Research

Summary of Research Interests

In my dissertation I develop a utilitarian account of political obligation and, as such, much of my current research involves the examination of contemporary theories of law, authority, and political obligation (see dissertation summary below). This project of offering a unique utilitarian account of political obligation is important and relevant because it provides a bridge between one of the most prevalent theories in ethics (i.e. utilitarianism) and one of the fundamental questions in political philosophy. This interest in Ethics and Political Philosophy also bleeds into my interests in the History of Early Modern and Ancient Philosophy. Within these areas I am particularly interested in the way which historical figures (e.g. Plato, Aristotle, Bentham, Spinoza, Hume, Locke, Kant) have developed their ethical and political theories in accord with one another. This interest in harmonizing various philosophical theories also draws me to the connections between contemporary ethical, epistemological, and metaphysical theories. My research interests are rounded out with more specified and diverse areas such as the ethics of care, applied ethics (particularly environmental and business), distributive and restorative justice, international law, existentialism, and pre-college philosophy. (Please see the pdf of my "Statement of Research Interests" at bottom of page for a more through summary of my research interests)

PUBLICATIONS (available upon request)

  • “The Social Media Commons: Public Sphere, Agonism, and Algorithmic Obligation,” Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 2020. (coauthored with Jose Marichal & Richard Neve)
  • “The Broad Nature and Importance of Public Philosophy,” Precollege Philosophy and Public Practice, 2020.
  • “‘The National Anthem’ and Weighing Moral Obligations: Is It Ever OK to F*ck a Pig?” Black Mirror and Philosophy, David Kyle Johnson (ed.), 2020. (“public philosophy”)
  • “The Value of Philosophy at Any Age!” Ventura County Reporter, July 2019 (“public philosophy”) https://www.vcreporter.com/2019/07/the-value-of-philosophy-at-any-age/
  • “A Political Interpretation of Aristotle’s Ethics,” Aristotle’s Practical Philosophy: On the Relationship between the Ethics and Politics, Cohen de Lara and Brouwer (eds.), 2017.
  • “Obligations, Responsibility, and Whistleblowing: A Case Study of Jeffrey Wigand and Brown & Williamson,” Business in Ethical Focus (2nd Edition), Allhoff, Sager, and Vaidya (eds.), 2017. (also reprinted in Business Cases in Ethical Focus, Allhoff and Sager [eds.], 2019)
  • “Adding Substance to the Debate: Descartes on Freedom of the Will,” Essays In Philosophy, Volume 14, Issue 2, July 2013. (special issue on Cartesian Virtue and Freedom)
  • “A Unique Metaphysical Problem for Moral Realism,” Southwest Philosophy Review, Volume 29, Number 1, January 2013.
  • “What Does Spinoza Prescribe?” Proceedings of the Southeast Philosophy Congress, Volume 4, 2011.

PRESENTATIONS

  • PLATO Conference (annual) - the theme of this 10th anniversary conference was “Ethics in Schools, Communities, and the Public Sphere”; originally scheduled for June 2020 in San Diego, CA but postponed to June 27-28, 2021 in Seattle, WA due to the COVID-19 pandemic, “The Effects of Pre-College Philosophy Instruction on Critical Thinking Skills," (research done collaboratively and presented with Cal Lutheran students: Lindy Ortiz, Katie Knapp, and Gus Wachbrit) (“public philosophy”)
  • Philosophy in Schools and the Public Realm - This research workshop was organized by Dr. Michael Burroughs and The Kegley Institute of Ethics and held at The Prindle Institute for Ethics, Depauw University - Greencastle, IN; May 29-June 1, 2019, “The Importance and Broad Nature of ‘Public Philosophy’”
  • California Lutheran University’s Campus Community Day (annual) - May 22, 2019, “Civil Discourse at Cal Lutheran: Strategies for Engaging in Difficult Dialogues," (“public philosophy”)
  • Keynote speaker for the 32nd Annual Pacifica Synod Assembly - May 10, 2019 (invited), “Philosophy and the Art of Listening” (“public philosophy”)
  • California Lutheran University’s Festival of Scholars (annual) - April 30, 2019, Panelist for the “Strategies and Challenges of Scholar Activism: Engaging Communities in Graduate School, Pedagogy, and Research”
  • University Village Thousand Oaks - March 13, 2019 (invited), “Environmental Ethics: Getting Our Values Straight” (“public philosophy”)
  • Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (Ventura County Chapter) - February 21, 2019 (invited), “Ethics and Legal Theory” (“public philosophy”)
  • Eighth Annual International Symposium on Digital Ethics - Loyola University Chicago, November 9, 2018, “Factory Farmed Citizens: Social Media, The Public Sphere, & Algorithmic Obligation” (co-written and presented with Jose Marichal & Richard Neve)
  • Ventura County Library’s “One County, One Book” Series - October 24, 2018 (invited), “Surfing & Philosophy” (“public philosophy”)
  • California Lutheran University’s Adjunct Faculty Retreat - April 28, 2018 (invited), “Teaching Reasoning & Critical Thinking Skills” (“public philosophy”)
  • Nudging and Moral Responsibility - This workshop was organized by Dr. Philip Robichaud as part of the NWO-funded Veni project “Nudging responsibly: The Impact of Choice Architecture on Responsibility Attributions” at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands - April 6-7, 2018, “The Extent of Moral Responsibility: The Connection Between Nudging and Moral Luck” (co-written and presented with Dr. Gregory Stoutenburg)
  • Beyond the State: Governance Legality, and Political Morality - A onetime interdisciplinary legal theory conference put on as the Ontario Legal Philosophy Partnership’s annual conference - September 29 - October 1, 2017, “Global Law and the Moral Requirement to Comply”
  • American Philosophical Association Pacific Division Meeting (annual) April 12-April 15, 2017 Panelist for the Committee Session on Curricular and Extracurricular Approaches to High School Philosophy (organized by the APA Committee on Pre-College Instruction in Philosophy) (invited)
  • Philosophical Foundations of Global Law - A onetime meeting convened by Yezid Carrillo de la Rosa, Dean of the Law School at Universidad de Cartagena - August 24-26, 2016, “Global Law & Political Obligation”
  • American Philosophical Association Pacific Division Meeting (annual) March 30-April 3, 2016 Commentator in the Symposium "Praise, Blame, and Demandingness” (organized by Dr. Bridget Clarke)
  • Keynote speaker for Southern Utah University’s Undergraduate Philosophy Conference (invited) February 6, 2016, “The Ethics of Following the Law”
  • Expert Meeting: On the Relationship Between Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics and Politics - A onetime symposium convened by Prof. Andreas A. M. Kinneging and Dr. Emma Cohen de Lara at Amsterdam University College - June 19, 2015, “A Political Interpretation of Aristotle’s Ethics”
  • American Philosophical Association Pacific Division Meeting (annual) April 1-5, 2015, “Derivative vs. Non-derivative Moral Principles: A Pervasive Source of Confusion for Accounts of Political Obligation”
  • American Philosophical Association Eastern Division Meeting (annual) December 27-30, 2014, “A Political Interpretation of Aristotle’s Ethics”
  • Rocky Mountain Ethics Congress (RoME) (7th annual) August 7-10, 2014, “Derivative vs. Non-derivative Moral Principles: A Pervasive Source of Confusion for Accounts of Political Obligation”
  • James F. Jakobsen Graduate Conference (16th annual) March 29, 2014, “What is Philosophy and Why is it Important?”
  • University of Iowa Graduate Philosophical Society Conference (annual) November 16, 2013 (invited “Distinguished Graduate Student Talk”), “A Unique Metaphysical Problem for Moral Realism”
  • Midwest Political Science Association Conference (71st annual) April 11-14, 2013, “Aspectival Concepts: A Wittgensteinian Analysis of ‘Liberty’ ”
  • James F. Jakobsen Graduate Conference (15th annual) April 6, 2013, “Understanding Aristotle’s Ethics Through His Politics”
  • Southwestern Philosophical Society Conference (74th annual) November 9-11, 2012, “A Unique Metaphysical Problem for Moral Realism”
  • Stephen L. Weber Graduate Conference in Ethics (2nd annual) May 5-6, 2012, “An Attempt to Find a Common Point of View on ‘The Common Point of View’ in Hume’s Ethics”
  • James F. Jakobsen Graduate Conference (14th annual) March 24, 2012, “In Defense of Culpable Ignorance”
  • Mid-South Philosophy Conference (36th annual) February 24-25, 2012, “Do You See Liberty as a Duck or a Rabbit?”
  • University of Iowa Graduate Philosophical Society Conference (annual) December 3, 2011, “An Attempt to Find a Common Point of View on ‘The Common Point of View’ in Hume’s Ethics”
  • Minnesota Philosophical Society Conference (annual) November 5, 2011, “A Response to the Causal Argument Against Disjunctivism”
  • James F. Jakobsen Graduate Conference (13th annual) March 26, 2011, “An Examination of J.J.C. Smart’s Extreme Utilitarianism”
  • Southeast Philosophy Congress Conference (4th annual) February 18-19, 2011, “What Does Spinoza Prescribe?”
  • Iowa Philosophical Society Conference (67th annual) November 13, 2010, “Finding Pleasure and Pain in Plato’s Protagoras”

DISSERTATION ABSTRACT

One of the core issues in contemporary political philosophy is concerned with ‘political obligation.’ Stated in an overly simplified way, the question being asked when one investigates political obligation is, “What, if anything, do citizens owe to their government and how are these obligations generated if they do exist?” The majority of political philosophers investigating this issue agree that a political obligation is a moral requirement to act in certain ways concerning political matters (e.g., a moral requirement to obey the laws and support one’s country). Despite this agreement about the general nature of what is being searched for, a broad division has arisen between political obligation theorists - there are some who take political obligations to actually exist (“defenders of political obligation”) and there are some who take there to be no general political obligation (“philosophical anarchists”). While there is debate within the camp defending political obligation about what it is that generates the obligations, the common core of all “defender theories” is the fundamental idea that one has a moral requirement(s) to support and obey the political institutions of one’s country. Despite utilitarianism’s status as one of the major ethical theories, historically, it has largely been dismissed by theorists concerned with political obligation. Within the contemporary debate it is generally accepted that utilitarianism cannot adequately accommodate a robust theory of political obligation.

The overarching objective of this dissertation is to challenge this general dismissal of a utilitarian account and to build upon the two accounts that have been developed (R.M. Hare’s and Rolf Sartorius’) in offering a robust utilitarian theory of political obligation that can be considered a competitor to the other contemporary theories (i.e., theories of consent, gratitude, fair play or fairness, membership or association, and natural duty). However, as this utilitarian account of political obligation develops, the possibility will also emerge for a non-antagonistic relationship between the utilitarian theory on offer and the contemporary political obligation debate. The moral reasons posited by the traditional theories of political obligation (i.e., consent, fair play, gratitude, associative, and natural duty) can be included in and accommodated by my utilitarian account. The utilitarian account of political obligation can accept that there are many types of reasons explaining why broad expectations concerning individual and group behavior are created, and each type of reason can be understood as supporting the utilitarian claim that there are moral reasons for following the laws and supporting legitimate political authorities.

Taken all together, my arguments will take the form of a three tiered response to the prevailing opinion that any utilitarian attempt to account for political obligations is doomed. The first tier contends that the utilitarian can consistently claim that there are moral reasons to follow the law. This is not a particularly strong claim, but it is one that has been denied by the vast majority of political theorists. The second tier of my argument addresses this apparent issue by contending that even the traditional deontological accounts of political obligation are not offering more than this. Lastly, it is contended that, given the contingent features of humans (i.e., intellectual fallibility, selfish biases, and the way moral education is tied to rules), the strength of the utilitarian political obligations is comparable to other accounts’ analyses of the obligations.