same conditions, it seems our only option is to do away with decentralized decisions, so the same NHS policy applies to everyone.
It seems those bringing this challenge don't even understand the notion of scarcity. "The Department of Health said... [trusts] should not refuse to pay because a drug is too expensive." So, if it would cost the NHS £20 million to keep me alive - albeit poorly - for an extra six months, is that something they should do? You could buy Fernando Torres for that...
Saturday, September 01, 2007
Liverpool 6-0 Derby
Continuing a week of convincing scorelines, today we scored our biggest win under Rafa to go top of the Premiership for the first time under his management. Granted, it was only Derby County, and even a stuttering Spurs managed to hit four past them, but these are the kind of teams we've sometimes struggled to break down in the past, especially without Gerrard.
In the absence of Stevie, Alonso got a chance to run the midfield (with Mascherano tidying up for him) and - like Lampard - seems to play better without Gerrard over-shadowing him. I'm not sure Alonso meant his 40 yard curling free-kick to open the scoring - I think it was intended for the head of Kuyt and, like a cross-shot, fortuitously went in without that touch. Regardless, however, it was a well-struck kick and Kuyt's role shouldn't be underestimated - with him hovering, the 'keeper couldn't commit either way in case he took a touch. (I saw RvN perform a similar move once for Man Utd - made the goal without touching the ball).
I don't want to dwell too much on the goals, but it was good to see Babel notch his first - though whether it owed more to his skill or two Derby defenders tackling each other I'm not sure - and Torres confirmed his general all-round ability to take balls into his feet, over the top or in the air. Last season our strikers could manage all of those between them, but this season we have it in one packet, and three goals so far isn't bad for a settling in period.
Just because we're top of the table - at least until Chelsea play tomorrow - I don't want to get carried away though. Last time we were top - November 2001 or 02 - was following a great start but we then collapsed and went on a disastrous run (after Dudek allowed Forlan to score twice). Under Rafa we've tended to have a slow start rather than a November slump (which had been our previous habit), but we've still tended to have good and bad runs a bit. Hopefully rotation will keep the squad fit and sharp and mean we can keep on producing results like this; however I've yet to see how we'd react to going behind or really having to grind out a win, and those are the qualities that separate champions over the 38 game marathon.
In the absence of Stevie, Alonso got a chance to run the midfield (with Mascherano tidying up for him) and - like Lampard - seems to play better without Gerrard over-shadowing him. I'm not sure Alonso meant his 40 yard curling free-kick to open the scoring - I think it was intended for the head of Kuyt and, like a cross-shot, fortuitously went in without that touch. Regardless, however, it was a well-struck kick and Kuyt's role shouldn't be underestimated - with him hovering, the 'keeper couldn't commit either way in case he took a touch. (I saw RvN perform a similar move once for Man Utd - made the goal without touching the ball).
I don't want to dwell too much on the goals, but it was good to see Babel notch his first - though whether it owed more to his skill or two Derby defenders tackling each other I'm not sure - and Torres confirmed his general all-round ability to take balls into his feet, over the top or in the air. Last season our strikers could manage all of those between them, but this season we have it in one packet, and three goals so far isn't bad for a settling in period.
Just because we're top of the table - at least until Chelsea play tomorrow - I don't want to get carried away though. Last time we were top - November 2001 or 02 - was following a great start but we then collapsed and went on a disastrous run (after Dudek allowed Forlan to score twice). Under Rafa we've tended to have a slow start rather than a November slump (which had been our previous habit), but we've still tended to have good and bad runs a bit. Hopefully rotation will keep the squad fit and sharp and mean we can keep on producing results like this; however I've yet to see how we'd react to going behind or really having to grind out a win, and those are the qualities that separate champions over the 38 game marathon.
Extreme Minorities under FPTP
I commented a little while ago on the often raised danger of extreme minorities winning under lottery-voting. I feel I should point out that this danger is not restricted to lottery-voting. The people over at Make My Vote Count point to this example, where a BNP candidate is elected under FPTP.
As they point out, two-thirds of the vote were cast against him, but that in itself isn't too surprising - given the number of parties running, a plurality is often attained with just 30-40% of the vote, and Labour won a Commons majority with around 35% of the national vote. If we speculate, however, that the BNP candidate would probably have been last choice, at least of those on the left (if not perhaps UKIP voters), then he could have been defeated by any system that took second preferences into account.
Another possibility would, of course, be to copy the French presidential 'plurality run-off' model. In this case, the BNP candidate would make the second round - much like Le Pen did in 2002 - but similarly would probably lose heavily.
As they point out, two-thirds of the vote were cast against him, but that in itself isn't too surprising - given the number of parties running, a plurality is often attained with just 30-40% of the vote, and Labour won a Commons majority with around 35% of the national vote. If we speculate, however, that the BNP candidate would probably have been last choice, at least of those on the left (if not perhaps UKIP voters), then he could have been defeated by any system that took second preferences into account.
Another possibility would, of course, be to copy the French presidential 'plurality run-off' model. In this case, the BNP candidate would make the second round - much like Le Pen did in 2002 - but similarly would probably lose heavily.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Liverpool 4-0 Toulouse (CL Qualifier)
I was saying to a friend the other day that it's not often we wrap games up. Against Aston Villa we almost paid the penalty, against Chelsea we did and even at Sunderland we left it late to make the game safe with a second. Well, this potential banana skin didn't cause me much worry once Crouch had added to our first-leg lead, but it wasn't until Hyypia's towering header just after half time that I was sure it was safe.
The two late goals from Kuyt added a gloss to the scoreline that was hardly undeserved, but the truth is that each of our strikers could've had 3 or 4 and - what's more worrying - they weren't denied by good goal-keeping, as at Sunderland, but an inability to hit the target from relatively clear chances. Neither Crouch nor Kuyt really create many chances for themselves - by which, I don't mean they score tap-ins with little left to do, but they do rely on others to deliver them the ball in the box - so I think their finishing ought to be better, although they do contribute to the team defensively too.
In general, however, I'm very happy with a team that was missing Gerrard and Carragher, but showed our strength in depth this season. Hyypia proved himself a very dependable stand-by. Not only is he still a great defender, but he was prepared to get forward and - at one point, just after the commentator mentioned his spriteliness - was seen running up the right flank. Truth be told, it was probably a good job he wasn't tested by a pacy attack, but the fact he was able to lose his marker not only for the second goal but also at the next corner suggests it was actually the French who had trouble catching him.
The other performer who stood out was, of course, Benayoun. Yet to figure in the Premiership this season, he was our main creative influence and suggested he could be key in unlocking tight defences with clever passing. A very different player to Pennant, I noticed he is willing to stay wide to receive the ball, but prefer to cut in with possession. With both of them playing well, Rafa has a tough selection problem on his hands - though for one I'd like to see both now, swapping flanks, against Derby at the weekend.
The two late goals from Kuyt added a gloss to the scoreline that was hardly undeserved, but the truth is that each of our strikers could've had 3 or 4 and - what's more worrying - they weren't denied by good goal-keeping, as at Sunderland, but an inability to hit the target from relatively clear chances. Neither Crouch nor Kuyt really create many chances for themselves - by which, I don't mean they score tap-ins with little left to do, but they do rely on others to deliver them the ball in the box - so I think their finishing ought to be better, although they do contribute to the team defensively too.
In general, however, I'm very happy with a team that was missing Gerrard and Carragher, but showed our strength in depth this season. Hyypia proved himself a very dependable stand-by. Not only is he still a great defender, but he was prepared to get forward and - at one point, just after the commentator mentioned his spriteliness - was seen running up the right flank. Truth be told, it was probably a good job he wasn't tested by a pacy attack, but the fact he was able to lose his marker not only for the second goal but also at the next corner suggests it was actually the French who had trouble catching him.
The other performer who stood out was, of course, Benayoun. Yet to figure in the Premiership this season, he was our main creative influence and suggested he could be key in unlocking tight defences with clever passing. A very different player to Pennant, I noticed he is willing to stay wide to receive the ball, but prefer to cut in with possession. With both of them playing well, Rafa has a tough selection problem on his hands - though for one I'd like to see both now, swapping flanks, against Derby at the weekend.
Saturday, August 25, 2007
Sunderland 0-2 Liverpool
After easing in most of the new signings, today saw Voronin and Babel given their first starts in the Premiership. On this evidence, Sunderland once again are a long way short on quality, however an away fixture is still a tricky one as Spurs have already found this season. Entering without Gerrard, I worried this is the kind of game that in past season's we'd have drawn or even lost.
As it was, Sunderland were surprisingly accommodating, almost gifting us a goal in the first minute with a poor back pass from former Colchester United player Greg Halford. After that, an inspired display from £9m 'keeper Gordon left me wondering whether this would be 'one of those days' but thankfully the opening goal - Liverpool's 7000th in the league - came from a most unexpected source - Momo Sissoko in his 75th game for the club (he has come close before, most memorably hitting the bar against Barcelona, but I've also seen his shots go for a throw...)
Despite dominating, we failed to make safe what should have been an easy 3- or 4-0, Voronin not scoring the second until the 87th minute. In fairness, Gordon should take credit for great saves from both our strikers, but I'm still not entirely convinced Torres will finish enough goals, even if he creates opportunities himself. The further bad news was the loss of Hyypia (probably broken nose) and Carragher (possibly broken rib) to injuries. While the makeshift defence were enough to repel Sunderland's ineffectual attack, we need at least one of these players fit to partner Agger. I was very glad we didn't get Heinze (£7m far too much for a 29 year old defender with dodgy knees and who looks nothing like the player he was three years ago) but I think we do need to bring in defensive cover - as Chelsea learned after getting caught short here last year.
As it was, Sunderland were surprisingly accommodating, almost gifting us a goal in the first minute with a poor back pass from former Colchester United player Greg Halford. After that, an inspired display from £9m 'keeper Gordon left me wondering whether this would be 'one of those days' but thankfully the opening goal - Liverpool's 7000th in the league - came from a most unexpected source - Momo Sissoko in his 75th game for the club (he has come close before, most memorably hitting the bar against Barcelona, but I've also seen his shots go for a throw...)
Despite dominating, we failed to make safe what should have been an easy 3- or 4-0, Voronin not scoring the second until the 87th minute. In fairness, Gordon should take credit for great saves from both our strikers, but I'm still not entirely convinced Torres will finish enough goals, even if he creates opportunities himself. The further bad news was the loss of Hyypia (probably broken nose) and Carragher (possibly broken rib) to injuries. While the makeshift defence were enough to repel Sunderland's ineffectual attack, we need at least one of these players fit to partner Agger. I was very glad we didn't get Heinze (£7m far too much for a 29 year old defender with dodgy knees and who looks nothing like the player he was three years ago) but I think we do need to bring in defensive cover - as Chelsea learned after getting caught short here last year.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Home
After spending most of August in temporary college accommodation, I returned home today. Despite leaving various Oxford things in my department locker, the car was absolutely packed and the journey - hit by bank holiday traffic and road works - a long one. Still, we made it in one piece - the only question now is how I'm going to fit all my stuff in my room. Unfortunately, this may require a long-term solution, as our accommodation officer informed me prospects of a room or flat for next year don't look good. Given a lack of income either, I may well decide to live at home.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Death Notices
Although this has probably reached most of those who care, I'm sad to pass on news of the recent deaths of two Oxford-related philosophers.
Michael Frede, expert in classical philosophy and former supervisor of my friend Pavel's girlfriend. I'd attended a graduate seminar of his on akrasia in Nicomachean Ethics VII and it was very thorough, though I recall a lot of time spent arguing with Ben Morison about Greek translation which was a bit lost on me.
Susan Hurley I'd only seen in moral philosophy seminars, though I know someone taught by her in Warwick. Though I don't know anything about her philosophy of mind/neuroscience stuff, I have read some of both Natural Reasons and Luck, Justice, and Knowledge - both very good, if dense - and also agree with Jo Wolff's recommendation of her paper in this book (previously mentioned here).
Michael Frede, expert in classical philosophy and former supervisor of my friend Pavel's girlfriend. I'd attended a graduate seminar of his on akrasia in Nicomachean Ethics VII and it was very thorough, though I recall a lot of time spent arguing with Ben Morison about Greek translation which was a bit lost on me.
Susan Hurley I'd only seen in moral philosophy seminars, though I know someone taught by her in Warwick. Though I don't know anything about her philosophy of mind/neuroscience stuff, I have read some of both Natural Reasons and Luck, Justice, and Knowledge - both very good, if dense - and also agree with Jo Wolff's recommendation of her paper in this book (previously mentioned here).
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Self-Defence Lotteries
Another interesting story on the BBC website, about the legal implications of intervening in a fight. It seems that while the legal category of 'self-defence' includes protecting your family and property*, if you try to help a stranger, you could be considered guilty of assault.
*I thought this was slightly amusing, but surely abuse of the term in any ordinary sense: "You can act in self-defence of another in Scots law"
Intuitively, I think you should be morally permitted to intervene, however of course it may not be prudentially wise and also there's the cost that such a moral rule may lead to more violence than necessary, if people took it upon themselves to intervene whenever they felt like it or were unsure which of two people engaged in a fight was actually guilty of initiating it. It raises interesting moral issues about whether our aims should be to minimize wrongs, in a consequentialist sense, or whether we should regard aggressors as having waived their rights to that practically 'anything goes' (by which I mean they become a legitimate target for anyone; I'm not waiving requirements to only use proportionate force, etc).
Returning to a regular theme of this blog, there's a caution at the end: "And even if you don't get hurt as a result, the police are going to get involved, as are lawyers who are smart enough to make the whole thing a lottery." I think this refers to the idea that you could be morally right to intervene, but whether or not you get prosecuted (successfully?) seems arbitrary or random. This seems like a failure of the principle of generic consistency (treat like cases alike), but then one way of achieving deterrence without inflicting too much punishment might be to have high penalties inflicted on a random sample of convicted wrong-doers. This does treat like cases alike at one level, in that all are (alike) entered into the lottery.
*I thought this was slightly amusing, but surely abuse of the term in any ordinary sense: "You can act in self-defence of another in Scots law"
Intuitively, I think you should be morally permitted to intervene, however of course it may not be prudentially wise and also there's the cost that such a moral rule may lead to more violence than necessary, if people took it upon themselves to intervene whenever they felt like it or were unsure which of two people engaged in a fight was actually guilty of initiating it. It raises interesting moral issues about whether our aims should be to minimize wrongs, in a consequentialist sense, or whether we should regard aggressors as having waived their rights to that practically 'anything goes' (by which I mean they become a legitimate target for anyone; I'm not waiving requirements to only use proportionate force, etc).
Returning to a regular theme of this blog, there's a caution at the end: "And even if you don't get hurt as a result, the police are going to get involved, as are lawyers who are smart enough to make the whole thing a lottery." I think this refers to the idea that you could be morally right to intervene, but whether or not you get prosecuted (successfully?) seems arbitrary or random. This seems like a failure of the principle of generic consistency (treat like cases alike), but then one way of achieving deterrence without inflicting too much punishment might be to have high penalties inflicted on a random sample of convicted wrong-doers. This does treat like cases alike at one level, in that all are (alike) entered into the lottery.
Monday, August 20, 2007
Random Primaries
I don't really understand the ridiculously complicated system of nominations and primaries that operates in the US, but one thing I do know is that people are often complaining about it. Thanks to Rob, whose comment led me to this post, in which Matthew Yglesias protests that "It would make more sense to enter the names of every registered Democrat in a hat, pick at random, and then let that guy choose." Well-said, even if he does wait on line...
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Liverpool 1-1 Chelsea
We were absolutely robbed. Seemingly fairly comfortable after Torres' sublime opener - beating Ben Haim on his wrong side and then beating Cech from a tight angle - we were denied a win over one of our main rivals when Chelsea were awarded a most dubious penalty after Malouda jumped into/over Finnan off the ball. In fairness to Chelsea, I don't think it was an intended dive and no one appealed - only the ref (and linesman) seemed to think it was a penalty (UPDATE: he was later dropped). Sadly, Lampard's equalizer took the sting out the game, as it became clear the blues would settle for a draw (we brought on Crouch to play three strikers and they responded with defender Alex). I suppose, on reflection, I should be happy that after winning for several years running at Anfield Chelsea were happy to escape with a draw. As with last year's CL final, the result wasn't what I wanted, but I take heart in comfortably matching our opponents on the pitch.
Friday, August 17, 2007
Another No It's Not a Lottery... (A Level Results)
Well done to anyone getting A level results today. Apparently my cousin James got 5 As and a B, which must mean they are gettign easier!
Of course, aside from questioning standards, this brings up the annual fuss about university places. This story from the BBC seems typical:
Twin sisters Tania and Mahua Bhaduri from West Malling, Kent, both got five grade As. But unlike her sister, Tania has not got a university place. Their father, Dr Bim Bhaduri, said his daughter Tania - who got the As in biology, chemistry, French, maths and psychology - had been rejected from universities including Oxford, Bristol and Sheffield. But Mahua, who studied almost the same A-levels as her sister at state foundation school Tonbridge Grammar for Girls - but took geography instead of psychology, has earned a place at Imperial College, London. Dr Bhaduri added: "The system really is a lottery, they can't differentiate between bright and brighter and this is a problem. The two girls both did very well but only one of them got a place to go to university."
Well, straight-A students get rejected from Oxford all the time, Laura Spence being the most famous example. I suppose it may be somewhat surprising that Tania didn't get in elsewhere, particularly given other universities can no longer discriminate agaisnt Oxbridge applicants, but then it's not clear where else she applied or what for.
Even if the two girls performed equally well in their A-levels, and all other selection criteria, the fact they were applying for different coruses at different universities means they'll be up against different competition. Consider, if I was to sprint 100m in 14 seconds in one race and you were to do so in another, I might win and you might be last, although in a sense we're equally deserving because we did the same thing.
If anything, it seems to me that the exams are more of a lottery, because one person's performances could be very different depending on whether they had a good day or a bad day or what questions come up. University admissions aren't, although of course it has been proposed that they should be - see Alan Ryan's comments in 2000 and 2007. To quote the latter: "at this time of year it always occurs to me that we would be better off behaving like the Dutch and the Irish and allocating some - I'd say a third - of our places by lottery. When critics say that Oxbridge admissions - really, admissions in any of the dozen most competitive universities - are a lottery, they mean it as a complaint; but if it is true that a third of the students admitted could without injustice have been selected at random from a pool from which the shoo-ins at one end and the no-hopers at the other had been eliminated, a lottery would be quicker and fairer. And speaking personally, I'd much rather that the unsuccessful candidates, along with their schools and their parents, spent January yelling at the computer than complaining to me about my colleagues' judgment."
Of course, aside from questioning standards, this brings up the annual fuss about university places. This story from the BBC seems typical:
Twin sisters Tania and Mahua Bhaduri from West Malling, Kent, both got five grade As. But unlike her sister, Tania has not got a university place. Their father, Dr Bim Bhaduri, said his daughter Tania - who got the As in biology, chemistry, French, maths and psychology - had been rejected from universities including Oxford, Bristol and Sheffield. But Mahua, who studied almost the same A-levels as her sister at state foundation school Tonbridge Grammar for Girls - but took geography instead of psychology, has earned a place at Imperial College, London. Dr Bhaduri added: "The system really is a lottery, they can't differentiate between bright and brighter and this is a problem. The two girls both did very well but only one of them got a place to go to university."
Well, straight-A students get rejected from Oxford all the time, Laura Spence being the most famous example. I suppose it may be somewhat surprising that Tania didn't get in elsewhere, particularly given other universities can no longer discriminate agaisnt Oxbridge applicants, but then it's not clear where else she applied or what for.
Even if the two girls performed equally well in their A-levels, and all other selection criteria, the fact they were applying for different coruses at different universities means they'll be up against different competition. Consider, if I was to sprint 100m in 14 seconds in one race and you were to do so in another, I might win and you might be last, although in a sense we're equally deserving because we did the same thing.
If anything, it seems to me that the exams are more of a lottery, because one person's performances could be very different depending on whether they had a good day or a bad day or what questions come up. University admissions aren't, although of course it has been proposed that they should be - see Alan Ryan's comments in 2000 and 2007. To quote the latter: "at this time of year it always occurs to me that we would be better off behaving like the Dutch and the Irish and allocating some - I'd say a third - of our places by lottery. When critics say that Oxbridge admissions - really, admissions in any of the dozen most competitive universities - are a lottery, they mean it as a complaint; but if it is true that a third of the students admitted could without injustice have been selected at random from a pool from which the shoo-ins at one end and the no-hopers at the other had been eliminated, a lottery would be quicker and fairer. And speaking personally, I'd much rather that the unsuccessful candidates, along with their schools and their parents, spent January yelling at the computer than complaining to me about my colleagues' judgment."
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Research Summary
I spent most of yesterday trying to condense my present research and future aims into a punchy 1,000 word summary. I'm not sure this has enough on the interest, importance and originality of my work, but in case anyone out there doesn't know what I'm doing it does nicely summarise my thesis:
My doctoral thesis, Democracy-as-Fairness: Justice, Equal Chances and Lotteries, challenges the assumption that democracy requires majority-rule. I begin by arguing that democracy is a matter of citizen sovereignty and political equality, and thus majority-rule is not naturally-privileged, but is justified only if truly egalitarian. Therefore an argument is needed for majority-rule, and the next two chapters explore what seem the most prominent defences of such, appeal to utilitarian outcomes and procedural fairness.
My second chapter argues that majority-rule, although sometimes associated with the ‘greatest happiness of the greatest number’, cannot guarantee utilitarian outcomes, since it ignores intensity of preferences or interests that are not reflected in votes. Further, if everyone votes to promote their own interests, this may be unfair because a permanent majority can always have their way at the expense of a minority. A more promising approach may be to assume each voter tries to identify and vote for ideal outcomes regardless of their personal interests. I reject this argument, partly because it places great epistemic and moral demands on the voters, but mostly because I think the idea of an ‘impartially best’ outcome is indeterminate – there will often be one pattern of coordination that benefits some and another that benefits others, so what matters is fairness to all involved.
Chapter three explores the idea of fairness, and the claim that majority-rule gives each person equal chances satisfaction. I argue this is only so when the composition of majorities and minorities is fluid, so it’s effectively random who is on the winning side. In cases of permanent majority/minority divides, however, it is predictable in advance who will win and who will lose, so the minority do not enjoy even prospective equality. I suggest using lotteries to adjudicate between competing interests. While giving equal chances to each group gives everyone equal chances of satisfaction, it is blind to numbers and faces practical implementation problems, e.g. deciding what constitutes an option. Instead I propose a proportionately-weighted lottery, which means while majorities have greater chances of victory, each person’s vote contributes equally to chances of success.
Chapters four and five address how proportional chances can be implemented in democratic practice, developing a procedure called ‘lottery-voting’, in which a single, randomly-selected vote determines the outcome. This means every vote has an equal chance of being decisive, and each option’s chance of victory is proportional to its number of votes. Also, since victory is never guaranteed (short of unanimity), all have incentives to turnout and to persuade others.
My final two chapters assess lottery-voting against normative conditions imposed on decision rules in the formal social choice literature, such as anonymity, neutrality, positive responsiveness, Pareto-optimality and rationality. I argue lottery-voting respects those that are important constituents of equality, such as anonymity and neutrality (respectively, requirements that no voter or option be favoured), while violating Arrow’s Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives and Collective Rationality simply because I conceive the purpose of democracy differently – as fairly-adjudicating between competing interests, rather than producing ‘socially preferred’ or best outcomes.
While lottery-voting could actually be used for making decisions, at least in small groups (I do not consider representative democracy), the importance of the thesis is primarily theoretical. Often defences of democracy and majority-rule are conflated; but showing political equality can be satisfied by a lottery shows they are not the same and means those who would defend majority-rule need to offer reasons why it is a better procedure.
Since few discussions of democracy engage with lotteries, beyond perhaps a passing reference to Athenian practice, I think this possibility highlights shortcomings in a number of contemporary arguments. For instance, in recent books both Richard Vernon and Anthony McGann claim that majority-rule maximizes the need for persuasion. In fact, however, a majority group do not need to persuade anyone of their case in order to ensure victory. Lottery-voting, while it does not require persuasion – because a small minority may be content to take their small chance – means all groups always have incentive to try to persuade others of their case, in order to increase their chances of victory.
Further, my work is original because, though I draw inspiration from a 1984 article proposing lottery-voting for representatives, I develop this for direct decision-making. This is a contrast to most work on political use of lotteries, which focuses on representative samples. Moreover, because it combines randomness with voting, lottery-voting ensures that reason also plays a role in selecting outcomes.
I currently have a complete, though unfinished, draft and aim to submit my thesis early in 2008. Taking up your Research Fellowship would allow me time to publish this material, either re-writing it for a monograph and/or working sections into journal articles. I envisage being able to make contributions in a number of areas, including the nature and normative theory of democracy, the fairness of lotteries and engaging with the formal analysis of social choice.
While I believe there is considerable scope for this further development, I am also keen to move on to pastures new. Alongside publishing my existing research, I would like to begin exploring the philosophy of education – an area I feel is of particular importance to those engaged in university teaching, and an interest that has been stimulated both by educational studies courses, including writing a teaching portfolio on problems of authority, and teaching two visiting students interested in political/philosophical issues around education.
Though the goals of this research will doubtless develop as I investigate the subject, I'm particularly interested in what goes on within schools and universities, rather than their interaction with wider society. I’d like to explore issues such as authority and democracy in the classroom and whether the syllabus can be neutral on the good life (e.g. should we be cultivating appreciation of ‘higher pleasures’ such as Shakespeare and Mozart or are we simply inflicting children with ‘expensive tastes’ that they will find harder to satisfy?).
My doctoral thesis, Democracy-as-Fairness: Justice, Equal Chances and Lotteries, challenges the assumption that democracy requires majority-rule. I begin by arguing that democracy is a matter of citizen sovereignty and political equality, and thus majority-rule is not naturally-privileged, but is justified only if truly egalitarian. Therefore an argument is needed for majority-rule, and the next two chapters explore what seem the most prominent defences of such, appeal to utilitarian outcomes and procedural fairness.
My second chapter argues that majority-rule, although sometimes associated with the ‘greatest happiness of the greatest number’, cannot guarantee utilitarian outcomes, since it ignores intensity of preferences or interests that are not reflected in votes. Further, if everyone votes to promote their own interests, this may be unfair because a permanent majority can always have their way at the expense of a minority. A more promising approach may be to assume each voter tries to identify and vote for ideal outcomes regardless of their personal interests. I reject this argument, partly because it places great epistemic and moral demands on the voters, but mostly because I think the idea of an ‘impartially best’ outcome is indeterminate – there will often be one pattern of coordination that benefits some and another that benefits others, so what matters is fairness to all involved.
Chapter three explores the idea of fairness, and the claim that majority-rule gives each person equal chances satisfaction. I argue this is only so when the composition of majorities and minorities is fluid, so it’s effectively random who is on the winning side. In cases of permanent majority/minority divides, however, it is predictable in advance who will win and who will lose, so the minority do not enjoy even prospective equality. I suggest using lotteries to adjudicate between competing interests. While giving equal chances to each group gives everyone equal chances of satisfaction, it is blind to numbers and faces practical implementation problems, e.g. deciding what constitutes an option. Instead I propose a proportionately-weighted lottery, which means while majorities have greater chances of victory, each person’s vote contributes equally to chances of success.
Chapters four and five address how proportional chances can be implemented in democratic practice, developing a procedure called ‘lottery-voting’, in which a single, randomly-selected vote determines the outcome. This means every vote has an equal chance of being decisive, and each option’s chance of victory is proportional to its number of votes. Also, since victory is never guaranteed (short of unanimity), all have incentives to turnout and to persuade others.
My final two chapters assess lottery-voting against normative conditions imposed on decision rules in the formal social choice literature, such as anonymity, neutrality, positive responsiveness, Pareto-optimality and rationality. I argue lottery-voting respects those that are important constituents of equality, such as anonymity and neutrality (respectively, requirements that no voter or option be favoured), while violating Arrow’s Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives and Collective Rationality simply because I conceive the purpose of democracy differently – as fairly-adjudicating between competing interests, rather than producing ‘socially preferred’ or best outcomes.
While lottery-voting could actually be used for making decisions, at least in small groups (I do not consider representative democracy), the importance of the thesis is primarily theoretical. Often defences of democracy and majority-rule are conflated; but showing political equality can be satisfied by a lottery shows they are not the same and means those who would defend majority-rule need to offer reasons why it is a better procedure.
Since few discussions of democracy engage with lotteries, beyond perhaps a passing reference to Athenian practice, I think this possibility highlights shortcomings in a number of contemporary arguments. For instance, in recent books both Richard Vernon and Anthony McGann claim that majority-rule maximizes the need for persuasion. In fact, however, a majority group do not need to persuade anyone of their case in order to ensure victory. Lottery-voting, while it does not require persuasion – because a small minority may be content to take their small chance – means all groups always have incentive to try to persuade others of their case, in order to increase their chances of victory.
Further, my work is original because, though I draw inspiration from a 1984 article proposing lottery-voting for representatives, I develop this for direct decision-making. This is a contrast to most work on political use of lotteries, which focuses on representative samples. Moreover, because it combines randomness with voting, lottery-voting ensures that reason also plays a role in selecting outcomes.
I currently have a complete, though unfinished, draft and aim to submit my thesis early in 2008. Taking up your Research Fellowship would allow me time to publish this material, either re-writing it for a monograph and/or working sections into journal articles. I envisage being able to make contributions in a number of areas, including the nature and normative theory of democracy, the fairness of lotteries and engaging with the formal analysis of social choice.
While I believe there is considerable scope for this further development, I am also keen to move on to pastures new. Alongside publishing my existing research, I would like to begin exploring the philosophy of education – an area I feel is of particular importance to those engaged in university teaching, and an interest that has been stimulated both by educational studies courses, including writing a teaching portfolio on problems of authority, and teaching two visiting students interested in political/philosophical issues around education.
Though the goals of this research will doubtless develop as I investigate the subject, I'm particularly interested in what goes on within schools and universities, rather than their interaction with wider society. I’d like to explore issues such as authority and democracy in the classroom and whether the syllabus can be neutral on the good life (e.g. should we be cultivating appreciation of ‘higher pleasures’ such as Shakespeare and Mozart or are we simply inflicting children with ‘expensive tastes’ that they will find harder to satisfy?).
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Toulouse 0-1 Liverpool (CL qualifer)
Thankfully I managed to get my internet working in time to be pleasantly surprised BBC audio commentary of this match was available online (CL wasn't last season, but maybe that's only the competition-proper). Sadly, I wasn't able to see it, but by all reports I didn't miss much from a pedestrian game played in a mid-afternoon 30 degree heat.
The good news is that Rafa was able to make six changes - starting Hyypia, Mascherano, Benayoun, Babel, Voronin and Crouch - without obviously fielding a weakened team. It wasn't so surprising to see some new signings bedded-in in Europe, to help them acclimatize to the team before being thrown into the Premiership.
Though defences enjoyed the best of the game, we seemed fairly comfortable. Voronin's cracking goal under-scored what excellent value for money he was. While it's still early days, it looks like he'll offer our first-team far more than Robbie did (I hate to say it) and - much as I like Crouch - I'm even starting to wonder what a Torres-Voronin partnership would look like for first-choice.
The bad side, however, is that the away goal counts for nothing (it would only come in to play if they score at least one at Anfield), and our recent qualifying history has been to win 2-0 away then lose at Anfield and squeak through - it looks like we'll need a full-strength team in two weeks' time. Also Gerrard picked up a minor knock before his substitution and Carragher showed signs of what was hopefully just cramp - we'd better hope both are fit for Chelsea's up-coming visit.
The good news is that Rafa was able to make six changes - starting Hyypia, Mascherano, Benayoun, Babel, Voronin and Crouch - without obviously fielding a weakened team. It wasn't so surprising to see some new signings bedded-in in Europe, to help them acclimatize to the team before being thrown into the Premiership.
Though defences enjoyed the best of the game, we seemed fairly comfortable. Voronin's cracking goal under-scored what excellent value for money he was. While it's still early days, it looks like he'll offer our first-team far more than Robbie did (I hate to say it) and - much as I like Crouch - I'm even starting to wonder what a Torres-Voronin partnership would look like for first-choice.
The bad side, however, is that the away goal counts for nothing (it would only come in to play if they score at least one at Anfield), and our recent qualifying history has been to win 2-0 away then lose at Anfield and squeak through - it looks like we'll need a full-strength team in two weeks' time. Also Gerrard picked up a minor knock before his substitution and Carragher showed signs of what was hopefully just cramp - we'd better hope both are fit for Chelsea's up-coming visit.
Further Technical Hitches
I thought my computer troubles had been fixed but, after much fiddling with my computer and a temporary spell of working, what started as a minor inconvenience - not being able to access my network files - has escalated to the point where I can now no longer even access internet from my room. I suppose at least living in college means the IT room and libraries are close by.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Another 400 words in print...
I was updating my CV today, and happened to look at the latest issue of Political Studies Review, where I found to my surprise one of my book notes had been published (p.267) without my knowledge back in May (I wasn't expecting it until September).
I have further book notes in the pipeline, having just received an acknowledgement that my latest is scheduled for May 2008, so may well feature in the next three PSRs. Guess I really should be writing that ol' thesis though...
I have further book notes in the pipeline, having just received an acknowledgement that my latest is scheduled for May 2008, so may well feature in the next three PSRs. Guess I really should be writing that ol' thesis though...
Monday, August 13, 2007
Protest Voting Gone Wrong
A common objection to lottery-voting is that even those nasty right-wing BNP types get some votes, and if we give them a proportional chance of victory then we face the prospect that they will actually get their way sometimes. I have a number of responses, which may briefly be summed up by saying:
i) That's democracy - people vote for bad outcomes and you might get them...
ii) We can prevent the worst injustices by taking constitutionally protected rights off the democratic agenda.
iii) We might also exclude small, and potentially extreme, minorities by imposing some kind of electoral threshold needed before an alternative gets any chance. Many PR schemes require a party to have something like 5% of the vote to get any seats, so we could similarly say you need 5% of the vote to get any chance.
Most important, I think, is:
iv) Voting is an endogeneous consequence of the political system.
In Britain's FPTP system most people vote Labour, Conservative or Lib Dem because they don't really have much choice. Votes for the others are often seen as 'wasted' because - except in a few cases - they have no chance of winning a seat. The flip-side of this, however, is that if your vote doesn't matter, you can cast it as you like (this expressive view is proposed by Brennan and Lomasky), and therefore it is easy to cast a protest vote - e.g. you can cross the BNP box to register dissatisfaction knowing they won't win anyway.
Sometimes, however, this may go wrong. I knew I'd kept a newspaper cutting of this and, after rummaging round through my unorganized collection of newspaper cuttings, was able to find it to cite in my thesis. (I prefer to be able to give the page number, rather than just citing an online link - this was page 5, by the way).
Following Hamas' surprise electoral victory, caused by mass protest voting, one Fatah supporter is quoted as saying “I voted Hamas so that my own Fatah Party would be shocked and change its ways… I thought Hamas would come second. But this is a game that went too far. Nobody thought Hamas would win – even them. I know lots of people who voted Hamas, who regret it now. If I could vote again, I would vote for Fatah”.
Lottery-voting means that every vote counts, whether you are in a majority or minority you bestow a chance of victory upon whatever option you vote for. This has at least four advantages:
i) There really is an incentive for each person to turn-out - your side could win, and your vote will increase their chances.
ii) Relatedly, since more votes always increase your chances, there is an incentive to persuade as many opponents as possible to join your cause, thus fostering deliberation.
iii) You should always vote sincerely - there's no point increasing the chances of your second choice rather than your first (the one qualification, of course, is if your first might not pass the threshold suggested above - but that could be avoided if the ballot paper includes second preferences to be redistributed).
iv) Since your vote matters, you'd better not cast it irresponsibly - and thus lottery-voting better realizes the educative effects expected of voting by the likes of J S Mill and Carole Pateman.
i) That's democracy - people vote for bad outcomes and you might get them...
ii) We can prevent the worst injustices by taking constitutionally protected rights off the democratic agenda.
iii) We might also exclude small, and potentially extreme, minorities by imposing some kind of electoral threshold needed before an alternative gets any chance. Many PR schemes require a party to have something like 5% of the vote to get any seats, so we could similarly say you need 5% of the vote to get any chance.
Most important, I think, is:
iv) Voting is an endogeneous consequence of the political system.
In Britain's FPTP system most people vote Labour, Conservative or Lib Dem because they don't really have much choice. Votes for the others are often seen as 'wasted' because - except in a few cases - they have no chance of winning a seat. The flip-side of this, however, is that if your vote doesn't matter, you can cast it as you like (this expressive view is proposed by Brennan and Lomasky), and therefore it is easy to cast a protest vote - e.g. you can cross the BNP box to register dissatisfaction knowing they won't win anyway.
Sometimes, however, this may go wrong. I knew I'd kept a newspaper cutting of this and, after rummaging round through my unorganized collection of newspaper cuttings, was able to find it to cite in my thesis. (I prefer to be able to give the page number, rather than just citing an online link - this was page 5, by the way).
Following Hamas' surprise electoral victory, caused by mass protest voting, one Fatah supporter is quoted as saying “I voted Hamas so that my own Fatah Party would be shocked and change its ways… I thought Hamas would come second. But this is a game that went too far. Nobody thought Hamas would win – even them. I know lots of people who voted Hamas, who regret it now. If I could vote again, I would vote for Fatah”.
Lottery-voting means that every vote counts, whether you are in a majority or minority you bestow a chance of victory upon whatever option you vote for. This has at least four advantages:
i) There really is an incentive for each person to turn-out - your side could win, and your vote will increase their chances.
ii) Relatedly, since more votes always increase your chances, there is an incentive to persuade as many opponents as possible to join your cause, thus fostering deliberation.
iii) You should always vote sincerely - there's no point increasing the chances of your second choice rather than your first (the one qualification, of course, is if your first might not pass the threshold suggested above - but that could be avoided if the ballot paper includes second preferences to be redistributed).
iv) Since your vote matters, you'd better not cast it irresponsibly - and thus lottery-voting better realizes the educative effects expected of voting by the likes of J S Mill and Carole Pateman.
Sunday, August 12, 2007
IVF 'Lottery'
The media seem to enjoy giving lotteries a bad name, and even the BBC are in on it. Interestingly, having just scanned through the article, I don't see anyone actually mention lotteries in the text, it's simply a gratuitous title.
The Facts: Guidelines say all eligible women aged 23-39 should get one free cycle of IVF. But some areas have introduced restrictions such as age limits, with some saying a woman over 35 is too old, with others saying that is too young. Other PCTs, like North Staffordshire, are so cash-strapped they have put a freeze on all forms of fertility treatment. Half of the 114 PCTs offered couples free IVF even if either partner already had a child. In other words, local decisions on health spending lead to local inequalities (though presumably areas spending less on IVF spend more on something else, like cancer drugs, so perhaps I should simply say differences)
Comments: Mr Shapps, whose own three children were conceived through IVF, said that PCTs were, to some extent, "playing God" - deciding who had the right to a child and who did not, based largely on the state of the PCTs' annual budgets and deficits. He explained: "Couples are effectively being told that they cannot have a baby while their friends on the other side of the street, who might have a similar set of circumstances, are able to obtain three cycles of IVF provided for them by the NHS."
Dr Mike Dixon, chairman of the NHS Alliance which represents PCTs, said: "For the individual, it might seem an unfair system. But looking at it nationally, I think it's better that there should be local determination of provision."
However Infertility Network UK said: "We urge the government to consult with all those involved, including patient representatives and clinicians, with a view to implementing the full NICE guideline and to setting centrally agreed criteria to overcome these inequalities once and for all."
I'm not really sure why these decisions are decentralized. Healthcare priorities aren't obviously local issues, and you might well think that if a life-saving cancer drug is a better use of NHS resources than IVF fertility treatment then that holds true everywhere. But (and I'm sure this won't be the last time I have to say this) regional variation isn't a lottery!
The Facts: Guidelines say all eligible women aged 23-39 should get one free cycle of IVF. But some areas have introduced restrictions such as age limits, with some saying a woman over 35 is too old, with others saying that is too young. Other PCTs, like North Staffordshire, are so cash-strapped they have put a freeze on all forms of fertility treatment. Half of the 114 PCTs offered couples free IVF even if either partner already had a child. In other words, local decisions on health spending lead to local inequalities (though presumably areas spending less on IVF spend more on something else, like cancer drugs, so perhaps I should simply say differences)
Comments: Mr Shapps, whose own three children were conceived through IVF, said that PCTs were, to some extent, "playing God" - deciding who had the right to a child and who did not, based largely on the state of the PCTs' annual budgets and deficits. He explained: "Couples are effectively being told that they cannot have a baby while their friends on the other side of the street, who might have a similar set of circumstances, are able to obtain three cycles of IVF provided for them by the NHS."
Dr Mike Dixon, chairman of the NHS Alliance which represents PCTs, said: "For the individual, it might seem an unfair system. But looking at it nationally, I think it's better that there should be local determination of provision."
However Infertility Network UK said: "We urge the government to consult with all those involved, including patient representatives and clinicians, with a view to implementing the full NICE guideline and to setting centrally agreed criteria to overcome these inequalities once and for all."
I'm not really sure why these decisions are decentralized. Healthcare priorities aren't obviously local issues, and you might well think that if a life-saving cancer drug is a better use of NHS resources than IVF fertility treatment then that holds true everywhere. But (and I'm sure this won't be the last time I have to say this) regional variation isn't a lottery!
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Aston Villa 1-2 Liverpool
It's been a while since we had a first-day win, but after last season's terrible start - where we only got one point from something like the first seven away games - this was a particularly welcome one, that also allows us to enjoy being 3 points ahead of Man Utd, Chelsea and Arsenal, at least briefly (start as you mean to go on, eh?).
Focusing on our performance, however, I can't be entirely happy. While Torres looked suited to the English game, and showed some good touch and movement - even if one shot from an angle actually did go for a throw - and Babel's cameo was also promising, the same flaws remained - we struggled to finish this one off. It took an own goal just to give us the lead and then, when we should have been about 3-0 up, we end up conceding a silly equalizer from the penalty spot that could have cost us dear.
Of course, first game of the season players aren't at their sharpest, but we have to be more clinical in taking our chances. It reminded me too much of the frustrating 0-0 draw with 'Boro on the opening day of the season before last. What was welcome, however, was the response to conceding. I'd recently read someone say that if Man Utd or Chelsea need a goal in the last 5-10 minutes you always fancy them to get it. Well, today I didn't really expect us to - or, at least, not from a Gerrard free-kick (I'd just said to Rob I'd swap him for Danny Murphy come deadball situations). In fact, Stevie's Beckham-like free-kick (UPDATE: video clip) curled over the wall and into the top corner. If he can keep doing that, then there's really no need for England to worry about old 'Goldenballs' any more...
(I couldn't find a video yet, but these two - a long-range screamer and near-post corner - suggest Villa fans must really be hating Stevie by now...)
Focusing on our performance, however, I can't be entirely happy. While Torres looked suited to the English game, and showed some good touch and movement - even if one shot from an angle actually did go for a throw - and Babel's cameo was also promising, the same flaws remained - we struggled to finish this one off. It took an own goal just to give us the lead and then, when we should have been about 3-0 up, we end up conceding a silly equalizer from the penalty spot that could have cost us dear.
Of course, first game of the season players aren't at their sharpest, but we have to be more clinical in taking our chances. It reminded me too much of the frustrating 0-0 draw with 'Boro on the opening day of the season before last. What was welcome, however, was the response to conceding. I'd recently read someone say that if Man Utd or Chelsea need a goal in the last 5-10 minutes you always fancy them to get it. Well, today I didn't really expect us to - or, at least, not from a Gerrard free-kick (I'd just said to Rob I'd swap him for Danny Murphy come deadball situations). In fact, Stevie's Beckham-like free-kick (UPDATE: video clip) curled over the wall and into the top corner. If he can keep doing that, then there's really no need for England to worry about old 'Goldenballs' any more...
(I couldn't find a video yet, but these two - a long-range screamer and near-post corner - suggest Villa fans must really be hating Stevie by now...)
AOCs
Since OUCS are doing some kind of servicing that includes Herald email being down for most of the day, I haven't yet had my weekly jobs.ac.uk email. Vaguely on the topic, however, I saw this discussion on Brian Leiter's blog (via) about Areas Of Competence listed on one's CV.
I generally subscribe to the view that AOS = primary research area (thesis topic) and that AOC = other areas in which you have a sound knowledge base and could teach an undergraduate course with relatively little preparation. For what it's worth, this is what I've generally put on my recent CVs:
Area of Specialisation:
Political Philosophy (distributive justice, democracy, political obligation, liberty)
Areas of Competence:
Normative Ethics (first-order moral theories and applied ethics)
Moral and Political Thought of Plato (especially Republic)
Democratic Theory (electoral systems, voting behaviour, social choice)
Though I suppose there's actually a case for putting democratic theory as an AOS and dividing political philosophy so that justice and democracy are under AOS and other areas under AOC. I think this is all a matter of specification, and whether one should go with general labels or something more specific, which is something discussed in the comments on Leiter, e.g. here and here. (I'm quite happy with my 'general label: specific detail' format).
Also interesting is the proposal of listing 'areas of teaching interest'. I think this is a good idea, as it allows you to distinguish where you could currently teach a course with little preparation (=AOC) and what you would be willing (and able) to teach in the medium-longer term, but not without a decent amount of time to prepare. I sometimes think about this, because there are a lot of Oxford courses that, given sufficient time, I could see myself being able to teach. Thus, if I was applying for a long-term job here I might sell myself by saying something like:
AOS/AOC
Theory of Politics
Prelims Politics (Theory)
Ethics
Prelims Philosophy (Mill)
Plato's Republic
Areas of Teaching Interest/'future AOCs'
Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics
Classical Political Thought
Philosophy of Religion
Aesthetics
Jurisprudence
And maybe even (if demanded)
History of Philosophy
Prelims Philosophy (General)
Political Sociology
Not, of course, that I'd list all that on my CV.
I generally subscribe to the view that AOS = primary research area (thesis topic) and that AOC = other areas in which you have a sound knowledge base and could teach an undergraduate course with relatively little preparation. For what it's worth, this is what I've generally put on my recent CVs:
Area of Specialisation:
Political Philosophy (distributive justice, democracy, political obligation, liberty)
Areas of Competence:
Normative Ethics (first-order moral theories and applied ethics)
Moral and Political Thought of Plato (especially Republic)
Democratic Theory (electoral systems, voting behaviour, social choice)
Though I suppose there's actually a case for putting democratic theory as an AOS and dividing political philosophy so that justice and democracy are under AOS and other areas under AOC. I think this is all a matter of specification, and whether one should go with general labels or something more specific, which is something discussed in the comments on Leiter, e.g. here and here. (I'm quite happy with my 'general label: specific detail' format).
Also interesting is the proposal of listing 'areas of teaching interest'. I think this is a good idea, as it allows you to distinguish where you could currently teach a course with little preparation (=AOC) and what you would be willing (and able) to teach in the medium-longer term, but not without a decent amount of time to prepare. I sometimes think about this, because there are a lot of Oxford courses that, given sufficient time, I could see myself being able to teach. Thus, if I was applying for a long-term job here I might sell myself by saying something like:
AOS/AOC
Theory of Politics
Prelims Politics (Theory)
Ethics
Prelims Philosophy (Mill)
Plato's Republic
Areas of Teaching Interest/'future AOCs'
Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics
Classical Political Thought
Philosophy of Religion
Aesthetics
Jurisprudence
And maybe even (if demanded)
History of Philosophy
Prelims Philosophy (General)
Political Sociology
Not, of course, that I'd list all that on my CV.
Friday, August 10, 2007
First Complete Draft
Having finally written chapter 7 and a conclusion, I now for the first time have a complete thesis draft. It's 81,868 words and 145 pages (single-spaced). Some of it still needs a lot of work, and I'm still waiting for feedback on my two Confirmation chapters (which I submitted in April!); but this is the first time I've had something that reads like a thesis, without any of it being scrappy notes or such, and I wanted to stick it all in one document to make me feel good about all that slaving away...
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
Online Comics
Since I've packed so much of my stuff, it's the perfect excuse to miss work and procrastinate. And how better than to convince myself everyone else is doing so too, by browsing PhD comics... Favourites:
165 dating
182 Who wants a Merc?
197 comic survey
213 one that suggests distributing doctoral degrees by lottery...
248 summer break
Also, today I found a new one, Basic Instructions (via Scott Adams). I like the format, though they take a while to load (probably the server problems mentioned on the site). Favourites: How to listen to other people's problems and How to master your fear (which ties in to my recent bears link)
165 dating
182 Who wants a Merc?
197 comic survey
213 one that suggests distributing doctoral degrees by lottery...
248 summer break
Also, today I found a new one, Basic Instructions (via Scott Adams). I like the format, though they take a while to load (probably the server problems mentioned on the site). Favourites: How to listen to other people's problems and How to master your fear (which ties in to my recent bears link)
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Book Launch
Not an official launch, more a celebratory drink in fact. Still, tonight we marked the publication of a book of essays on Wittgenstein, edited by my friends Edward (lecturer at Jesus) and Guy (CV - which lists the book as late 2006; oh well). The book itself includes contributions from Hilary Putnam, P. M. S. Hacker and A. W. Moore.
Computer Woes
Today, I spent over two and a half hours - between morning and afternoon - sat in the IT officer's office trying to work out why my computer couldn't connect to the college network (a problem since I moved, coinciding with network maintenance). In the end, the verdict was that there had been multiple problems with both my computer and the server, an network settings and IP addresses were adjusted. Needless to say, not a productive day.
Sunday, August 05, 2007
Puntastic
Since summer's finally arrived - after a brief spell in April, which saw my only previous punting action of the year - we decided to go punting today. It's the first time this year I've used the Jesus college punts (after one previous plan was rained off), now at the Cherwell boathouse. After that, there were strawberries and biscuits in the GCR, provided by the welfare rep for those of us still around - which seemed to be only 6 or 7. It was a nice afternoon for lying in the quad, doing nothing. Now the weekend's over, I suppose I'd better think about getting back to work though...
Saturday, August 04, 2007
Bears Aren't the Bravest
Today, while out with my dad and great aunt, for some reason the conversation reminded me of this story about a cat chasing a bear up a tree (in fact, two trees). I meant to search the BBC website for it, but had no need as there was a handy link on this recent story about Deep Purple/Whitesnake rock star David Coverdale scaring bears away from his property. While bears may be intruding more on urban spaces, it appears saying 'boo' may be an adequate defence mechanism...
UPDATE: Advice on mastering fear, of bears included.
UPDATE: Advice on mastering fear, of bears included.
London, Baby
Today I went to London, to meet up with my dad and visit my great aunt Hilda. It gave me a brief chance to look down Oxford St - though the CD clearance in Borders didn't seem as interesting as the one in Oxford - and to pick up my mini-fridge off my dad, which has made my new room slightly more convenient.
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Moving Saga
Well, I spent most of yesterday packing and cleaning the flat. Ed had said he'd give me a lift down to Ship Street (college-owned houses just next to Jesus), but it wouldn't be until after work. Since he also had himself and his two new housemates to take, it turned out we didn't leave until 8:30. I had to go to a tiny room on the 3rd floor, and it took me 45 mins just to carry all my stuff up there from the hall - then I had to go to Tesco... Add to this the room hadn't even been cleaned since the last occupant, wasn't big enough for all my stuff and the curtains didn't cover the window (guaranteeing an early wake up) and things weren't looking good.
Thankfully, first thing this morning I went to see the accommodation officer and she said I could move into room 3 - the one I had in the first year of my M.Phil - first floor, much larger. It meant another hour moving, and I almost put my back out again shifting boxes and furniture, but at least it's a much nicer place to be for the next three weeks or so. Room aside, the shower and kitchen are pretty filthy, so have stocked up as much as I can on food I can eat with only a sandwich toaster and a kettle (lots of cous cous...) At least I'm near the libraries; guess I should try to make the most of that, not that I'm going to do anything more today.
Thankfully, first thing this morning I went to see the accommodation officer and she said I could move into room 3 - the one I had in the first year of my M.Phil - first floor, much larger. It meant another hour moving, and I almost put my back out again shifting boxes and furniture, but at least it's a much nicer place to be for the next three weeks or so. Room aside, the shower and kitchen are pretty filthy, so have stocked up as much as I can on food I can eat with only a sandwich toaster and a kettle (lots of cous cous...) At least I'm near the libraries; guess I should try to make the most of that, not that I'm going to do anything more today.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Chapter 6
I'm moving later on today, but thankfully this morning had just enough time to finish the last section of my penultimate chapter (the one on social choice, previously chapter 5 and now number 6). This is good, because I wanted to back it up safely, and it's now available online via WebLearn (Oxford log-in required - if anyone else happens to be interested, email me).
Latest word counts:
Intro 5,211
ch.1 8,349
ch.2 12,617
ch.3 11,394
ch.4 11,467
ch.5 10,930
ch.6 14,426
ch. 7 [to do]
Conc [to do]
Total: 74,394
Latest word counts:
Intro 5,211
ch.1 8,349
ch.2 12,617
ch.3 11,394
ch.4 11,467
ch.5 10,930
ch.6 14,426
ch. 7 [to do]
Conc [to do]
Total: 74,394
Apocalyptica
Finnish cello-rock band Apocalyptica have posted a new song, 'SOS', on their MySpace, featuring vocals from Lacuna Coil's Cristina Scabbia. New album Worlds Collide is due out in September.
Monday, July 30, 2007
The Importance of Education
Last term I taught a visiting student interested in egalitarianism and education and now I'm teaching a girl at St Hugh's Summer School who's interested in politics and education. I'm increasingly finding it an interesting field as well, and think when it comes to post-doc research proposals I may well want to do something in the field of education.
In the meantime, below I copy the annotated reading suggestions I gave for next week's tutorial, should anyone be interested. I notice that, since writing it early this afternoon, Mary Warnock is back in the news.
A. Gutmann ‘What’s the Use of Going to School? The Problem of Education in Utilitarianism and Rights Theories’ in B. Williams and A. Sen (eds.) (1982) Utilitarianism and Beyond
Argues that education should be about equipping children for future freedom, rather than serving ‘utilitarian’ goals, i.e. promoting happiness or usefulness according to current standards.
M. Saito (2003) ‘Amartya Sen's Capability Approach to Education: A Critical Exploration’ Journal of Philosophy of Education 37:1 17–33
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9752.3701002
M. Walker (2005) ‘Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach and Education’ Educational Action Research 13:1 103-110
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9752.3701002
Amartya Sen argues that rather than looking simply at people’s income or achievement (which he terms ‘functionings’) we should look at capabilities – what people are free and able to achieve. He employs the ‘capabilities approach’ in looking at economic development and inequality, but these two articles seek to relate the insights to education.
M. Warnock (1998) An Intelligent Person’s Guide to Ethics ‘introduction’ p14ff and pp.58-63
Baroness Warnock was part of a House of Lords committee that looked at education policy in the UK in the 1970s. These few pages briefly set out how she thought of the problem and justify her stance that it is important to devote resources to bring about small improvements in the worst off.
If you can’t find that, I assume her thoughts are developed at longer length in M. Warnock (1978) Meeting Special Educational Needs: A Brief Guide (though I haven’t read this and can’t say which parts are most useful)
M. Walzer (1983) Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality chapter 8
Walzer’s broader argument is that all goods should be distributed according to their own internal logic or standards – so political office should go to the persuasive or charismatic leader, not simply the person with the most money. (It’s generally an argument that not everything should be subject to monetary exchange, since the market corrupts the meaning of others goods). Chapter eight addresses implications for education, arguing that schools are for learning, so should be willing to teach anyone willing and able to learn.
A. Brown (2006) ‘Equality of Opportunity for Education: One-off or Lifelong?’ Journal of Philosophy of Education 40:1 63–84
This is about who should pay for adult education – should the state subsidize those that failed to make the most of the chance they had as children? I include it as it may relate to the drop-outs we talked about, or challenge your focus on the 2-20 age range rather than life-long learning…
In the meantime, below I copy the annotated reading suggestions I gave for next week's tutorial, should anyone be interested. I notice that, since writing it early this afternoon, Mary Warnock is back in the news.
A. Gutmann ‘What’s the Use of Going to School? The Problem of Education in Utilitarianism and Rights Theories’ in B. Williams and A. Sen (eds.) (1982) Utilitarianism and Beyond
Argues that education should be about equipping children for future freedom, rather than serving ‘utilitarian’ goals, i.e. promoting happiness or usefulness according to current standards.
M. Saito (2003) ‘Amartya Sen's Capability Approach to Education: A Critical Exploration’ Journal of Philosophy of Education 37:1 17–33
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9752.3701002
M. Walker (2005) ‘Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach and Education’ Educational Action Research 13:1 103-110
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9752.3701002
Amartya Sen argues that rather than looking simply at people’s income or achievement (which he terms ‘functionings’) we should look at capabilities – what people are free and able to achieve. He employs the ‘capabilities approach’ in looking at economic development and inequality, but these two articles seek to relate the insights to education.
M. Warnock (1998) An Intelligent Person’s Guide to Ethics ‘introduction’ p14ff and pp.58-63
Baroness Warnock was part of a House of Lords committee that looked at education policy in the UK in the 1970s. These few pages briefly set out how she thought of the problem and justify her stance that it is important to devote resources to bring about small improvements in the worst off.
If you can’t find that, I assume her thoughts are developed at longer length in M. Warnock (1978) Meeting Special Educational Needs: A Brief Guide (though I haven’t read this and can’t say which parts are most useful)
M. Walzer (1983) Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality chapter 8
Walzer’s broader argument is that all goods should be distributed according to their own internal logic or standards – so political office should go to the persuasive or charismatic leader, not simply the person with the most money. (It’s generally an argument that not everything should be subject to monetary exchange, since the market corrupts the meaning of others goods). Chapter eight addresses implications for education, arguing that schools are for learning, so should be willing to teach anyone willing and able to learn.
A. Brown (2006) ‘Equality of Opportunity for Education: One-off or Lifelong?’ Journal of Philosophy of Education 40:1 63–84
This is about who should pay for adult education – should the state subsidize those that failed to make the most of the chance they had as children? I include it as it may relate to the drop-outs we talked about, or challenge your focus on the 2-20 age range rather than life-long learning…
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Pre-Season Thoughts
Well, yesterday a senior Liverpool team were denied their first trophy (albeit a meaningless one) of the season by losing a penalty shoot-out, in which Reina failed to save any and neither Torres nor Benayoun could score from the spot... Today a young Liverpool XI drew with Colchester United at Layer Rd.
I haven't generally dignified pre-season matches with coverage, but thought I may as well express my feelings on the coming season:
I was disappointed to see Bellamy and, more particularly, Gonzalez axed from the squad instead of being given more time (At least we made a profit on the former, and I suspect there may be non-football reasons behind the latter).
Torres is obviously a good striker, but his record in Spain is only about 1 in 3 and I'm not really sure he's the main to fire us to a title challenge. An improvement on what we had before certainly, but a big risk for £20+m.
Ryan Babel is supposed to be very promising, but I haven't seen anything of him yet, and from what I hear it's not clear where he'll play - he's really a forward who likes to drift out left (like Henry in that respect), but I think he may play left wing, at least at first.
Formation-wise, from what I can tell we've mostly employed a 4-4-2 over pre-season, which surprises me. I'd have expected we might use either 4-3-3, with Babel/Kewell left-sided striker and Pennant or Kuyt on the right, or adopt Benitez' Valencia 4-2-3-1, which would line up something like:
(Back 5: Reina, Finnan, Carra, Agger, Riise/Aurelio)
2 defensive midfielders: Alonso, Sissoko, Mascherano
Right attacking midfield: Pennant, Gerrard, Benayoun, Kuyt
Central attacking midfield/link man: Gerrard, Voronin, Kuyt, Leiva
Left attacking midfield: Kewell, Babel
Lone striker: Torres, Crouch, Kuyt
Overall, some expensive new signings have certainly whetted my appetite, but so far they're untested and need time to gel. Man Utd have spent more, while Chelsea and Arsenal have relatively settled squads, so I'm not going to go crazy and suggest we'll win the league or anything. To be honest, I'd be happy if we hold onto 3rd provided we run the top two much closer and have a good run in the Champions League and one domestic cup (hopefully using youth teamers)
I haven't generally dignified pre-season matches with coverage, but thought I may as well express my feelings on the coming season:
I was disappointed to see Bellamy and, more particularly, Gonzalez axed from the squad instead of being given more time (At least we made a profit on the former, and I suspect there may be non-football reasons behind the latter).
Torres is obviously a good striker, but his record in Spain is only about 1 in 3 and I'm not really sure he's the main to fire us to a title challenge. An improvement on what we had before certainly, but a big risk for £20+m.
Ryan Babel is supposed to be very promising, but I haven't seen anything of him yet, and from what I hear it's not clear where he'll play - he's really a forward who likes to drift out left (like Henry in that respect), but I think he may play left wing, at least at first.
Formation-wise, from what I can tell we've mostly employed a 4-4-2 over pre-season, which surprises me. I'd have expected we might use either 4-3-3, with Babel/Kewell left-sided striker and Pennant or Kuyt on the right, or adopt Benitez' Valencia 4-2-3-1, which would line up something like:
(Back 5: Reina, Finnan, Carra, Agger, Riise/Aurelio)
2 defensive midfielders: Alonso, Sissoko, Mascherano
Right attacking midfield: Pennant, Gerrard, Benayoun, Kuyt
Central attacking midfield/link man: Gerrard, Voronin, Kuyt, Leiva
Left attacking midfield: Kewell, Babel
Lone striker: Torres, Crouch, Kuyt
Overall, some expensive new signings have certainly whetted my appetite, but so far they're untested and need time to gel. Man Utd have spent more, while Chelsea and Arsenal have relatively settled squads, so I'm not going to go crazy and suggest we'll win the league or anything. To be honest, I'd be happy if we hold onto 3rd provided we run the top two much closer and have a good run in the Champions League and one domestic cup (hopefully using youth teamers)
Friday, July 27, 2007
Back 4 Good
Sorry for the lengthy hiatus. I owes largely to the fact that I put my back out Saturday before last (playing tennis) and was reduced to hobbling around the flat - and unable to sit at the computer for lengthy periods of time. While it's still slightly painful, my mobility is now more or less back to normal (even if I'm careful bending/lifting), and I was able to resume work yesterday. Sadly I think things will be further disrupted by the need to move at the end of the month (which will, of course, be further inconvenienced by the back).
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Postcodes Again
After some recent encouraging press (see here and here), now we're back to condemnation of healthcare 'lotteries'. I note they always use the inverted commas - they know postcodes aren't really allocated by lottery - but it gives random selection a bad name.
Friday, July 13, 2007
Lotteries Ruled Fair
A court considering the Brighton schools case (see my previous round-ups here and here) have declared lotteries for admissions can produce "a greater degree of justice" and are "a reasonable means of exercising a tie-break function".
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Making Votes Count
This is more like it:
"Nothing is more central, however, to the strength of democracy than the way votes are counted. Citizens faced, as so many are at the ballot box, with a choice between disregarding their true preference and wasting their vote, will never feel engaged with the process of government."
(via)
Also, scroll down to the comment from WoollyMindedLiberal at 9:23am 09/07/07, where it's pointed out "They are the lucky ones! Most of us live in safe seats where our vote is totally immaterial as the results for at least the next 20 years are already known."
Regular readers will know my solution.
"Nothing is more central, however, to the strength of democracy than the way votes are counted. Citizens faced, as so many are at the ballot box, with a choice between disregarding their true preference and wasting their vote, will never feel engaged with the process of government."
(via)
Also, scroll down to the comment from WoollyMindedLiberal at 9:23am 09/07/07, where it's pointed out "They are the lucky ones! Most of us live in safe seats where our vote is totally immaterial as the results for at least the next 20 years are already known."
Regular readers will know my solution.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Intrusion
Last night I went to Intrusion in the Cellar for what must've been the first time in about 4 months (it was the first chance I'd had to wear the Ministry t-shirt I got on the day of the End of Term Dinner before last!) It was great fun, particularly the last hour or so although the DJ seemed to forget that it was supposed to be a goth night - playing Prodigy, NIN, Marilyn Manson, Fear Factory, KoRn, Kaiser Chiefs and then The Killers, not to mention Fluke, Dresden Dolls, Blur and William Shatner.
Saturday, July 07, 2007
Scraping the Barrel?
A few more possible job opportunities (not sure if they're worth my application)
UCL seem to have an AHRC-funded Ethics of Risk programme, and are advertising an associated post-doc and PhD studentship.
Nottingham want a temporary teaching fellow (further details) (via).
Job.ac.uk also provide 10 tips for covering letters (maybe a bit late).
UCL seem to have an AHRC-funded Ethics of Risk programme, and are advertising an associated post-doc and PhD studentship.
Nottingham want a temporary teaching fellow (further details) (via).
Job.ac.uk also provide 10 tips for covering letters (maybe a bit late).
Friday, July 06, 2007
Wiki-Voting Systems
While searching the internet to find a name for a voting system where voters can distribute their votes between different issues according to the intensity of their preferences - I settled on cumulative voting, though that isn't quite the same - I found Wikipedia had an entry dedicated to lottery-voting, under the name 'random ballot'.
Relatedly, it also has an entry on coin-flipping and you can flip a virtual coin here.
Relatedly, it also has an entry on coin-flipping and you can flip a virtual coin here.
Monday, July 02, 2007
Free Michael Shields
There may be a new, unelected, PM, but you can still petition Number 10 online. I just signed the petition on Michael Shields (read about it here).
Genetics & Justice
Today I'm going to the Colin Farrelly's Genetics & Justice conference (programme), though I'll have to sneak out after lunch to go up to St Hugh's for my teaching in their summer school.
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Goodbye Fopp
This hardly ranks as the loss of another Oxford institution, but it seems the relatively new Fopp on Gloucester Green is to close, with the rest of the chain. I was quite excited when it opened, having heard good things from my brother in Reading. As it happens, I rarely made the trip - Gloucester Green seems far away for such a small store, when Virgin and HMV are so close - and don't think I ever bought anything there. It seems there strength was more regular low prices, rather than fantastic sale bargains (my preferred purchase). Still, it's a shame to see it go so soon.
I don't know when the final closure happens, and I can't be bothered to make the special trip into town, but any bargain hunters in the area may want to check for closing down sales...
I don't know when the final closure happens, and I can't be bothered to make the special trip into town, but any bargain hunters in the area may want to check for closing down sales...
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Tennis
Well, Henman's defeat marks the end of British involvement in Wimbledon singles. It was all my fault as, having seen the first set at lunchtime, I was drawn into going back upstairs and watching the fifth set after finding that Henman had levelled.
I'm playing too, but - as usual - I lost in three sets to Pavel tonight. Between us, we did manage to (mis)hit a few good shots, but it was the final game that summed things up. Serving for the match, Pavel confidently predicted at 15-0 'just three more points'. Well, I not only took him to deuce, but even two break points. His victory finally game after we'd both closed to the net, I smashed a volley right at him, and his winning shot was literally no more than a block...
I'm playing too, but - as usual - I lost in three sets to Pavel tonight. Between us, we did manage to (mis)hit a few good shots, but it was the final game that summed things up. Serving for the match, Pavel confidently predicted at 15-0 'just three more points'. Well, I not only took him to deuce, but even two break points. His victory finally game after we'd both closed to the net, I smashed a volley right at him, and his winning shot was literally no more than a block...
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Kamm Reading Group
Dr. S. Matthew Liao from the Program on the Ethics of the New Biosciences would like to invite you to participate in a summer reading group on Frances Kamm's new book Intricate Ethics, which will take place online at www.ethics-etc.com.
Each week, a commentator will provide a summary of a chapter and some points for consideration. The post will then be open for discussion, and we welcome your thoughts on any aspect of the chapter. Please register yourself on the blog.
The Kamm Reading Group is in part sponsored by the Program on the Ethics of the New Biosciences, and aims a) to help launch Ethics, Etc as one of Britain's first group ethics blogs; and b) to provide a service to the philosophical community on Kamm's important book. Professor Kamm will give the Uehiro Lecture in 2008. So do join us for the discussions and let your colleagues know about this event.
The schedule is as follows:
Chapter 1 July 6 S. Matthew Liao (Oxford) Nonconsequentialism
Chapter 2 July 13 Toby Ord (Oxford) Aggregation and two moral methods
Chapter 3 July 20 Daniel Star (ANU) Intention, harm, and the possibility of a unified theory
Chapter 4 July 27 David Wasserman (Yeshiva) The doctrines of double and triple effect and why a rational agent need not intend the means to his end
Chapter 5 Aug 3 Dan Moller (JHU/Maryland) Toward the essence of nonconsequentialist constraints on harming : modality, productive purity, and the greater good working itself out
Chapter 6 Aug 10 Nir Eyal (Harvard) Harming people in Peter Unger's Living high and letting die
Chapter 7 Aug 17 Guy Kahane (Oxford) Moral status
Chapter 8 Aug 24 Nick Shackel (Oxford) Rights beyond interests
Chapter 9 Aug 31 Rebecca Roache (Oxford) Conflicts of rights: a typology
Chapter 10 Sept 7 Neil Levy (Melbourne & Oxford) Responsibility and collaboration
Chapter 11 Sept 14 Tom Douglas (Oxford) Does distance matter morally to the duty to rescue?
Chapter 12 Sept 21 Thom Brooks (Newcastle) The new problem of distance in morality
Chapter 13 Sept 28 Julian Savulescu (Oxford) Peter Singer's ethical theory
Chapter 14 Oct 5 Michael Otsuka (UCL) Moral intuitions, cognitive psychology, and the harming/not-aiding distinction
Chapter 15 Oct 12 Mark Sheehan (Oxford) Harms, losses, and evils in Gert's moral theory
Chapter 16 Oct 19 Gerald Lang (Leeds) Owing, justifying, and rejecting
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Human Rights 1
Well, it looks like I'm teaching three tutorials on human rights for the St Hugh's Summer School. I'll be posting syllabus/reading list info here for ease of access. Feel free to make use of what I suggest and/or recommend additions.
Topic 1: What are 'human rights'?
Assignment:
For the first essay, I think we should focus on what rights there are and, to some extent, why. Think of the various things we are often alleged to have rights to - anything from security of the person, to free speech, to paid holiday, and ask whether these are really human rights. Things to think about include the distinction between legal and moral rights, what is 'natural' or 'human' about them, and what it is that gives us these rights. Write an essay (at least 1,000 words, to be brought with you) addressing some or all of these questions.
I assume you won't have access to many books now (you will be able to use the library when you get here). Therefore I'll concentrate on some online resources, and your own thoughts. Feel free, of course, to draw on other sources you're aware of, e.g. contemporary newspaper discussion or from human rights groups like Amnesty International, however beware that a lot of material on the internet is not necessarily credible - the online encyclopaedia articles given below (unlike, say, Wikipedia) are written and reviewed by academics.
Reading:
First, familiarise yourself with the UN's 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which can be found online, e.g.: http://www.un.org/rights/50/decla.htm
Then read these general overviews:
J. Nickel (2006) 'Human Rights' Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/
L. Wenar (2005) 'Rights' Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights/
A. Fagan (2005) 'Human Rights' The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
http://www.iep.utm.edu/h/hum-rts.htm
Other useful internet resources:
Human Rights Library <http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/>
Human Rights Internet <http://www.hri.ca/index.aspx>
If you do have access to a decent source of books, you might want to look now at:
J. Rawls (1999) The Law of Peoples (Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP)
M. Freeden (1991) Rights (Open University Press)
A. Gewirth (1982) Human Rights (Chicago: University Press)
J. Nickel (2006) Making Sense of Human Rights 2nd edition (Oxford: Blackwell)
T. Pogge (2002) World Poverty and Human Rights (Cambridge: Polity)
B. Orend (2002) Human Rights: Concept & Context (Peterborough, Ont: Broadview)
J. Waldron (1984) Theories of Rights (OUP)
These aren't essential just yet - but I'm sure we'll look at some of them
later in the course...
Proofs
Remember the long-running quest to publish a review of Cecile Fabre's Whose Body is it Anyway?? You can read the original notice here, my earlier follow up post - from November last year - here, and my battle with the corrected proofs here.
Today I received an email with the final proofs in PDF format, for any last minute essential corrections. Hopefully these will be few or any, but I also have to complete and sign various forms dealing with copyright, offprints, etc and then fax it all back in the next few days. Looks like the thesis will have to wait another day...
It was nice to be addressed 'Dear Dr/Prof Saunders' though!
Today I received an email with the final proofs in PDF format, for any last minute essential corrections. Hopefully these will be few or any, but I also have to complete and sign various forms dealing with copyright, offprints, etc and then fax it all back in the next few days. Looks like the thesis will have to wait another day...
It was nice to be addressed 'Dear Dr/Prof Saunders' though!
Monday, June 25, 2007
Editorial
Some of you may know I've been writing reviews (recent e.g.s here, here and here) for a London-based online music fanzine, UK-Fusion.com, for a few years now. The once weekly editorial column has been erratic this year, in fact the previous guest editorial had been up since 29th April! Anyway, to cut a long story short, I've rectified that by writing this week's. If you already read my blog, there's probably nothing you didn't know, but check the site out - we're always grateful for more readers/traffic.
Interview
Well, I had the St John's interview this morning. I don't think I answered anything disastrously, but I think I was too nervous rather than slick and confident, and failed to mention several key selling points I wanted to. Still, at least I got some more interview practice, which it seems I badly in need of. I've written a fuller post-mortem, for my own reflection.
Friday, June 22, 2007
Kerrang!: History of Rock
Today I picked up a copy of Kerrang!, noticing it had another covermount CD in their history of rock series (Higher Voltage). For those not in the know, these feature current artists covering classic rock tracks. The previous installment was generally very good, with highlights including Biffy Clyro's almost unrecognizable take on Weezer's 'Buddy Holly', The Answer's 'Sweet Emotion' and Atreyu's 'You Give Love A Bad Name' among my personal highlights.
Sadly, although this promised much - including Lost Prophets taking on 'Davidian', Soulfly covering 'Beautiful People' and YourCodeNameIs:Milo offering their version of 'Feel Good Hit Of The Summer' - my first impression was that this was very disappointing, with most of the bands opting for very faithful covers. Usually, this merely highlights the fact they're not as good as the originals - something particularly evident in The Automatic's attempt at Faith No More's 'Epic'. Kudos to Lost Prophets for a reasonable, if faithful, stab at a Machine Head classic and Bring Me The Horizon for at least making Slipknot's 'Eyeless' even heavier...
Oh, and for some reason the magazine's love affair with Bullet For My Valentine, Funeral For A Friend and Fightstar continues, all of whom present and correct once again.
Sadly, although this promised much - including Lost Prophets taking on 'Davidian', Soulfly covering 'Beautiful People' and YourCodeNameIs:Milo offering their version of 'Feel Good Hit Of The Summer' - my first impression was that this was very disappointing, with most of the bands opting for very faithful covers. Usually, this merely highlights the fact they're not as good as the originals - something particularly evident in The Automatic's attempt at Faith No More's 'Epic'. Kudos to Lost Prophets for a reasonable, if faithful, stab at a Machine Head classic and Bring Me The Horizon for at least making Slipknot's 'Eyeless' even heavier...
Oh, and for some reason the magazine's love affair with Bullet For My Valentine, Funeral For A Friend and Fightstar continues, all of whom present and correct once again.
Thursday, June 21, 2007
EoT Dinner
Tonight was the End of Term Dinner, which also of course marked the end of the year. The Middle Eastern theme worked quite well, although I wasn't particularly impressed with the vegetarian option (the first signs weren't good that the menu only said 'a vegetarian option is also available', and the veggie starter was just the regular one without the fish). Afterwards there was dancing in the hall, which I missed most of, and then - as is traditional - in Baby Love.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
George's Visit
My old school friend George was in town today, for a conference in the Engineering Faculty. Sadly we only got a half-hour lunch break to catch up. I really must do more to stay in touch with old friends from home...
Monday, June 18, 2007
Karl's Visit
My old friend Karl has been back in town over the weekend - cue Saturday afternoon spent in the Turf and Sunday night in the KA. It's been good to see him again and I hope his job interviews go well - there's even one that means he might be in Oxford again next year, rather than the States.
Saturday, June 16, 2007
CVs
I recently uploaded an up to date CV onto this website. So far, I've not been having the best of luck with the job hunt, but I do have an interview for Monday week (25th). This article on the BBC website was quite interesting though. I particularly like creative comments 10-12.
Friday, June 15, 2007
Friday of 8th
Once upon a time, the end of term - particularly the end of the year - was an excuse for a big piss up. Tonight I went to John William's house, next to the department, to drink fruit smoothies and play Boggle! Obviously we're now somewhat more mature, because it was a very pleasant evening, mixing with a number of members of the department I didn't really know, being impressed by JW's bookshelf and boosting my vitamin intake. I did join Jonas and Brian for a quick drink in the KA afterwards, however - it just wouldn't have been the end of term otherwise...
Thursday, June 14, 2007
BBQ II
After a day spent listening to Quentin Skinner, Alan Ryan et al talking about the differences between Cambridge history and Oxford theory, the department's end of term party was a welcome break. I was able to ask several of the recently-finished MPhils how their exams went - all seemed reasonably happy, but none of those hoping to stay next year were willing to count their chickens.
I'd signed in for high table in Jesus, which was the last chance for me, Leigh, Steve and Rhiannon. Even though there were seven of us altogether, we ate in the SCR rather than the hall, which is often nicer (it's easier to talk to people round a small table than lined up along one side of a big one), but slightly disappointing that twice this week I failed to get my last meal on the actual high table.
After dinner, I headed up to Milan's post-exam BBQ. I was disappointed to find I'd missed a game of football, and being stuffed from crisps at the earlier party before high table I didn't eat anything. Nonetheless it was and enjoyable time, and we hung around talking in his very nice garden until around midnight, at which point someone suggested going on to Baby Love and I decided to make an exit.
I'd signed in for high table in Jesus, which was the last chance for me, Leigh, Steve and Rhiannon. Even though there were seven of us altogether, we ate in the SCR rather than the hall, which is often nicer (it's easier to talk to people round a small table than lined up along one side of a big one), but slightly disappointing that twice this week I failed to get my last meal on the actual high table.
After dinner, I headed up to Milan's post-exam BBQ. I was disappointed to find I'd missed a game of football, and being stuffed from crisps at the earlier party before high table I didn't eat anything. Nonetheless it was and enjoyable time, and we hung around talking in his very nice garden until around midnight, at which point someone suggested going on to Baby Love and I decided to make an exit.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Dasturzada Dr Jal Pavry Memorial Lecture
This afternoon Jonas invited me to the Brasenose summer garden party - sandwiches, strawberries and Pimms.
Unfortunately, we couldn't stop too long as we went to see Jay Wallace give the snappily-titled Dasturzada Dr Jal Pavry Memorial Lecture on The Deontic Structure of Morality (paper here). Too be honest, I wasn't too impressed, but then I'm not sure I followed too well - I wasn't clear what this deontic structure was, or the importance of the fact that some of his examples of discretion seemed to be self-regarding cases. It became clear during the questions that whatever his aim was it was rather minimal in any case.
I'd been thinking I hadn't been out to dinner much this term, not with the moral philosophy seminar or political theory research seminar, nor with Peter Singer or the Nuffield seminar. There was a dinner with Jay Wallace, but Jonas, Brian and I went back to Brasenose and caught the end of the party then went to Zizzi's for dinner.
Unfortunately, we couldn't stop too long as we went to see Jay Wallace give the snappily-titled Dasturzada Dr Jal Pavry Memorial Lecture on The Deontic Structure of Morality (paper here). Too be honest, I wasn't too impressed, but then I'm not sure I followed too well - I wasn't clear what this deontic structure was, or the importance of the fact that some of his examples of discretion seemed to be self-regarding cases. It became clear during the questions that whatever his aim was it was rather minimal in any case.
I'd been thinking I hadn't been out to dinner much this term, not with the moral philosophy seminar or political theory research seminar, nor with Peter Singer or the Nuffield seminar. There was a dinner with Jay Wallace, but Jonas, Brian and I went back to Brasenose and caught the end of the party then went to Zizzi's for dinner.
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Deja Deja Vu
So the French Open (tennis) titles are won by Justine Henin and Rafael Nadal, each for the third year running. Must be getting repetitive, non?
Interesting Paper on Sen
While browsing around with Google Scholar, I just came across this interesting looking paper by Ian Carter, called 'The Concept of Freedom in the Work of Amartya Sen: An AlternativeAnalysis Consistent with Freedom's Independent Value'. It's from an Italian journal, Notizie di Politeia, no. 43/44 (1996), which is apparently a special issue on Sen's theory of functionings and capabilities. It may be worth checking out more - including Sen's reply - if it's available and in English. There are also some interesting references in the bibliography, including G A Cohen's review of Inequality Reexamined.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Saturday, June 02, 2007
BBQ
Thankfully June has been more like April than May so far - i.e. generally warm and sunny, rather than cold and wet. Today I went to my first barbecue, celebrating Rachele's birthday, and it was not only so sunny some people arrived burned, but warm enough to hang around the garden until 11 (and in only a t-shirt).
I didn't know many people there, but it was quite a nice time. Possible highlight was being introduced to someone by Rachele saying something along the lines of 'Ben, this guy knows what that says on your t-shirt [Cyclefly] and likes them. Sometimes he wears t-shirts like you too, but today he's dressed normally'!
Luckily my Tesco veggie burgers also barbecued fine, even from slightly frozen - unlike Dunlaith's Indian quarter pounders, which only fell apart even more than under the grill, and consequently ended up uneaten.
I didn't know many people there, but it was quite a nice time. Possible highlight was being introduced to someone by Rachele saying something along the lines of 'Ben, this guy knows what that says on your t-shirt [Cyclefly] and likes them. Sometimes he wears t-shirts like you too, but today he's dressed normally'!
Luckily my Tesco veggie burgers also barbecued fine, even from slightly frozen - unlike Dunlaith's Indian quarter pounders, which only fell apart even more than under the grill, and consequently ended up uneaten.
Friday, June 01, 2007
Steven Gerrard
How often do we end up reading something like this after England games?
Gerrard was England's best player in a holding midfield role, while Lampard was poor once more on the international stage as the attacking force. The balance, at least, looked better, but this was more a tribute to Gerrard's brilliance and adaptability than signs of a genuine, workable partnership between the pair. Once Owen Hargreaves is fit... [McLaren] should drop Lampard, give Gerrard the attacking role, and use Hargreaves as the holder... not for the first time, Gerrard emerged as England's best player once the effect of the glitz and the flashlights had worn off.
I couldn't say it better myself, and it really is about time McLaren realised it too.
My team for Estonia (based on who's fit):
Robinson
Carragher, King, Terry, Bridge
Beckham, Gerrard, Carrick, J Cole
Crouch
With one of Dyer, Bentley or Defoe added in some kind of attacking midfield/striker role...
Gerrard was England's best player in a holding midfield role, while Lampard was poor once more on the international stage as the attacking force. The balance, at least, looked better, but this was more a tribute to Gerrard's brilliance and adaptability than signs of a genuine, workable partnership between the pair. Once Owen Hargreaves is fit... [McLaren] should drop Lampard, give Gerrard the attacking role, and use Hargreaves as the holder... not for the first time, Gerrard emerged as England's best player once the effect of the glitz and the flashlights had worn off.
I couldn't say it better myself, and it really is about time McLaren realised it too.
My team for Estonia (based on who's fit):
Robinson
Carragher, King, Terry, Bridge
Beckham, Gerrard, Carrick, J Cole
Crouch
With one of Dyer, Bentley or Defoe added in some kind of attacking midfield/striker role...
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Amartya Sen
As I mentioned yesterday, from Peter Singer to Amartya Sen...
Sadly I was sat right at the back of the Sheldonian and Sen's voice in particular didn't carry well (particularly when he went 'off script' to make jokes), so I found it a bit hard to follow in places. The topic was about theories of justice, and predictably plugged the capabilities approach and his general view that incompleteness need not be a problem. He argued that if the same conclusion can be justified by different theories, then we don't need to worry any more.
He did, however, present an interesting case involving three children claiming a flute - one on grounds only they can play it (possibly some kind of Walzer-ian style claim internal to the nature or social meaning of the thing, possibly merely a form of efficiency argument), one on grounds that they have no other toys to play with (a point based in welfare - equality or priority), and one on grounds she made it (a libertarian entitlement). Any of those claims, presented in itself, may seem a sufficient claim, but while they may coincide in this case that don't, and while each can accept the others' grounds, it isn't clear who should get the flute.
The more fundamental point of the lectures was to argue that a theory of justice should not only present an ideal but allow us to make comparative judgements about whether X is more just than Y and be impartial between all people (i.e. a form of global justice, rather than impartiality only between 'insiders' to a contract).
Colin Farrelly also has a report, here.
Sadly I was sat right at the back of the Sheldonian and Sen's voice in particular didn't carry well (particularly when he went 'off script' to make jokes), so I found it a bit hard to follow in places. The topic was about theories of justice, and predictably plugged the capabilities approach and his general view that incompleteness need not be a problem. He argued that if the same conclusion can be justified by different theories, then we don't need to worry any more.
He did, however, present an interesting case involving three children claiming a flute - one on grounds only they can play it (possibly some kind of Walzer-ian style claim internal to the nature or social meaning of the thing, possibly merely a form of efficiency argument), one on grounds that they have no other toys to play with (a point based in welfare - equality or priority), and one on grounds she made it (a libertarian entitlement). Any of those claims, presented in itself, may seem a sufficient claim, but while they may coincide in this case that don't, and while each can accept the others' grounds, it isn't clear who should get the flute.
The more fundamental point of the lectures was to argue that a theory of justice should not only present an ideal but allow us to make comparative judgements about whether X is more just than Y and be impartial between all people (i.e. a form of global justice, rather than impartiality only between 'insiders' to a contract).
Colin Farrelly also has a report, here.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Peter Singer
Today I went to the first of Peter Singer's Uehiro lectures. I turned up at 4pm, to help arrange things and direct people around, and it was jsut as well because the place did begin filling up from then - there were still seats in the main theatre at the recommended arrival time (4:30), but late arrivals had to make do with a video link up from another room.
He didn't really say much new about global poverty to be honest - though I was shocked to learn the one billion people living on less than a dollar a day is measured by purchasing power parity. Other than that, this lecture was largely setting the scene, though he also argued - against libertarian claims that we don't owe the Third World anything since we didn't inflict harm on them - that we may have harmed the world's poorer countries through colonization, global trade practices (including buying natural resources off blatantly corrupt governments) and global warming.
A particularly pleasant surprise was finding my old (in two senses) tute partner Stuart and his wife in the audience. They were in Oxford for a few days, and took me out for dinner in the KA - in return for which I was able to tip them off about Sen's public lecture in the Sheldonian tomorrow. (UPDATE: report here)
He didn't really say much new about global poverty to be honest - though I was shocked to learn the one billion people living on less than a dollar a day is measured by purchasing power parity. Other than that, this lecture was largely setting the scene, though he also argued - against libertarian claims that we don't owe the Third World anything since we didn't inflict harm on them - that we may have harmed the world's poorer countries through colonization, global trade practices (including buying natural resources off blatantly corrupt governments) and global warming.
A particularly pleasant surprise was finding my old (in two senses) tute partner Stuart and his wife in the audience. They were in Oxford for a few days, and took me out for dinner in the KA - in return for which I was able to tip them off about Sen's public lecture in the Sheldonian tomorrow. (UPDATE: report here)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)