It is obvious, I think, that national democracy withers. This has to do with globalisation.

The Chinese are generally speaking much more reluctant than Westerners to killing as a means to the rescue of lives.

I wanted to know what it means to know something, whether we can know at all, and, if so, how.

I look at the most promising putative moral theories. I construct crucial thought experiments in areas where they give conflicting advice. I confront their conflicting advice with my own moral sensitivity, my moral intuition. I take the theory that can best explain the content of my intuitions as gaining inductive support through an inference to the best explanation.

Once we realise that utilitarianism comes with the idea of blameworthy rightdoing (such as when you push a big man onto the tracks in order to save five lives) and blameless wrongdoing (such as when you don't push a big man onto the tracks in order to save five lives), then utilitarianism all of a sudden appears to give the right answers.

There comes a time where next to everyone will resort to techniques that enhance cognitive, mental including emotive, physical, and other capacities. When this has happened, if not before, the ban on doping in sport will have been lifted.

If two norms conflict, if they are mutually inconsistent, then at least one of them must be false.