Ruwen Ogien defended moral minimalism, arguing that what can be legitimately prohibited is the harm caused to others, and that, for the rest, individuals should be allowed to live their lives as they see fit. He considered that ethics has meaning only when it is limited.
Do animals have a moral life in the same way as humans do? The philosopher Alice Crary argues that they are visible bearers of moral qualities, as literature suggests. But can values be the object of empirical observation?
What does the science of the brain tell us about our moral judgments and behavior? Two books address that question in presenting a new discipline: neuroethics.
Where does ones moral compass come from, nature or nurture? Successfully avoiding all reductionism, Vanessa Nurock reflects on the natural origins of ethics, using both the history of philosophy and empirical research on psychology and cognitive science to present her argument.
Simply by analysing the moral problems of each and every one of us, Ruwen Ogien takes the stance of ‘minimal ethics’. His book reads like a good mystery novel in which the detective proves against all odds that there may be no crime, no victim, and no murderer.
Is scientific progress necessarily moral? In his history of experiments on human guinea pigs, Grégoire Chamayou attempts to show that modern science, although apparently neutral, has a share in the domination and exploitation of individuals whose existence is deemed insignificant.
