Podcast appearances and mentions of onora o'neill

In this interview, 2017 Holberg Laureate Onora O’Neill discusses a variety of topics, including Immanuel Kant and public reason, human rights and duties, the ethics for communication and the dilemmas that arise from media globalisation. O’Neill is interviewed by Professor of Philosophy Lars Fredrik Svendsen, University of Bergen. Baroness Onora O’Neill is Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Cambridge, a crossbench member of the House of Lords and a former President of the British Academy (2005–2009).

This conversation is part of the Immanuel Kant Series | 'Dare to know!' Philosophy Podcast. Today we are joined by Onora O’Neill. Onora O’Neill is an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Cambridge, a crossbench member of the House of Lords and a former President of the British Academy (2005–2009). She has extensively published articles and books related to the work of Immanuel Kant. In this conversation, we talk in particular about her book ‘Constructing Authorities: Reason, Politics and Interpretation in Kant’s Philosophy’’.

In this, the second episode of our NeurIPS series, we’re joined by David Spiegelhalter, Chair of Winton Center for Risk and Evidence Communication at Cambridge University and President of the Royal Statistical Society. David, an invited speaker at NeurIPS, presented on “Making Algorithms Trustworthy: What Can Statistical Science Contribute to Transparency, Explanation and Validation?”. In our conversation, we explore the nuanced difference between being trusted and being trustworthy, and its implications for those building AI systems. We also dig into how we can evaluate trustworthiness, which David breaks into four phases, the inspiration for which he drew from British philosopher Onora O'Neill's ideas around 'intelligent transparency’. The complete show notes for this episode can be found at twimlai.com/talk/212. For more information on the NeurIPS series, visit twimlai.com/neurips2018.

While they aren’t as unpopular as politicians or journalists, people who work with statistics come in for their share of abuse. “Figures lie and liars figure,” goes one maxim. And don’t forget, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." But some people are the good guys, doing their best to combat the flawed or dishonest use of numbers. One of those good guys is David Spiegelhalter, professor of the public understanding of risk in the Statistical Laboratory in the Centre for Mathematical Sciences at the University of Cambridge and current president of the Royal Statistical Society. Spiegelhalter, the subject of this Social Science Bites podcast, even cops to being a bit of an “evidence policeman” because on occasion even he spends some of his time “going around telling people off for bad behavior.” There is bad behavior to police. “There’s always been the use of statistics and numbers and facts as rhetorical devices to try and get people’s opinion across, and to in a sense manipulate our emotions and feelings on things,” he tells interviewer David Edmonds. “People might still think that statistics and numbers are cold, hard facts but they’re soft, fluffy things. They can be manipulated and changed, made to look big, made to look small, all depending on the story that someone wants to tell.” Asked at one point if he even accepts that there are ‘facts,’ Spiegelhalter gives a nuanced yes. “I’m not going to get into the whole discussion about ‘what is truth,’ although it’s amazing how quick you do go down that line. No, there are facts, and I really value them.” Despite that policing role, Spiegelhalter explain, his methods are less prescriptive and more educational, working to get others to ask key questions such as “What am I not being told?” and “Why I am hearing this?” The goal is less to track down every bit of fake news in the world, and more to inoculate others against its influence. One part of that, for example, is determining what communicators and organizations to trust. Spiegelhalter, acknowledging his debt to Onora O'Neill, an emeritus professor of philosophy at the University of Cambridge, argues that organizations themselves shouldn’t strive to be trusted, but to show trustworthy attributes. This goes beyond things like “fishbowl transparency,” where you lard your website with every imaginable factoid, but actively making sure people can get to your information, understand it and they can assess how reliable it is. That ‘understanding’ part of the process is what Spigelhalter pursues as part of chairing the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication, which is dedicated to improving the way that quantitative evidence is used in society. In that role he’s become a public face of honest use of numbers, as evidenced by his role as presenter of the BBC4 documentaries Tails you Win: the Science of Chance and Climate Change by Numbers. His own research focuses on health-related use of statistics and statistical methods, and while that might include Bayesian inference using Gibbs samplinig, it can also encompass the focus of his 2015 book, Sex by Numbers.

The British Philosopher Onora O'Neill is awarded the Holberg Prize 2017 for her influental work in the field of moral and political philosophy. She is particularly well known for her work on Kant, bioethics, human rights, trust and communication ethics. O'Neill is a also a crossbench member of the House of Lords since 1999 and a former President of the British Academy. In this interview, she speaks about her background, carreer and work.

The philosopher Onora O'Neill criticises the standard of public debate on both sides of the European Union decision and asks how this democratic deficit can be repaired. "The disarray that we now witness, and the retractions, revelations and recriminations that spill out on a daily basis, show that large parts of each campaign failed to communicate with the public, did not offer adequate or honest accounts of the alternatives, and did not provide the basic means for voters to judge the real options, the real opportunities or the real risks." This is the first of a series of special editions of Radio 4's long-running essay programme, A Point of View, in which five of Britain's leading thinkers give their own very personal view of "Brexit" - what the vote tells us about the country we are, and are likely to become. Producer: Sheila Cook.

A lecture by Onora O'Neill on Accountability, Excellence and Success in Universities.

Trust is crucial in areas of medicine and health. But what sort of explicit consent should doctors obtain before medical treatment? Onora O'Neill discusses the place of trust in areas of bioethics with Nigel Warburton in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast (originally on Bioethics Bites, a series made in association with the  Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics and made possible by a grant from the Wellcome Trust).

Onora O'Neill, formerly principal of Newnham College, Cambridge, has been thinking about the issue of 'trust': trust is vital in most areas of human interaction - but nowhere more so than in health and medicine.

Radically new techniques are opening up exciting possibilities for those working in health care - for psychiatrists, doctors, surgeons; the option to clone human beings, to give just one example. Who should determine what is allowed and what prohibited? And what sort of consent should doctors have to have from patients before treatment. Is the trend towards consent forms helpful? Or should we trust doctors to make good decisions for us. For many years now, philosopher Onora O'neill, formerly principal of Newnham College, Cambridge, has been thinking about the issue of 'trust': trust is vital in most areas of human interaction - but nowhere more so than in health and medicine.

Trust was the subject of moral philosopher Professor Onora O'Neill's acclaimed Reith Lectures in 2002. Enron, political sleaze, the foot and mouth crisis, the Bristol heart babies scandal and the collapse of Equitable Life had contributed to a perception - challenged by Professor O'Neill - that we were living through a crisis of trust in our institutions. Eight years on, the subject is no less topical and so Professor O'Neill returns to Radio 4 to be interviewed about her latest reflections on trust by Edward Stourton. The intervening years have seen no let-up in the stream of highly publicised political scandals, financial crises and blunders by state officials. Yet levels of trust have remained remarkably consistent. Furthermore, argues Professor O'Neill, the public debate about building trust misses the point: we should be more concerned about levels of trustworthiness rather than levels of trust in society. Attempts to restore trust in certain professions or organisations do little to help individuals with the practical difficulty of placing and refusing trust wisely. In addition, she points to clumsy "accountability" schemes designed to raise levels of trust but which in fact encourage an increase in untrustworthy behaviour. Edward Stourton discusses these notions with Onora O'Neill and explores their topicality. Her arguments are also commented on and challenged by John Haldane, Professor of Philosophy at St Andrews University and current chairman of the Royal Institute of Philosophy.

What do we mean by 'consent' in a medical context? Is it reasonable to ask for informed consent before performing medical procedures? Is consent even the most important issue. Onora O'Neill challenges some widely-held assumptions in this area in this interview for Philosophy Bites.