Penn Journal of Philosophy: Volume 16, Issue 1
Volume
Number
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Date Published
Journal Volume
Description
Keywords
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
Publication Child Marriage: Characterization as a Noxious Market and Policy-Based Responses to Economic Motivations(2021-04-05) Newman, CurtisChild marriage is a human rights violation according to various international agreements and human rights conventions. In many countries the practice is outlawed, yet it persists with great incidence in both developed and developing societies. Governments must act to eliminate the practice which (1) results in physical and psychological individual harms for child brides; (2) perpetuates societal harms in the form of entrenched gender inequality and limited economic potential for women and for countries as a whole; (3) thrives on the exploitation of economic and agency vulnerabilities of a social class, namely young girls and women; and (4) threatens the agency and autonomy of market “participants,” thereby characterizing the market in child marriage as a “noxious market,” according to Debra Satz’s framework, in the strongest sense. To best respond to the harms and negative effects of the market, governments need to understand the reasons why the practice persists, even though it is illegal. Among the most cited motivators of child marriage are economic circumstance (i.e., poverty) and dated or unfounded beliefs relating to the economic potential of young girls and women. Governments can address these motivators, and thereby (begin to) eradicate the practice of child marriage, through improvements to and expansion of social welfare programs and through targeted educational initiatives which stress the economic opportunity available to and earnings potential of young girls.Publication A Letter From the Editor(2021-04-05) Liu, AndrewLetter from the Editor regarding the Spring 2021 editionPublication Digital Norms and Their Place in a Tech-Based Future(2021-04-05) Squillaro, Joseph MOne impact of the technological revolution has been technology’s effects on social norms and the nudges needed to ensure efficiency and security in today’s “digitally required” world. I define these phenomena as digital norms and they inform interpersonal contact and tech-based choices. This paper looks specifically at norm interactions between Generation X and Generation Z. To test these digital norms and gauge their presence in both generations, this paper outlines a survey experiment of 50 people (25 Gen X and 25 Gen Z) and seeks to extrapolate assumptions on technology while providing policy recommendations. What was found was that civil liberty and morality expectations roll over into the expectations within digital norms. Thus, digital norms, and how we choose to interact with them, can be viewed as a themed social norm which abides by much of the same rules outlined by behavioral economics. They serve as the fundamental underpinning to how technological innovation gets perpetuated and ultimately how tech will facilitate future societal interaction.Publication How Personally Relevant Cases of COVID-19 Influence Individuals’ Level of Concern towards the Virus(2021-04-05) Nicklas, Timothy JThis paper presents the findings of a statistical analysis exploring the ways in which personally relevant cases of COVID-19 influence an individual's level of concern towards the virus. The analysis makes use of public opinion data collected throughout the pandemic by a market research company called Ipsos. This study conducts an OLS regression analysis using three different samples of data from three distinct periods of time during the pandemic. The paper addresses each component of the study's deductive approach, outlining everything from the initial hypothesis to the conclusions and broader implications. Ultimately, this study does show evidence that an individual's personal experience with COVID-19 influences their attitudes towards the virus. This is consistent with the findings of previous psychological research that has explored how personally salient information affects humans' attitudes and beliefs.Publication Rejecting Ingrid Robeyns’ Defense of Limitarianism(2021-04-05) Nicklas, Timothy JThis paper critically evaluates the argument put forth by the philosopher Ingrid Robeyns in her work entitled What, if Anything, is Wrong with Extreme Wealth. Robeyns holds the Chair Ethics of Institutions at Utrecht University, and her academic research focuses on issues pertaining to contemporary political philosophy and applied ethics. In her aforementioned publication, Robeyns defends the political theory called limitarianism, which holds that there should be an upper limit to the amount of income that an individual can hold. Limitarianism, like many other political philosophies, presents a view of how resources ought to be distributed in society based, in part, on certain ethical principles. Robeyns explicitly outlines two arguments in support of limitarianism as a political philosophy: (1) by eliminating excess wealth, limitarianism prevents the super-rich from undermining political equality and (2) by redistributing this excess wealth, there will be more resources available to address any urgent unmet needs or collective action problems in society. This paper carefully reviews and ultimately rejects Robeyns’ defense of limitarianism as a theory of political philosophy. This paper sets out to highlight both the flaws in the basic premises of limitarianism as a theory as well as the shortcomings of the specific arguments that Robeyns’ constructs in support of the theory itself.Publication Corporate Limitarianism(2021-04-05) Meyer, KarlIngrid Robeyns argues that there is a point at which increasing one’s income no longer increases one’s quality of life. Her argument states that given better uses for this money, namely restoring political equality and meeting urgent needs, it is morally wrong for individuals to have surplus money, which is money beyond that which is needed to live a good life. Therefore, Robeyns argues that surplus money should be taxed at a rate of 100%. The original argument only applies to individuals with excess wealth. However, there is no reason why it should be restricted only to people. In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the United States Supreme Court ruled that corporations have free speech rights, building on previous cases that gave corporations protection under the Fourth, Fifth, Seventh, and Fourteenth Amendments. Given that corporations have rights similar to people, should they be held to the same consideration of surplus economic value? Just as Robeyns argues that super-rich individuals have surplus money, so do mega-corporations have wealth beyond their use. I call this argument “corporate limitarianism”. In this paper, I apply Robeyns’ arguments for economic limitarianism, namely the democratic argument and the argument from unmet needs, to corporations. In the case of urgent needs, I also look at the expanded causal role of mega-corporations in creating and contributing to these issues and how it supports the corporate limitarianism argument.Publication Extended Minds: The Externalization and Expansion of Human Minds Beyond the Body(2021-04-05) Wolfe, DmitriDespite the commonly accepted notion that the mind is inseparable from the body, the extended mind hypothesis claims human minds can become linked with the world around us. Through various avenues such as spoken and written language, humans may use non-biological means to allow the mind to store, access, and communicate information in extended capacities not otherwise possible. Though the extended minds hypothesis may be viewed as a result of advancing technology, it makes up only a small part of the way in which externalization may occur. Everyday life is full of examples of extended minds, from computers and phones to billboards and books. There is much debate among philosophers over the acceptance of the hypothesis, but in this paper, I will explore some of the most relevant arguments and aim to show why I hold the extended minds hypothesis to be true.