Research

The article argues that moral neuroenhancement is ethically difficult to justify because we cannot reliably distinguish permissible indirect interventions from impermissible direct ones.

This paper argues that normative reasons depend not only on an agent’s epistemic perspective, but also on their rational perspective.

The paper develops a theory-based approach to conceptualization, according to which definitions of concepts are constrained by the ontological commitments of the theories that employ them.

The article introduces a more differentiated conceptual framework for the global commons in international security studies to improve causal analysis, normative debate, and policy research on extraterritorial spaces.

The paper distinguishes a dispositional surface account of valuing from a representational layer account and traces their theoretical consequences.

The paper argues that cooperation in international relations is not a unitary phenomenon and distinguishes three forms with different theoretical and causal implications.

The paper investigates the conditions under which normative models provide successful guidance and proposes that they extend existing normative justification to cases in which the correct verdict is uncertain.