ABSTRACT: This thesis engages with the question: how should states deal with information warfare? To begin with, this question will be discussed from the perspective of Just War Theory. The...Show moreABSTRACT: This thesis engages with the question: how should states deal with information warfare? To begin with, this question will be discussed from the perspective of Just War Theory. The analysis will demonstrate that solely the jus in bello category of JWT, as opposed to jus ad bellum, is relevant for information warfare. Furthermore, scholar alternative ethical framework designed by Taddeo will be critiqued. According to Taddeo, the application of Just War Theory to information warfare causes a problem because physical harm and harm in the cyber domain are in different ontological domains. Her theory strives for ontological equality by merging information ethics with Just War Theory. However, our analysis will show that the resulting theory is unsatisfactory in several ways. As an alternative, I will suggest to distinguish four categories of harm and six forms of information warfare. These forms of information warfare can be associated with the categories of harm in order to determine to what extent jus in bello is suitable to assess the justifiability of IW attacks by looking at their consequences.Show less
Many modern political campaigns use psychological profiling in order to influence voting decisions. I argue that this practice threatens the autonomy of voters. In doing so, I develop a theoretical...Show moreMany modern political campaigns use psychological profiling in order to influence voting decisions. I argue that this practice threatens the autonomy of voters. In doing so, I develop a theoretical account of autonomy. In order to protect voters from psychological profiling, I suggest a form of “privacy paternalism,” which prevents people from acquiescing to the trade and aggregation of their personal data. My thesis involves two separate claims. The first is that psychological profiling is capable of violating autonomy. The second is that, because psychological profiling can violate autonomy, it should be outlawed.Show less
This thesis argues that sustainability as a desideratum of a theory of distributive justice can sometimes help decide what currency we should accept. This applies to the case of two widely...Show moreThis thesis argues that sustainability as a desideratum of a theory of distributive justice can sometimes help decide what currency we should accept. This applies to the case of two widely discussed currency approaches of distributive justice: primary goods and capabilities, both of which are involved in an endless debate on which is best as a currency of distributive justice. I argue that sustainability is necessary for any currency of justice, and that when it is taken into account it is capabilities which come out as victorious against the primary goods. The reason for this is because capabilities can help us think in terms of stability and resilience, key requirements of a sustainable currency of distributive justice.Show less
This thesis explores whether the killing of animals for human consumption is permissible and the moral limits of this permissibility. I am going to propose and evaluate an argument as to why it is...Show moreThis thesis explores whether the killing of animals for human consumption is permissible and the moral limits of this permissibility. I am going to propose and evaluate an argument as to why it is permissible to slaughter farm animals if this does not harm them. It is called the permissibility of larding argument. I will also look at several possible objections against this view. The most important objection is that if a lack of harm can make the killing of animals permissible, than it would also be permissible to kill humans if it does not harm them. Another fundamental issue I will call the baseline of comparison objection. A final issue has to deal with the credibility of the first premise of the argument, which is that every wrong involves harming. I will conclude that the permissibility of larding argument is untenable because it does not hold up well against the baseline of comparison objection and the objection to the first premise.Show less
Abstract: This paper investigates whether expected utility theory is a proper method for decision-making given the conditions of uncertainty surrounding climate change. I explain what expected...Show moreAbstract: This paper investigates whether expected utility theory is a proper method for decision-making given the conditions of uncertainty surrounding climate change. I explain what expected utility theory is and how Ramsey’s theory of partial belief can be used to infer subjective probabilities. By the use of the Allais paradox I show that one of the axioms, namely independence is unlikely to be satisfied. First, it can be the case that when applying expected utility theory one does not assign utilities and probabilities in a consistent manner. Second, I explain that the example of the Allais paradox is part of a broader phenomenon in which what is considered good about an option cannot be reduced to the goodness or badness of individual outcomes of this option. I conclude that expected utility theory is an improper method for decision-making about climate change policy.Show less
Despite the fact that women and men are equal before the law, and discrimination based on sex, race, ethnic background or sexual orientation is prohibited, economic, political and social...Show moreDespite the fact that women and men are equal before the law, and discrimination based on sex, race, ethnic background or sexual orientation is prohibited, economic, political and social inequalities still persist. Increasing employment opportunities and advances in educational achievement have not end widespread discrimination against women. It is for example still difficult for women to combine paid work with family duties, without limiting their chances of promotion. Women experience a gender pay gap of 16% in the European Union (EU) and are becoming more involved in the informal economy, with its lack of protection and often poor working conditions. Moreover, the trafficking of people for sexual exploitation and sexual and domestic violence disproportionally affects women. It is important for these problems of inequality to be solved because the EU can only be a viable and (gender) just system, when the ongoing disadvantaged position of women, i.e. lack of equal opportunities, unequal access to remunerative employment and gender based sexual and domestic violence is put to an end. Gender Equality Policies (GEP) are set up to diminish these inequalities in opportunities for women, in all areas of life. Since GEP are not solely focussed on rights but on the correction of actual cases of social, economic and political inequality, the question rises how to normatively evaluate GEP. Nussbaum’s capability approach has proved itself of great importance for understanding the human rights discourse accompanied with a focus on human capabilities and functioning. The capability approach provides “a benchmark in thinking about what it is really to secure a right to someone” (Nussbaum, 1997, p. 294), therefore the capability approach is the right end to evaluate GEP in that it argues the importance of policy making that actualizes the human rights discourse. GEP are rectifications of social, political and economic inequalities, therefore Nussbaum’s capability approach, that provides a theoretical framework focussed on gender equality, is the right framework to explore GEP. My thesis will address this question: which GEP could be seen as an example of Nussbaum’s capability approach? In addition, empirical applications in policy making could show the relevance of adding philosophical value to political examples, in order to overcome concrete inequalities. GEP will be discussed in the context of Europe, because the EU could be seen as a unique case to study gender equality, but also diversity and social justice in an increasing globalizing world.Show less
In this paper I argue that the Just War Theory in its current state is anachronistic and requires modernising. I set out how the domain of war has changed over time, specifically with new threats...Show moreIn this paper I argue that the Just War Theory in its current state is anachronistic and requires modernising. I set out how the domain of war has changed over time, specifically with new threats from weapons of mass destruction and non-state actors. These changes require a modernisation of the theory, and a product of this modernisation is developing a preventive war doctrine generally seen to be impermissible, as permissible. I make the case based on the changing nature of threats, and, extend the notion of self-defence to include preventive action. I highlight the epistemic problem in today’s war environment regarding the ‘last resort’ condition of the Just War Theory, and argue that if pre-emptive attacks are permissible, then based on the same epistemic logic, preventive wars are also permissible.Show less
