Kalle Grill

Today I am sharing some thoughts on the relationship between neutrality regarding the wellbeing of future people, and value pluralism in population axiology. I think the two are rather natural companions and that value pluralism means that common arguments against neutrality may not be relevant.

Yesterday I claimed, in another presentation, that there are important moral differences between procreation and consumption, which substantially weaken, but do not completely undermine, the argument that we should limit our own ecological footprint by having fewer or no children.

Today I am presenting some thoughts on moral principles to regulate default-setting online, as part of the Mancept workshops in political theory panel Paternalism, Nudging and The Digital Sphere, convened by Johannes Drerup, Thomas Grote and Sebastian Stein.

Giving a talk today at a workshop on so-called “lifestyle diseases”, organized by the Nordic Committee on Bioethics. I will present an overview of the concept of nudging, some conceptual controversies, and some ethical controversies. Ultimately, I think nudging is an excellent policy tool that should be used, wisely, for appropriate policy goals. It is also of course a tool in the hands of marketeers, whose goal is typically to maximize profits. Tomorrow, I’ll be on a panel on responsibility for health.

Taking part in the Summer Academy in Population-level Bioethics at the Brocher Foundation, Geneva, this week. Today I will present some thoughts on how the presence of e-cigarettes make strict regulation of combustible tobacco more appealing from a liberal perspective.

Today starts a two day workshop on The good family and the state, at the Mancept workshops in political theory. I convene the workshop with my colleague at Umeå Daniela Cutas. My own presentation discusses whether the state should encourage families with more than two parents, both for increased diversity and fit with some poeple’s preferences, and because it is often better for all involved – children, parents and society.

At the Swedish Philosophy Days I give another version of my argument for why families should include more adults than two. In brief, this is because more parents means more support, more adult interaction and greater stability over time (as parents may die or leave). Plus more people can be parents with fewer children, which may help limit our too large world population.

Today at the workshop Philosophy and Childhood, organized by the Centre for Ethics and Poverty Research at Salzburg University, I give “An argument for intrinsic respect for the will of children”. The idea is that in addition to the reasons we have to respect children in order to protect and promote their wellbeing, and the reasons we have to foster their future autonomy, we also have reasons to respect their will just because it is their will, like we do (I presume) with adults.

Today I give an invited lecture under the title “An argument for better families: larger and more diverse”, at the Munich Centre for Ethics, in their series of talks on Family Ethics.

Talking in New Orleans today on “Interference with What?” in a panel organized by Jason Hanna on Autonomy, Rights and Paternalism. I give some reasons to be skeptical of the common idea that paternalism is essentially influence on a person’s sphere of authority in some sense.

Speaking today on “The Uses and Limits of Moralization”, at the workshop Health, technology, and moralization: How are technologies influencing the moralization of health?, organized by 4TU, Centre for Ethics and Technology.