@marcusarvan.bsky.social
Associate Professor of Philosophy: ethics, social-political philosophy, cognitive science, philosophy of AI, mind, and metaphysics
Also, the happiest, most stable, and least corrupt societies in the world (in Northern Europe) are those that most closely conform to Rawlsโ theory.
22.08.2025 12:11 โ ๐ 3 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0Imagine saying that an economic theory is wrong because politicians arenโt following it. Thatโs no reason to throw the theory under the bus. If itโs a good theory, itโs just a reason to get people to actually follow it.
22.08.2025 11:58 โ ๐ 2 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0Much of what the OP describes in their post has little to do with the theory at all, but rather inaccurate straw man interpretations of it.
22.08.2025 11:56 โ ๐ 2 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0But thatโs not the case here. A good theory of justice should do two things: describe an ideal society/world we should shoot for (ideal theory), and then show how to get there in a just way from where we are (nonideal theory). As I argue in my work, Rawlsโs theory does both.
22.08.2025 11:55 โ ๐ 2 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 2 ๐ 0Also, you say liberals need to show why liberalism is good for people. Okay, but this isnโt that hard to show: see philpapers.org/rec/ARVFRS
21.08.2025 20:01 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0That it does so is an unfortunate yet fairly common misconception. Rawls provided an โideal theoryโ of a fully just societyโbut when the framework is extended to unjust conditions, its implications are far more non-neutral on race, gender, and many other things as well.
21.08.2025 19:35 โ ๐ 3 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0Rawlsian liberalism (โJustice as fairnessโ) does not, for example, support neutrality on anti-black racism (something you imply it does in your piece).
21.08.2025 19:32 โ ๐ 5 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 2 ๐ 0Your discussion here may be based on common interpretations of Rawlsian liberalismโbut as I show in this published paper, those interpretations are largely wrong about how committed it is to neutrality under unjust conditions.
philpapers.org/rec/ARVAAO
I recently went on Academic Edgelords, a leftist podcast, to discuss my new book, Why It's OK to be a Moderate.
Much to my delight, all three hosts indicated that they enjoyed the book, and we had a fantastic discussion!
If you're curious, check it out: www.academicedgelords.com/2025/07/08/e...
Yes, when you click Donate on the GoFundMe page, it gives that as an option.
21.06.2025 00:47 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0I am devastated to learn of my dear friend and fellow philosopher Helen De Cruzโs passing.
With Helen's blessing, her husband Johan and I agreed to circulate a GoFundMe on their childrenโs behalf.
Please feel free to share and circulate widely.
www.gofundme.com/f/support-he...
"How to do philosophy with (science) fiction"
Here are some reflections on writing weird novels as scholarly outputs (with thanks to @marcusarvan.bsky.social).
>> newworkinphilosophy.substack.com/p/giacomo-pe... <<
Whether the value is truth, morality, or whatever, there is no empirically tractable way to train these things to reliably give the right outputs. www.scientificamerican.com/article/ai-i...
05.05.2025 23:40 โ ๐ 1 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0โAs they try to tackle a problem step by step, they run the risk of hallucinating at each step. The errors can compound as they spend more time thinking.โ
Your daily reminder that โaligningโ LLMs with what we want them to do is a foolโs errand.
www.nytimes.com/2025/05/05/t...
I made a video for New Work in Philosophy on mind and self, from Descartes to the anti-Cartesians. Thanks @marcusarvan.bsky.social for the invite! youtu.be/tPXbnketu8I
26.03.2025 15:23 โ ๐ 2 ๐ 1 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0A fun, short interview at "Why Philosophy?" on my path into philosophy, what philosophy means to me, etc.
Many thanks to Cรฉline Leboeuf for the invitation. It's a great series, and I highly recommend subscribing to her substack!
celineleboeuf.substack.com/p/why-philos...
New podcast interview with Reid Blackman on whether AI control and alignment are possible. Thanks so much to Reid for having me on--it was a fun discussion! open.spotify.com/episode/5rdh...
26.03.2025 13:01 โ ๐ 3 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0Hope some of you decide to check it out and enjoy it, and if so, please do share the word!
21.03.2025 19:43 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0More information on the book's contents, including a chapter-by-chapter summary and some advance endorsements, are available here: www.marcusarvan.net/my-books
21.03.2025 19:43 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0He makes this case to you, showing that whatever your reasonable political ideology may be, things tend to go best politically when radicals and moderates effectively complement each otherโs virtues while counterbalancing the otherโs vices."
21.03.2025 19:43 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0I am excited to report that my new book, "Why It's OK to be a Moderate", is now available for purchase ($24.99 paperback / $14.74 Kindle). www.amazon.com/Why-Its-OK-B...
From the book's jacket synopsis: "Arvan shows that itโs OK to be a moderate precisely because not everyone should be one...
Pirated 2 of my books and a bunch of my journal articles.
21.03.2025 02:00 โ ๐ 4 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 0 ๐ 0