Although empirical evidence may provide a much desired sense of certainty amidst a pandemic characterised by uncertainty, the vast gamut of available COVID-19 data, including misinformation, has instead increased confusion and distrust in authorities’ decisions. One key lesson we have been gradually learning from the COVID-19 pandemic is that the availability of empirical data and scientific evidence alone do not automatically lead to good decisions. Good decision-making in public health policy, this paper argues, does depend on the availability of reliable (...) data and rigorous analyses, but depends above all on sound ethical reasoning that ascribes value and normative judgement to empirical facts. (shrink)

The 2020 coronavirus pandemic is a phenomenon of great interest from the point of view of philosophy of technique. In this paper, we propose an interpretation of its causes and its current and foreseeable effects through a dual theoretical framework. On the one hand, we will use Edward Tenner’s concept of the revenge effect, which refers to the phenomenon by which a technique produces unexpected consequences that cancel its objective. In this case, modern mobility techniques, by spreading the disease on (...) a global scale, have produced the opposite effect, that is, the mobility limitations of lockdowns. On the other hand, we will embrace Jacques Ellul’s philosophy of technique, which shows how many problems produced by modern technique, such as the current pandemic, have an ultimate tendency toward the establishment of a centralized and authoritarian organization of humanity not compatible with the fundamental rights of liberal democracies. The conclusion drawn from these elements will be that the way the pandemic has been tackled supports Ellul’s prediction about the establishment of such an organization. (shrink)

Review of Karbowski, J.. Aristotle’s Method in Ethics: Philosophy in Practice. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press.

From a moral point of view, what arguments are there for and against seeking COVID-19 vaccination? Can it be morally permissible to require (parts of) a population to receive a vaccine? The present paper adopts a perspective of virtue ethics and argues both that it is morally right for an individual virtuous moral agent to seek COVID-19 vaccination and for a virtuous ruler to impose mandatory vaccinations on her population.We begin by first presenting virtue ethics and the current vaccine controversy. (...) Second, we examine whether a virtuous individual should get vaccinated. Third, we consider whether, from a moral point of view, it is right for a ruler to impose mandatory vaccinations on her citizens. Fourth, we answer some objections to our argument. Finally, we conclude that virtue ethical considerations warrant both the individual choice of getting vaccinated and mandatory vaccinations against COVID-19. (shrink)