Deliberation
6 writings
The Authority and Politics of Epiphanic Experience
Zeitschrift für Ethik und Moralphilosophie (ZEMO) – Journal for Ethics and Moral Philosophy 9, 8 (2026). doi:10.1007/s42048-026-00250-y
In response to Chappell’s work on epiphanies, the article first questions the normative authority of epiphanic experiences over more sober reflection, warning that their power can distort our values and lead to a kind of “transcendent ventriloquism” before challenging Chappell’s political solution of “conversational justice,” arguing that its rationalist constraints ultimately undermine the very experiential and emotional dimension that epiphanies were meant to champion.
Download PDF
Can AI Rely on the Systematicity of Truth? The Challenge of Modelling Normative Domains
Philosophy & Technology 38 (34): 1–27. 2025. doi:10.1007/s13347-025-00864-x
Argues that the asystematicity of normative domains, stemming from the plurality, incompatibility, and incommensurability of values, poses a challenge to AI’s ability to comprehensively model these domains and underscores the indispensable role of human agency in practical deliberation.
Download PDF
Dropping Anchor in Rough Seas: Co-Reasoning with Personalized AI Advisors and the Liberalism of Fear
Philosophy & Technology 38 (170): 1–7. 2025. Invited commentary. doi:10.1007/s13347-025-01006-z
A political critique of personalized AI advisors through the lens of the liberalism of fear. Highlights the asymmetries of power involved and argues that personalization risks stabilizing domination by translating structural injustices into individualized aspirational challenges. Three political constraints on personalized AI are then proposed: the priority of non-domination, the public contestability of operative norms, and the recognition of non-personalizable civic burdens.
Download PDF
On the Fundamental Limitations of AI Moral Advisors
Philosophy & Technology 38 (71): 1–4. 2025. Invited commentary. doi:10.1007/s13347-025-00896-3
Argues that while the asystematicity of truth militates against the personalization of AI moral advisors, it also imposes limitations on generalist AI moral advisors.
Download PDF
Ethics Beyond the Limits: New Essays on Bernard Williams’ Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy
Mind 132 (525): 234–243. 2023. doi:10.1093/mind/fzaa077
Reviews a collection of essays on Williams’s Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy and offers a substantive defense of Williams against Humean critiques, arguing that Williams does employ vindicatory genealogies for basic ethical concepts like obligation, but separates these from their distortion within the morality system. Synthesizes diverse interpretations of Williams’s relativism of distance and practical necessity, recasting them not as skepticism but as inquiries into authenticity and the irreducible first-person nature of deliberation. Frames the collection as evidence that Williams’s project was not merely destructive, but a liberating attempt to legitimize ethical thoughts that exist outside the rigid constraints of modern moral theory.
Download PDF
Whence the Demand for Ethical Theory?
American Philosophical Quarterly 58 (2): 135–46. 2021. With Damian Cueni. doi:10.2307/48614001
Offers a practical derivation of the need for public and judicial reasoning to take a more discursive and consistent form than private deliberation (a theme more fully explored in ch. 10 of my second book).
Download PDF