Welcome to our next NDPR Forum, on Suzy Killmister’s book Taking the Measure of Autonomy: A Four-Dimensional Theory of Self-Governance. It was recently reviewed in NDPR by Ben Mitchell-Yellin. Below the fold are a few blurbs about the book and passages from the review. Please feel free to join in on the discussion!
I am pleased to kick off another discussion forum on books recently reviewed in NDPR. The series gives book authors a chance to respond to their reviewers. We also invite reviewers to chime in, as well as anyone else who is interested. This forum is on Bennett Helm’s latest book, Communities of Respect: Grounding Responsibility, Authority, and Dignity (OUP 2017), reviewed in NDPR by Caroline T. Arruda. Normally, I would first post the OUP description of the book, followed by some flavorful passages from the review. But Bennett has written a rather robust response to the review, and in so doing he makes clear both what his book is about and what aspects of the review he thought involved misconstruals, so I’m going simply to let him start off this discussion in his own words.
WHAT FOLLOWS IS WRITTEN BY BENNETT HELM:
Thanks to Caroline Arruda for engaging with my book with her review, and thanks to PEA Soup for the opportunity to respond and hopefully provoke further discussions. Unfortunately, the review involves significant misconceptions of what I am up to in this book and of the kind of account I offer, so I want to take this opportunity to clarify. The account I offer ends up rejecting deeply entrenched views of the mind and of persons, so perhaps it is not surprising that there would be misunderstanding of my central aim. Moreover, my theory is quite systematic and wide-ranging, developed over 25 years and two prior books (and a separate dissertation), with each building upon the rest. Thus Communities of Respect really is part 4 of a longer series, in which I investigate what it is to be a person by considering the nature of: (1) caring in general (Helm 1994), (2) personal values (Helm 2001), (3) interpersonal values in intimate relationships (Helm 2010), and now in this book (4) interpersonal values in non-intimate relationships (Helm 2017).
We’ve got a few openings for liaison positions with various journals. One, for example, is the Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy. Others will be political-philosophy-oriented. Liaisons put together discussion forums on an article in an issue of the journal, no more than twice/year. If you’re interested, please contact one or both of the Daves, Shoemaker or Sobel, and say what topics you’re interested in.
I’ll try to keep this brief, and so will likely run roughshod over important points. I’m curious about what’s doing the work on our intuitions in so-called manipulation cases when people deploy them to theorize about responsibility. These are cases in which someone is one way, values-wise, and then her brain is manipulated by a team of neuroscientists/god to produce within her a new set of values (or subset of values), so that she now performs some action for which she is not responsible — or at least that’s what our intuitions are supposed to be.
Here. It’s a true mess, with lots of flights into the city cancelled, and now many members at one main hotel downtown unable to get across the river to the convention center to attend and participate in today’s sessions.
Welcome to our NDPR Forum on Kit Wellman’s “Rights Forfeiture and Punishment,” which was recently reviewed by David Dolinko in NDPR. Kit has agreed to kick off this forum by contributing a new post on one of the issues raised in his book, namely, on whether there is or should be, on the rights forfeiture view, additional culpability for hate crimes. Please join in on the discussion. I herewith give you Kit:
Number 5: Chrisoula Andreou’s “Decisive Reasons and Rational Supererogation”
Number 4: David Sobel’s “(Additional) Reasons to Rule Out Initiating Sexual Relationships with Those You Have Power Over”
Number 3: NDPR Forum: Jason Brennan’s Against Democracy
Number 2: By far our most-read original discussion post of the year was Vida Yao’s and Sam Reis-Dennis’s Featured Philosophers’ “‘I Love Women’: The Conceptual Inadequacy of ‘Implicit Bias’.”
Number 1: No surprise, in this year that started out so tragically for moral philosophy, our most-read post of 2017 was our notice of “The Death of Derek Parfit.”
Thanks so much to all of our contributors and readers for a great year discussing Philosophy, Ethics, and Academia (the PEA in PEA Soup). It will be our pleasure to serve more Soup for you in 2018 and beyond. Have a Happy New Year!