Research students
MANCEPT has a long tradition of excellence in research. A considerable contribution to this research ethos is made by its many research students who are reading for their M Phil or PhD degree. Below is a list of current and recent past PhD and M Phil students with a brief description of their particular project.
Current
David Rhys Birks (Supervisors Kimberley Brownlee and Hillel Steiner)
E-mail address: David.Birks@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk
My research examines the following two questions: What are we under a duty to do for the mentally ill, and what are we forbidden to do to them? My thesis begins with an examination of welfare and proposes a substantial modification to the Razian account. I employ this conception of welfare as (1) the metric for judging the harm of mental illness and (2) the basis for determining when we have a duty to administer involuntary treatment.
My wider research interests include issues in political philosophy, bioethics and normative ethics.
Qin Cao (Supervisors Jon Quong and Adrian Blau and Hillel Steiner)
E-mail address: Qin.Cao-2@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk
My thesis is about the concept of freedom (liberty) in contemporary republicanism, and I will especially pay attention to the works of Quentin Skinner and Philip Pettit. These writers challenge the traditional dichotomy of positive / negative freedom. Based on philosophical resources in past eras (like Renaissance, English Civil War and Enlightenment), they claim that there was a tradition of republican political philosophy, which had a different idea of freedom from the one associated with modern liberalism. They try to rediscover this tradition and the implications of the alternative concept of freedom (which Pettit calls "freedom as non-domination", in contrast with the liberal concept of "freedom as non-interference). The aim of my thesis is to evaluate their arguments, from both philosophical and historical perspectives, and to judge whether they provide a better theory of freedom and government than the liberal one.
Richard Child (Supervisor Jon Quong)
E-mail address: richard.child@manchester.ac.uk
Taking cosmopolitanism seriously: to what extent can national partialities and allegiances coexist with a global conception of individual equality?
The ethical perspective known as ‘cosmopolitanism’ claims that all individuals in the world are moral equals and that nothing related to their ethnicity, cultural background or geographical location should influence their chances in life. In its strong normative form, cosmopolitanism sees national borders as morally arbitrary. The question my work seeks to answer is how far we can and should try to take this cosmopolitan view towards its logical conclusion. More specifically, I aim to determine the implications taking cosmopolitanism seriously has for the partiality many people feel towards their co-nationals. I intend to argue that, although nationhood has in many cases been hard won, the evolution of political society will not, and should not, stop there. Nation-states are simply unable to provide the moral and institutional preconditions for cosmopolitan justice and, therefore, should be replaced by forms of government more suited to this task.
Steve Cooke (Supervisors Kimberley Brownlee and Steve de Wijze)
E-mail address: stephen.cooke@manchester.ac.uk
The Ethics of Animal Liberation
In exploring the ethics of animal liberation I am looking at whether animals of worthy of moral consideration and, if so, whether it is justifiable to break the law in their defence. My thesis will examine, where animals are accorded rights, what kinds of illegal actions might be justifiable and how they might be justified. The subject of my enquiry will be carried out in the context of modern democratic states with particular reference to social contract theories. The research seeks to determine whether and how democratic societies should respond to the claims and actions of animal rights activists and to enrich the ongoing debate on animal research.
Stephen Hood (Supervisors Steve de Wijze and Andrew Russell)
E-mail address: stephen.hood@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk
Citizen Expectations and Deliberative Democracy
Democratic political theory makes a number of assumptions with regard to the expected behaviour of its citizens; in particular it assumes that they will act rationally in pursuit of their own particular conception of the good. My thesis seeks to explore whether such assumptions can remain valid when set against a background context of a technologically advanced market economy, suggesting that this may lead citizens to have expectations of the democratic system that cannot be realised. As a result, there may be a blindspot in democratic theory in failing to adequately account for phenomena such as voter apathy or decreasing confidence in democratic institutions. However, I wish to argue that a deliberative conception of democracy may prove to be superior at dealing with increased demands from citizens, as the process of deliberation will encourage an outward orientation within citizens that provides them with a better understanding of the limits of collective action.
Christopher Hughes (Supervisors Alan Hamlin and Angelia Wilson)
E-Mail address: christopher.hughes-2@manchester.ac.uk
Does Liberal Democracy Represent the End of History? An analysis of Fukuyama and Postmodern Challenges
My thesis is a theoretical examination of the possibility of a challenge to liberal democracy and Fukuyama’s claim that it is the end of history. My thesis questions whether it is possible to conceive of a future which is not a liberal democracy in the most “enlightened”, developed and post-industrial nations. The thesis asks does liberal democracy represent the end of history, or is it possible to imagine a philosophical alternative to liberal democracy? In particular, the thesis examines whether postmodernism represents a coherent challenge to liberal democracy by assessing the arguments from a range of postmodern critiques of liberal democracy, from various thinkers, including: Foucault, Derrida, Butler, Lyotard and Rorty. The thesis primarily focuses on three questions and three problems which postmodern theory raises to the possibility of constructing a notion of a history which has end point. The thesis poses the questions: can we talk about a universal and teleological history? Can we talk about a universal human nature? Can we talk about an autonomous individual? Ultimately, the thesis aims to assess whether the political objectives of liberal modernists such as Fukuyama and their postmodern critics are as opposed as they appear. The thesis attempts to establish a dialogue and conversations between the two positions, by highlighting points of convergence, and thus, at least partially, reconciling the two schools of thought. The thesis concludes by offering a political vision based on the emancipation of individual difference which synthesises liberal democratic and poststructural thought.
Dogancan Ozsel (Supervisors Alan Hamlin and Hillel Steiner)
E-mail address: dogancan_ozsel@yahoo.com
Radicalism and Conservative Ideology My thesis will endeavour to put forward a critical analysis of conservative ideology, via demonstrating the inseparable link between radical conservatism and ‘traditional’ forms of conservatism. In its broadest sense, the thesis will be an investigation of the interpretive possibilities inherent to conservative ideology. To carry out that investigation; I am planning to reconstruct conservatism as an ‘ideology’, illuminate its characteristic references, show the consistency of ‘radical’ policies with these characteristics; and lastly, reconsider possible conservative variations which should be deduced from that referential body.
Charlie Place: 'Obligations to Share and Rights to Accumulate' (Supervisor Hillel Steiner)
Primitive people hold a strong ideological committment to sharing resources within the group. This research project explores the possibility that the redistribution of wealth within the welfare state may be better understood as a reflection of this ancient human political virtue, rather than as a reciprocal arrangement arising out of rational self-interest.
Rebecca Reilly-Cooper (Supervisors Steve de Wijze and Jon Quong)
E-Mail Address: Rebecca.Reilly-cooper@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk
My doctoral research examines the recent theoretical literature surrounding the idea of deliberative democracy. I attempt to formulate a model of democratic decision-making for multicultural societies and societies characterised by deep differences and divisions. I argue that as it is typically articulated by its most famous proponents, the deliberative ideal contains some assumptions which would serve to marginalise the voices of members of social minority groups. In particular, I analyse the notion of the 'force of the better argument' which plays a central role in much democratic theory and yet is rarely explored in much detail. I aim to uncover whether conventional ideas about what constitutes a 'better argument' might be excessively restrictive and therefore exclusionary, and to investigate whether a model of democratic deliberation ought to make room for a wider range of arguments and expressions. In particular, I explore whether some emotional appeals, as well as disruptive and unruly forms of political conduct, might have a valid role to play in a model of collective decision-making for pluralistic and divided societies.
Recently completed
Tom Goodwin (Supervisors Steve de Wijze and Kimberley Brownlee)
Passed Viva October 2009
E-mail address: Tom.Goodwin@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk
Dirty Hands: Inescapable Wrongdoing in Public and Private Life?
The aim of my thesis is to highlight the failure of traditional moral theory to capture a pervasive aspect of our moral reality, namely the problem of 'dirty hands' - a species of unavoidable moral wrongdoing. It will argued that the phenomenon of 'dirty hands' also has particular implications for the political sphere, especially when viewed through the lens of a democratic society.
Charlie Robinson - Deliberative Democracy and Social Justice (Supervisors Stephen de Wijze and Thomas Uebel (Philosophy))
Passed Viva - October 2007
I propose to develop an account of deliberative democracy that draws on the philosophical hermeneutics of Hans-Georg Gadamer. Habermasian versions of deliberative democracy ignore the fact that moral commitments are rooted in specific traditions and norms and thus cannot be the subject of practical or moral discourses aiming at consensus through rational argumentation. Gadamer points us in the right direction by showing that tradition and prejudice are ontologically fundamental and cannot be side- stepped. In fact, they are the very conditions of the possibility of knowledge. But this does not mean that we draw, as Walzer proposes, only on the resources embedded in the democratic political culture, even though hermeneutics seems to lead us to suppose the validity of such a project. In multicultural and pluralistic societies, we cannot hope to specify the content of tradition in a way acceptable to all, as different groups will interpret the same phenomenon differently, even if they are all reasonable (say, in the Rawlsian sense of the term). Thus, deliberative procedures, if they are sufficiently inclusive and open-ended (i.e. if we accept their limitations in line with hermeneutic insights), will enable citizens to test their different interpretations in a practical way. Hermeneutic discourses proceed in a way analogous to interpretation itself, as described by the hermeneutic circle. Our interpretations of aspects of a form of life are to be evaluated in terms of a background of intersubjectively valid norms and behavioural expectations. But by the same token, aspects of those background conditions are subject to revision in the light of our interpretations of individual traditions, practices, norms, and so on.
Mihaela Georgieva - Political Constructivism and the Liberal Project of Public Justification (Supervisors Stephen de Wijze and Hillel Steiner)
Passed Viva - August 2007
E-mail address: M.V.Georgieva@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk
The thesis examines one of the important challenges faced by contemporary projects of liberal theorising – the challenge of offering public justification for liberal principles of justice to an ethically diverse constituency of justification marked by reasonable disagreement. My aim is to consider the political liberal argument (as exemplified by the work of Rawls) for the 'methodological and logical independence' of political theory from moral philosophy and to assess its implications for the project of liberal justification of principles of justice. To do that, I, firstly, analyse how the 'argument for agnosticism' leads to the adoption of a specific approach to justice – political constructivism. Secondly, I try to show that there is a tension between the commitment to agnosticism and the commitment to provide a compelling justification. Finally, I consider some possible ways of resolving that tension and its implications for both the 'argument for agnosticism' and for the use of political constructivism as an approach to the question of justice.
Carl Knight: 'Equality, Utility and Entitlement' (Supervisor Hillel Steiner)
(Completed 2006) Contemporary political theorists tend to treat one of these principles as fundamental, ignoring the considered judgments that support the other principles. This research examines the three principles and devises a pluralistic account of justice that accommodates the strengths, and sidelines the weaknesses, of each of them.
Adina Preda: 'The Justification of Humanitarian Intervention' (Supervisor Hillel Steiner)
(Completed 2006) This research aims to offer a moral justification for unilateral humanitarian intervention, defined as forcible intervention in a state/(political) community in order to stop or prevent human rights violations. Starting from a distinction between rights and reasons to intervene, it analyses the nature and justification of various collective rights, such as states' and group rights, and possible conflicts between these and individual human rights. It then moves on to examine possible reasons for prohibiting humanitarian intervention and, in particular, an argument which implies that, although exceptional instances of humanitarian intervention may be excused or mitigated, a more permissive general rule is not.
Andrew Shorten - Treating Cultural Commitments Fairly: A Cosmopolitan Account of Multicultural Justice (Completed 2005) (Supervisor Stephen de Wijze) Winner of the Political Studies Association Sir Ernest Barker Prize for Best Political Theory Thesis 2005
This work explores the relationship between liberal philosophy and the politics of cultural diversity. It proposes a normative theory – the fair treatment of cultural commitments argument - regarding how liberalism should respond to the fact of multiculturalism, examining the conditions under which special forms of accommodation for minorities might be necessary, and evaluating which demands can (and cannot) be rightly made on behalf of holders of minority cultural commitments. The argument is grounded on a moderate cosmopolitan ontology, and this distinguishes the approach from a number of alternative approaches to similar issues. This ontology rejects the view that cultural communities are bearers of moral value, and instead holds that culture should affect our considerations of liberal justice at the level of individually held cultural commitments. Such commitments matter because they can be the objects of unfair treatment even in societies governed according to ostensibly neutral procedures, and because the unfair treatment of cultural commitments can constitute an injustice. The argument has three major aims. First, to demonstrate why and how matters of culture and identity should inform our moral, legal and political reasoning. Second, to demonstrate why and how the unfair treatment of cultural commitments can be unjust. Third, to explore the implications of this for our theories of justice more generally. This is achieved, in particular, by configuring a particular (moderate cosmopolitan) conception of citizenship that is compatible with group-differentiated rights, and through a related an examination of the demands of equality and toleration in conditions of cultural diversity.