Podcasts about public ethics

Simon Kerr (pictured) is the musical driving force of "Music for a Warming World" and has had a long history in the challenges of climate change. The Melbourne-based musician/academic was reading the most recent book, "Living Hot: Surviving and Thriving on a Heating Planet", co-authored by Australian public intellectual Clive Hamilton and energy consultant, George Wilkenfeld. Simon was so impressed with what Halimton and Wilkenfeld had written that he contacted "Climate Conversations" saying: "We have to talk". Both Simon and his partner, Christine, use electric bikes to travel about the City of Melbourne. He was particularly excited to hear the "Climate Conversations" episode in which the CEO of the Melbourne-based Bicycle Network, Alison McCormack was interviewed: "Interview: 'Australia's E-Bike moment' with Bicycle Network's CEO, Alison McCormack". Hamilton has been the Professor of Public Ethics at Charles Sturt University in Canberra since 2008. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/robert-mclean/message

Clive Hamilton, who is Professor of Public Ethics at Charles Sturt University, joined us to talk about what Australia can do to not only survive a hotter world.

Clive Hamilton joins the show to discuss his left-wing critique of wokeness published in the Sydney Morning Herald. Clive Hamilton is Professor of Public Ethics at Charles Sturt University. He is the found of The Australia Institute and the author of many books, including Defiant Earth: The Fate of Humans in the Anthropocene, Silent Invasion: China's Influence in Australia and Provocateur: A Life of Ideas in Action. The article discussed in the show is "Wake up, lefties, and reject wokeness." The Political Animals is hosted by Dr Jonathan Cole, a scholar, writer and translator specialising in political theology: the intersection of religion and politics. Jonathan was a senior terrorism analyst at Australian intelligence agency the Office of National Assessments where he worked on Islamist terrorism and the global jihadist movement. He is the author of The Reign of God: A Critical Engagement with Oliver O'Donovan's Theology of Political Authorityand Christian Political Theology in an Age of Discontent: Mediating Scripture, Doctrine, and Political Reality. You can follow Jonathan and the show on Facebook and Twitter.

Invest in Women. Improve the World.If you were moved by any part of this episode, then please consider making a donation to Vital Voices to help continue our work of investing in, connecting with and amplifying the work of women leaders who are solving the world's greatest challenges. www.vitalvoices.org/donateAbout This Episode:“The work we do is lonely work,” said KAH WALLA, President of the Cameroon People's Party and a Vital Voices Board Member. “If we want social justice, if we want inclusion, we cannot count on the people who have built the current status quo to change it. We must embrace power.” And so went the discussion of three powerful women leaders about how they broke the so-called rules of society to start movements and blaze a trail towards gender equality.In this special Festival episode of the Vital Voices podcast, you'll hear more from WALLA, in addition to Senior Policy Advisor for Native Affairs and Domestic Policy Council at The White House ELIZABETH HIDALGO REESE, Founder of Femmes for Freedom SHIRIN MUSA, Environmental and Human Rights Activist HELENA GUALINGA,  and Former Secretary of Public Ethics, Transparency and Anti-Corruption of Argentina LAURA ALONSO. 

Dec. 30, 2022 - Sandy Berland, the former executive director of the state Joint Commission on Public Ethics, discusses his new role as top staffer at the Commission on Ethics and Lobbying in Government. He talks about his objectives, the structure of the new oversight entity and reflects on his time at JCOPE.

Dec. 30, 2022 - Sandy Berland, the former executive director of the state Joint Commission on Public Ethics, discusses his new role as top staffer at the Commission on Ethics and Lobbying in Government. He talks about his objectives, the structure of the new oversight entity and reflects on his time at JCOPE.

Dec. 30, 2022 - Sandy Berland, the former executive director of the state Joint Commission on Public Ethics, discusses his new role as top staffer at the Commission on Ethics and Lobbying in Government. He talks about his objectives, the structure of the new oversight entity and reflects on his time at JCOPE.

Clive Hamilton is a Professor of Public Ethics at Charles Sturt University in Canberra, who has authored two books on China: 'Silent Invasion: China's Influence in Australia' and 'Hidden Hand: Exposing How The Chinese Communist Party Is Reshaping The World.' He shares his insights on China's ambitions, influence, what has driven President Biden's reaffirmed stance against an invasion of Taiwan, and how well Australia's new leadership is handling these delicate relationships. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Clive Hamilton is a Professor of Public Ethics at Charles Sturt University in Canberra, who has authored two books on China: 'Silent Invasion: China's Influence in Australia' and 'Hidden Hand: Exposing How The Chinese Communist Party Is Reshaping The World.' He shares his insights on China's ambitions, influence, what has driven President Biden's reaffirmed stance against an invasion of Taiwan, and how well Australia's new leadership is handling these delicate relationships. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Clive Hamilton is one of Australia's most well-known public intellectuals. He's a Professor of Public Ethics and is the founder of the The Australia Institute. A provocateur since youth he's plans to continue challenging baseless assumptions, even when he's no longer paid to. While he admits that many problems still confront the globe, he says Boomers needs to remember the victories they have won. And he's also keen to champion the many benefits of an ageing population.  Supported by HomemadeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

July 15, 2022 - As a parting goodbye, the state's Joint Commission on Public Ethics released a report on the watchdog's internal approval process of a request by then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo to write a pandemic memoir in 2020. The Times Union's Chris Bragg shares the details of the analysis and highlights what it says about the entity's broader failings over the past 11 years.

June 22, 2022 - Before the Joint Commission on Public Ethics is retired, the embattled watchdog is going after one of its harshest critics, former watchdog turned lobbyist, David Grandeau. We talk about the case with Times Union state investigative reporter Chris Bragg.

June 22, 2022 - This summer marks the end of the Joint Commission on Public Ethics and the launch of its replacement, the Commission on Lobbying and Ethics in Government. But before the new ethics watchdog can get to work it needs commissioners, who will be vetted by the new Independent Review Committee, which will be helmed by New York Law School Dean Anthony Crowell, who joined the show to talk about his mandate and what comes next.

Alan speaks with John Milloy, former Liberal MPP and cabinet minister, is the director of the Centre for Public Ethics at Martin Luther University College. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Elizabeth Kocienda, New York City Bar Director of Advocacy, speaks with three City Bar members about issues that they advocated to include in the New York State Budget. Lisa Pearlstein, Betsy Kramer, and Ed Murray discuss the work that they did through their City Bar Committees to bridge the digital divide for New Yorkers living in shelters; increase funding for representation of parents and children in family court and matrimonial proceedings; and reform the Joint Commission on Public Ethics. Find more resources, including those mentioned in this podcast, by using this link: https://bit.ly/3kSGIwf

Today, on the Hudson Mohawk Magazine, We begin with Mark Dunlea and New York Public Interest Research Group's Blair Horner discussing how best to replace New York's State's Joint Commission on Public Ethics, or JCOPE, with another approach to oversee ethics issues with state officials. Then, Alexis Goldsmith interviews with Dr. Clifford Lau, a chemist leading a citizen air-quality monitoring program near an ethane cracker plastics plant in Pennsylvania. Later on, Aileen Javier talks with Angela Kaufman from Saratoga's Lake View Mobile Home Park about possible retaliation against her by the park's new owner in response to her advocacy there. After that, we re-broadcast an interview by Meghan Marohn with David Borton about his decisions to build a solar home and a solar boat. And we end with our weekly live discussion with retired meteorologist Hugh Johnson, this time with a look at tornadoes and, of course, regional weather.

On this week’s Gazette – a year in review. As 2021 comes to an end we take a look at the weaknesses of the Joint Commission on Public Ethics. Our political observer Alan Chartock with his political year in review. Also, we’ll take a look at a pilot program designed to improve outcomes for non-violent mental health emergency calls. Photo courtesy of JCOPE.

On this week's Gazette - a year in review. As 2021 comes to an end we take a look at the weaknesses of the Joint Commission on Public Ethics. Our political observer Alan Chartock with his political year in review. Also, we'll take a look at a pilot program designed to improve outcomes for non-violent mental health emergency calls. Photo courtesy of JCOPE.

Dec. 21, 2021 - Times Union investigative reporter Chris Bragg provides the latest update from the Joint Commission on Public Ethics and its ongoing drama with former-Gov. Andrew Cuomo and his pandemic memoir.

Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo was ordered by New York's ethics commission Tuesday to give up millions of dollars a publisher paid him to write a book about his response to the coronavirus pandemic. An attorney for Cuomo immediately called the action unconstitutional and promised a fight. Cuomo was directed to turn over proceeds earned from “American Crisis: Leadership Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic” within 30 days under a resolution approved 12-1 by the Joint Commission on Public Ethics. The order came a month after the commission voted to rescind the ethics approval it had given Cuomo as he entered into the $5.1 million book deal. “American Crisis" was published in October 2020, months before Cuomo resigned amid allegations he sexually harassed at least 11 women. It was published by Crown Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House. The staff of the commission granted approval of the deal in July 2020, when his counsel told the commission Cuomo agreed to not use any state personnel or resources to produce his book and that he would write it “entirely on his own time.” But complaints later surfaced that state property, resources and personnel were used to prepare, write, edit and publish the book. Cuomo has acknowledged that state employees helped with tasks including editing the manuscript. But he's claimed that those employees were volunteering their private time. Cuomo's camp promptly challenged the commission's authority, setting up what could be a lengthy legal battle. “JCOPE's actions today are unconstitutional, exceed its own authority and appear to be driven by political interests rather than the facts and the law," Cuomo attorney Jim McGuire said in a prepared statement. “Should they seek to enforce this action, we'll see them in court.” A spokesperson for the attorney general's office, which would enforce the order, said they are reviewing the commission's vote "and determining how best to move forward.” The commission's order hinges partly on a declaration that its retroactive revocation of its prior approval for the book deal means that Cuomo "is not legally entitled to retain compensation paid to him, in any form, for his outside activities related to the book." It doesn't specify an amount, but says he owes the state an amount equal to whatever compensation he received. Efforts to claw back the money could be complicated, in part because Cuomo already disbursed $1.5 million to a charity and a trust for his three daughters. Cuomo disclosed in May that he was paid a $3.1 million advance to write the book and that he was to make another $2 million on it over the next two years under the publishing contract. Cuomo spokesperson Richard Azzopardi had said then that after taxes and expenses, Cuomo netted $1.5 million on the book last year, with $500,000 of the profits donated to the United Way of New York State. The rest was being put in a trust for his daughters. Spokespeople for Cuomo and Crown Publishing Group did not respond to questions Tuesday about whether Cuomo had received money for the book beyond the initial $3.1 million. A separate state Assembly investigation released last month found evidence that Cuomo, who resigned in August, had his staff spend copious amounts of time on the project. Junior and senior staff members told investigators they were asked to perform book tasks during their work day, including transcribing dictations, printing and delivering documents, and attending meetings with agents and publishers. One senior state official sent and received 1,000 emails about the book, the legislative report said. Azzopardi said those allegations are false. “This is political hypocrisy and duplicity at its worst. Governor Cuomo received a JCOPE opinion and advice of counsel stating that government resources could not be used — and they weren't — and any staffer who assisted in this project did so on their own time, which was reflected on their timesheets," the spokesperso...

Thank you for joining this week's edition of the Albany Update. There is a reason why some Albany insiders refer to JCOPE (the state's Joint Commission on Public Ethics) as “J-Joke”. What happened last week regarding former Gov. Andrew Cuomo's $5 Million book deal is only the most recent example of why no one takes this ethics commission seriously. Speaking of ethics, many are calling into question a Virginia campaign ad with Vice President Kamala Harris promoting the Democratic candidate for governor in hundreds of predominantly African American churches. On the endorsement front, Governor Kathy Hochul has picked up the support of another major pro-abortion political player. Then, we'll look at the rise of authoritarian government demonstrated by the continuing COVID mandates. Finally, we'll update you on the latest regarding efforts to redistrict our state ahead of next year's elections. Let's get started. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/albanyupdate/support

​Religious people are not very popular when it comes to politics. Canadian politicians are asked tough questions about how their religious beliefs shape their politics. Is that fair? Should it discourage people of faith from running for office? Our guest John Milloy is Assistant Professor of Public Ethics and the Director of the Centre for Public Ethics at Wilfrid Laurier University in Ontario. He was a member of provincial parliament (MPP) in Ontario and worked on Parliament Hill as a political adviser to senior cabinet ministers, as well as five years on the senior staff of former prime minister Jean Chrétien. He's also a practicing Roman Catholic and author of the recently-released book Politics and Faith in a Polarized World: A Challenge for Catholics. (Novalis publishing)

July 15, 2021 - Albany Times Union investigative reporter Chris Bragg shares the latest developments about a 2019 leak at the state's Joint Commission on Public Ethics, which is nominally the ethics watchdog for the executive and legislative branches.

Media professor and feminist Catharine Lumby sees a role for pornography in a healthy sexual diet, whereas public ethics professor Clive Hamilton has the self-confessed unfashionable view that it's destructive and demeaning. They've clashed in the media, and we bring them together for the first time to see if we can tease out this complex topic, in a conversation that exemplifies the principle of charity. Everyone seems to be looking at pornography but its rarely discussed. 35% of all internet downloads are estimated to be porn-related, and porn sites receive more regular traffic than Netflix, Amazon, & Twitter combined each month. A third of porn users are female, and the industry is estimated to be worth $97 billion worldwide. So is pornography a healthy form of sexual expression, exploration and enjoyment for all these people? And a thriving industry of empowered performers?Or is pornography exploitative, demeaning, and ultimately destructive to our intimate relationships, even sometimes promoting violence against women?Our guests are Catharine Lumby and Clive Hamilton. Catharine is Professor of Media at Sydney University. She's written extensively on this topic as an author, and is a frequent media commentator across print, radio and television. Clive is Professor of Public Ethics at Charles Sturt University. He has held academic positions at the University of Oxford and Yale. Clive was the executive director of public policy think tank The Australian Institute. Your hosts are Lloyd Vogelman and Emile Sherman, You can find Emile at: www.linkedin.com/in/emile-sherman-201399213https://twitter.com/emilesherman?s=20You can find Lloyd at: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lloydvogelman~~~Produced by Jonah PrimoInstagram.com/jonahprimo See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

May 3, 2021 - The Albany Times Union's state investigative reporter Chris Bragg introduces us to the new executive director of the state Joint Commission on Public Ethics and walks us through other highlights from the embattled watchdog.

CNN Legal Analyst Elie Honig and Missouri Law Professor Frank Bowman discuss whether Trump broke the law in his phone call to Georgia election officials. NYU School of Law Professor Stephen Gillers discusses Attorney General Barr’s legacy and his potential successor. Public Ethics and Public Policy Center President and former Scalia clerk and co-editor Ed Whelan discuss […]

Dr Clive Hamilton, Professor of Public Ethics at Charles Sturt University and author of Silent Invasion: China's Influence in Australia, said he expected China to keep "twisting and twisting" the arm of Australia until it backed down. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Peter Albert David Singer is an Australian moral philosopher. He is the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, and a Laureate Professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne. He specializes in applied ethics and approaches ethical issues from a secular, utilitarian perspective. He is known in particular for his book Animal Liberation (1975), in which he argues in favor of veganism and his essay “Famine, Affluence and Morality”, in which he argues in favor of donating to help the global por. For most of his career, he was a preference utilitarian, but he stated in The Point of View of the Universe (2014), coauthored with Katarzyna de Lazari-Radek, that he had become a hedonistic utilitarian. On two occasions, Singer served as chair of the philosophy department at Monash University, where he founded its Centre for Human Bioethics. In 1996 he stood unsuccessfully as a Greens candidate for the Australian Senate. In 2004 Singer was recognized as the Australian Humanist of the Year by the Council of Australian Humanist Societies. In 2005. The Sydney Morning Herald placed him among Australia’s ten most influential public intellectuals. Singer is a cofounder of Animals Australia and the founder of The Life You Can Save. Journalists have tagged him as the ‘world’s most influential living philosopher’ as Singer’s work on ethics behind the treatment of animals have been credited to starting the modern animal rights movements. He is a known critic of the sanctity of life ethics in bioethics. Several key figures in the animal movement have said that his book Animal Liberation, led them to get involved in the struggle to reduce the vast amount of suffering we inflict on animals. To that end, he co-founded the Australian Federation of Animal Societies, now Animals Australia, the country's largest and most effective animal organization. He and his wife, Renata, stopped eating meat in 1971. He is the founder of The Life You Can Save, an organization based on his book. It aims to spread Peter’s ideas about why we should be doing much more to improve the lives of people living in extreme poverty, and how we can best do this. You can view his TED talk on this topic here. He has written, co-authored, edited or co-edited more than 50 books, including Practical Ethics, The Expanding Circle, Rethinking Life and Death, One World, The Ethics of What We Eat (with Jim Mason) and The Point of View of the Universe (with Katarzyna de Lazari-Radek.)

Anti Corruption Motion: A dispute over the anti-corruption committee motion brought forward by the Conservatives could see a federal election happen amidst the second wave of COVID-19. When is this supposed to go down? Guest: David Akin, Chief Political Correspondent, Global News - Is there a need for an anti-corruption committee? Should the Trudeau government answer more questions over the WE Charity scandal? Guest: John Milloy, former Ontario Cabinet Minister, practitioner-in-residence in Laurier's Political Science department and assistant professor of public ethics and co-director for the Centre for Public Ethics at Waterloo Lutheran Seminary - The Ontario government has taken a look at ranked balloting and has decided to pull the practice. London, ON was the first municipality in the province to actually have an election by ranked balloting.  Guest: Kate Graham. Ph, Political Scientist, Department of Political Science, Western University - London has a new deputy mayor in Josh Morgan, however there was some debate. Josh Morgan joins the show this morning to discuss this and his motion on city hall space. Guest: Josh Morgan, Ward 7 Councillor. City of London - Today in Queen's Park, the leader of the Green Party of Ontario is going to be debating his private member's bill that would revoke the ability of employers to require sick notes for short term, minor illnesses. There has been support from labour groups and business/health associations for this piece of legislation. Guest: Mike Schreiner, leader of the Ontario Green Party

For exclusive member-only content become a CwC subscriber via https://colemanhughes.org/In this episode, Coleman interviews Peter Singer, an Australian moral philosopher, professor of Bioethics at Princeton University and a Laureate Professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne. Peter is known for his book, ‘Animal Liberation' in which he argues in favor of veganism, and his essay ‘Famine, Affluence and Morality' in which he argues in favor of donating to the global poor. During this episode they talk about whether moral obligations depend on where you happen to be in the world, whether human happiness is comparative or absolute, Tyler Cowen's book Stubborn Attachments, hedonic adaptations and whether the human race is happier now than it was a thousand years ago, and more.

For exclusive member-only content become a CwC subscriber via https://colemanhughes.org/ In this episode, Coleman interviews Peter Singer, an Australian moral philosopher, professor of Bioethics at Princeton University and a Laureate Professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne. Peter is known for his book, ‘Animal Liberation’ in which he argues in favor of veganism, and his essay ‘Famine, Affluence and Morality’ in which he argues in favor of donating to the global poor. During this episode they talk about whether moral obligations depend on where you happen to be in the world, whether human happiness is comparative or absolute, Tyler Cowen’s book Stubborn Attachments, hedonic adaptations and whether the human race is happier now than it was a thousand years ago, and more.

Professor of Public Ethics at Charles Sturt University, Professor Clive Hamilton, explains why the move is significant.

Current episode description: We are pleased to welcome Dr. Ligon Duncan to the podcast to address the recent and historic vote in Mississippi to replace its state flag, presenting a powerful case that Christians should promote the justice and dignity of their neighbors. He also shares with us how RTS is adapting and flourishing amidst the challenges presented by covid-19. Show notes: https://ligonduncan.com/a-statement-on-the-flag-of-mississippi/ https://www.amazon.com/Dominion-Christian-Revolution-Remade-World/dp/0465093507 https://ligonduncan.com/a-pastoral-letter-on-racism-and-the-gospel/

Clive Hamilton, Professor of Public Ethics at the Centre for Applied Philosophy & Public Ethics, joins Michael to discuss his latest book ‘Hidden Hand’, which exposes the Chinese Communist Party’s global program of influence & subversion, and the threat it poses to democracy.   Professor Hamilton comprehensively reveals the covert techniques used by the CCP for its influence and interference operations within universities, big business, think tanks and in diplomatic service.   The insights into the influence in the UK in particular will provoke new debate in a region that still lags a long way behind us here in Australia in understanding the nature and extent of Chinese interference.

Professor of Public Ethics and Chinese interference expert at Charles Sturt University, Clive Hamilton, explains the economic tactic the Chinese government is using to try and pressure Australia into withdrawing support for a probe into the origins of COVID-19.

Michael is joined by Clive Hamilton, Professor of Public Ethics at the Centre for Applied Philosophy & Public Ethics, following Ambassador Jingye Cheng suggesting the Chinese public may boycott Australian products, or decide not to visit Australia in the future, if the Australia continues its push for an independent inquiry into the spread of COVID-19.   "Maybe also the ordinary people will say why should we drink Australian wine or to eat Australian beef?" China’s ambassador said in a recent interview with the Australian Financial Review.

Did the NYS Joint Commission of Public Ethics illegally leak information to Governor Cuomo concerning the fate of his disgraced former aide Joe Percoco? We’ll have the latest on a secret investigation by the inspector general. Also, we speak to a doctor on a state-appointed board that’s investigating the cause of maternal deaths in New York. At our Reporters Roundtable, we analyze the week’s headlines with Casey Seiler of the Times Union and Brendan Lyons and Bill Mahoney of Politico New York.

Alan speaks to John Milloy, an Assistant Professor of Public Ethics at Wilfrid Laurier University to talk about Andrew Scheer and his faith. He also speaks with Global's Meghan Collie to talk about the new Global Online series, "Failure to launch kids". 

One of Australia’s best-known public intellectuals, Clive Hamilton, Professor of Public Ethics, Charles Sturt University speaks about his recently published book “Silent Invasion” in which he outlines China’s interference in the political discourse in Australia, through the use of tied funding, covert and overt acts of interference.

------------------Support the channel------------ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenter SubscribeStar: https://www.subscribestar.com/the-dissenter PayPal: paypal.me/thedissenter PayPal Subscription 1 Dollar: https://tinyurl.com/yb3acuuy PayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9l PayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpz PayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9m PayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao ------------------Follow me on--------------------- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheDissenterYT Anchor (podcast): https://anchor.fm/thedissenter Dr. Peter Singer is the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, and a Laureate Professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne. He specializes in applied ethics and approaches ethical issues from a secular, utilitarian perspective. He is known in particular for his book Animal Liberation (1975), in which he argues in favor of veganism, and his essay "Famine, Affluence, and Morality", in which he argues in favor of donating to help the global poor. He has written, co-authored, edited or co-edited more than 50 books, including Practical Ethics, The Expanding Circle, Rethinking Life and Death, One World, The Ethics of What We Eat (with Jim Mason) and The Point of View of the Universe (with Katarzyna de Lazari-Radek). His writings have appeared in more than 25 languages. In this episode, we first get into how we morality can be objective, and issues regarding our evolved morality and its conflicting features, the limitations of reason, and if it is possible to derive moral values from science. We talk about how personality might influence the philosophies that people develop, and if it would be acceptable to nudge people's behavior through environmental tweaks. We then discuss effective altruism and its several flavors, and if we should eliminate all suffering. In the latter part of the interview, we talk about some specific subjects, like veganism, human enhancement, and euthanasia. Toward the end, we also discuss moral foundations theory, and if it should influence the way people do moral philosophy. -- Follow Dr. Singer's work: Website: https://bit.ly/2CxGqpS Faculty page (Princeton): https://bit.ly/2Jh9fdA Faculty page (Melbourne): https://bit.ly/2XttGv3 Books on Amazon: https://amzn.to/2Llq3CL Twitter handle: @PeterSinger -- A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS: KARIN LIETZCKE, ANN BLANCHETTE, SCIMED, PER HELGE HAAKSTD LARSEN, LAU GUERREIRO, RUI BELEZA, MIGUEL ESTRADA, ANTÓNIO CUNHA, CHANTEL GELINAS, JERRY MULLER, FRANCIS FORD, HANS FREDRIK SUNDE, BRIAN RIVERA, ADRIANO ANDRADE, YEVHEN BODRENKO, SERGIU CODREANU, ADAM BJERRE, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, AIRES ALMEIDA, BERNARDO SEIXAS, HERBERT GINTIS, RUTGER VOS, AND RICARDO VLADIMIRO! A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, ROSEY, AND JIM FRANK!

Photo: (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais) A release sent out this morning says that the city has got its contractor and two different asphalt experts ready to start repaving the Red Hill later this month. Guest: John-Paul Danko, Hamilton City Councillor, Ward 8. In an op-ed, a former MPP and Ontario cabinet minister has called out the budget by the Ontario government saying that it will change the province for generations. Guest: John Milloy, former Ontario Cabinet Minister, practitioner-in-residence in Laurier's Political Science department and assistant professor of public ethics and co-director for the Centre for Public Ethics at Waterloo Lutheran Seminary. A former U.S .Ambassador says that the U.S. President has ‘messed up the clock' on USMCA when it came to getting it ratified and it may now die. Guest: Marvin Ryder. Business Professor, DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University.

Photo: (Global News) The Prime Minister has threatened the leader of the Opposition with a libel suit. In a letter from Trudeau's lawyer says they took issue with ‘inappropriate comments' made in a statement from the Conservative leader in regards to new documents in regards to the JWR case. Guest: Peter Graefe. Professor of Political Science, McMaster University. With budget coming this week, an overarching theme seems to be cuts. What kind of budget could we expect? Guest: John Milloy, former Ontario Cabinet Minister, practitioner-in-residence in Laurier's Political Science department and assistant professor of public ethics and co-director for the Centre for Public Ethics at Waterloo Lutheran Seminary. According to a report released by People for Education, just 5% of students per high school are enrolled currently in online courses, and that some have trouble learning without structure. Guest: Annie Kidder. Executive Director, People for Education.

Emails obtained by Global News appear to show that Ontario's Ministry of ChildrenCommunity and Social Services had directed autism support service providers to stop contacting families of children with autism. In one email, a manager with Kerry's Place Autism Services said “As of this afternoon, we have been asked to pause on making calls to families regarding DSO or DGO services until further notice.”Guest: Bruce McIntosh, PC staffer who quit in regards to the changes to the province's Autism program-With the SNC Lavalin affair continuing on, should the PMO's office be reformed?Guest: John Milloy, former Ontario Cabinet Minister, practitioner-in-residence in Laurier's Political Science department and assistant professor of public ethics and co-director for the Centre for Public Ethics at Martin Luther University College-Byelections are being held today in several cities and one of the most important ones is the Burnaby South race where NDP leader Jagmeet Singh is trying to win a seat. If he loses, what does that spell for his run as leader? Could he be ousted right before an election?Guest: Genevieve Tellier, Professor, School of Political Studies, University of Ottawa

How does Christianity create a public faith?

Photo: (THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld) Just before the deadline last night, the U.S. and Canada came to a new trade deal. Now there will be a trilateral agreement between the two and Mexico entitled USMCA.Guest: Mike LeCouteur, Ottawa Correspondent Global News. How will the new trade deal affect Canadians? Is it any different from the old deal? Guest: Marvin Ryder. Business Professor, DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University. The Interim Liberal Party Leader for Ontario has said that the province made the right choice in voting them out. Guest: Christo Aivalis, Social Sciences and humanities Research Council Postdoctoral Fellow in History at the University of Toronto 613-929-4550 Guest: John Milloy, former MPP and provincial Liberal Cabinet Minister, Director of the Centre for Public Ethics at Martin Luther University College and practitioner in residence in the Department of Political Science at Wilfrid Laurier University. 

Photo: (THE CANADIAN PRESS/Christopher Katsarov) The Interim Liberal Party Leader for Ontario has said that the province made the right choice in voting them out. Guest: Christo Aivalis, Social Sciences and humanities Research Council Postdoctoral Fellow in History at the University of Toronto 613-929-4550 Guest: John Milloy, former MPP and provincial Liberal Cabinet Minister, Director of the Centre for Public Ethics at Martin Luther University College and practitioner in residence in the Department of Political Science at Wilfrid Laurier University. 

Professor Clive Hamilton talks to Miranda Devine about the emerging threat of China in the Pacific region.  See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

See http://www.president.ie/en/diary/details/president-visits-the-ucd-centre-for-ethics-in-public-life President Higgins delivered the keynote address at UCD’s Centre for Public Ethics. In the speech, President Higgins welcomed the creation of the Centre for Public Ethics, and called for more analysis and critical reflection in classrooms, in the media and in public debate.

In light of all the violence, racism, and political tensions, how should the Christian respond? How should the church body behave in the public square? 

Please Support The Show With a Donation   This week we talk to Peter Singer Peter Albert David Singer, is an Australian moral philosopher. He is the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University and a Laureate Professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne. He specializes in applied ethics and approaches ethical issues from a secular, utilitarian perspective. He is known in particular for his book Animal Liberation, in which he argues in favor of vegetarianism, and his essay Famine, Affluence, and Morality, in which he argues in favor of donating to help the global poor. For most of his career, he was a preference utilitarian, but he announced in The Point of View of the Universe that he had become a hedonistic utilitarian. On two occasions, Singer served as chair of the philosophy department at Monash University, where he founded its Centre for Human Bioethics. In 1996 he stood unsuccessfully as a Greens candidate for the Australian Senate. In 2004 Singer was recognized as the Australian Humanist of the Year by the Council of Australian Humanist Societies, and in 2006 he was voted one of Australia's ten most influential public intellectuals. Singer is a cofounder of Animals Australia and the founder of The Life You Can Save. In This Interview, Peter Singer and I Discuss... His book, Ethics and the Real World: 82 Brief Essays on Things That Matter How he's widely considered the most famous living philosopher Utilitarian philosophy The importance of preventing unnecessary suffering How the world is better today than it's ever been The reasons why we don't donate to help save children across the world Where to find highly vetted charity organizations to donate to How we've evolved to respond to help the person right in front of us but not yet to respond to someone who needs help on the other side of the world The science of measuring happiness Which is a better, more important question: asking people if they're satisfied with their lives or enjoying their lives moment to moment Reducing unavoidable suffering vs. making people happier The link between happiness and money at various levels of society The importance of living in accordance with your values The importance of believing that your life has some purpose Personal identity or the idea of self The public good as a value and then individual liberty as another value Physician-assisted suicide His views on animal rights The value of starting new things later in life and taking on things you may not be great at     Please Support The Show with a Donation   It also often features different animals, mainly two dogs.

tbs eFM Highlights Interview with Peter Singer tbs eFM This Morning interviews the legend, Peter Singer 2016.9.29 [Bringing and Bearing the Moral Law] Peter Singer is a philosophy Professor at Princeton University and considered controversial for not shying away from today's tough issues, from abortion to burkinis. Hear what he has to say on This Morning. Now, influential, controversial, practical, some words to describe the philosopher Peter Singer who's pioneered discussions in the world of ethics on very sensitive topics from coming to the rescue of children in peril to abortion, from animal rights to global poverty. To celebrate our new fall or autumn season at tbs eFM, we can now bring in professor Singer. Good morning to you from Seoul. -Good morning, good to talk to you. Wonderful to have you on the line. Just a quick bit of background, you are a professor of bioethics at Princeton University in the United States, laureate professor at the Center for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne Australia, and your books include ‘Animal Liberation' and ‘The Most Good You Can Do'. And that's keeping it brief, so it's a great honor to have you on the line with us. I mean, this book, ‘The Most Good You Can Do' the title in itself sends a clear message to us, doesn't it? That we should perhaps be doing what we can to help others? -Yes, certainly. But not only just something to help others, but whatever we are doing to help others, whether it's giving our time or our money, that we should be thinking about will it be doing the most good we can? Because there are many different choices that we face and some of them are much better than others, and very often people just make emotional choices on this without a lot of thought. I'm arguing we should combine the head and the heart to make sure that we do the most good that we can. Now it I may venture just a little into the way of philosophy, why should we help others? I'm sure many of us do have the urge to do so, but why? -Well, I think one way of looking at it would be to say that other people are like us in a very important way and that is that their lives can go well or badly, and if we look at the world as the whole, if we detach ourselves a little from our own interests, I think we can see from that larger perspective we should be caring about the welfare of others as well as ourselves. We are not that different from others and if we think that our pain is a bad thing, that our suffering is a bad thing and conversely that it is a good thing when we are happy, then I think it's very hard for us to deny that the pain of others is a bad thing and the happiness of others is a good thing. No doubt, but for example, some of us will have a religion, have a divine belief that will help us along with that, help us solidify this need to help others, perhaps knowing or suspecting that there will be some sort of retribution if we are not as good as we can be or at least if we are evil, that there could be very negative effects. For those who have no such belief system, as long as things are going well for them, how can they rationally turn around and not help others? -I mean I don't have the kind of belief system that you mentioned. I think that we can do this simply on the basis of using our reason to see that we are one person among others, and that if we care about our own wellbeing, then to not care about the wellbeing of others, especially when we can quite easily make a big difference to their well being at either no cost or a very modest cost to ourselves. But that's just a kind of a bias, just as we reject biases on the grounds of race or sex or something like that. I don't think we should say this is me and that's you or that's them. I don't think that that's a good enough reason for saying their welfare doesn't count. And again, that scenario we could probably devote a long time to, but it's interesting to hear your thoughts on it. Another area, for example that you've urged people to help children when you are able to help them, but by the same token, you do not oppose abortion, as somebody who has several children myself, I think, imagine if we had gone down the abortion route, this lovely child of mine would never exist today. How do you square that? -Well, I mean it's true that that child would never exist, equally that child would never have existed if you had not had sex in the particular occasion when that child was conceived. You might have had sex on a different occasion and a different child might have been conceived. Just as if a pregnancy had been at an inconvenient time, you might have not had that child but you might have later on had another child, perhaps just as many children as you now have. So I mean to me the point is that, when you have an abortion, you end a life before it's really got going from the subjective point of view of that life, that is there is no being who is aware of it's own life, who wants to go on living, who has plans. In fact, for the overwhelming majority of abortions there isn't even a being who can feel pain; the brain is not developed enough for a sense of pain. So I see that as a stage at which it is ethically acceptable to decide that that life has not begun well, it has not begun at a convenient time and that it doesn't have to continue at that point. Once you have a being who has all those capacities, who is more aware of their own life, then you have a very different sort of situation, and that's the point at which I think you do want to protect life and save life and especially of course if the baby is a cherished one whose parents love and care for that baby. And if that baby then dies from some preventable cause, let's say malaria, that's a tragedy, both for the child and for the parents. And if a relatively modest donation to the Against Malaria Foundation for example would have enabled that child to be protected by a bed net and not to get malaria, not to die, that would have been money very well spent. I mean, self-awareness is a controversial issue, but one might argue that even a newborn has very little self-awareness compared with an embryo. -Well one might, certainly, and one might therefore argue that the death of a newborn is not the same as the death of an older child. Of course it may still be a tragedy for the parents who want that child, but I don't, you know, perhaps for legal purposes we need to have a clear line and birth is the line that is mostly used. But that's not the case in all cultures. Some cultures have had some ceremony at some stage after birth to accept the child into the community, and I think there's some area there, there's some margin where you could say that decision is a tolerable one because there isn't a life in the same sense as there is later on. Yeah. And I just want to clarify for the record, when we speak of existence before, that in itself is a whole area that would warrant further discussion, but professor Singer, one thing that is already coming out in this discussion is that you don't shy away from sensitive topics. In fact, we can bring you into the sphere of current affairs, because you have weighed in on the whole burkini argument, this idea of Muslim women being able to wear certain clothes, whatever they want really when they go to the beach. It's a discussion that has gone from France to Australia and beyond, what are your thoughts, can you clarify them for us? -Yes, I think that we should not try to prevent people from, women in this case, from participating in all areas of life on the grounds that they may have certain beliefs that they don't want to go out in public with certain parts of their body uncovered. And if we have a law that says you can't wear this garment known as a burkini on the beach, which is a kind of a swimsuit that is designed to cover the parts of a woman's body that according to her religion she believes she may not display in public, then you affectively are preventing her from going to the beach. And I think that that's a penalty that we ought not to impose. The burkini actually developed in Australia, which is where I'm from originally, precisely because an immigrant from a Muslim background felt that it was a pity that girls could not participate in Australia's beach culture. It's important to Australians in the summer that the beach is a place where you socialize with your friends, where kids play. If Muslim girls are excluded from that, then that's going to create a lack of integration in society. And if we want different groups with different cultures and different beliefs to actually integrate and come together in the community, it's a mistake to say you have to expose the same parts of you body as other people from different religions or no religions. Yes. -I don't see why we should enforce that. Well, it was your article on this that drew you today to our attention, but of course you are renowned in the world of philosophy and its been fascinating to look at your work, it's a shame we don't have more time to go through some of that. One quick not on the burkini, of course in Australia you also have some swimsuits to protect from the sun that aren't so different, don't you? Which gives us some pause for thought. -Absolutely, because we are worried about skin cancer and a lot of kids who are not Muslims cover up as well. And rightly so. Thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us. -Good. Your welcome. Thank you. As I said, renowned professor Peter Singer joining us on the line. You can have your say right now on this topic, on any of those topics we've discussed there and more, pound or sharp 1013 for 50 won per message, you can tweet us @efmthismorning.

​Kevin Burkett joins Daniel to discuss the aftermath of Trump's win, the biblical basis of government, and the crisis of free speech in America. On the issue of free speech, Kevin and Daniel drill into the moral commitments that inform the social Left and the new libertarian insurgency that is challenging it.

With the threat of climate change and damage to other elements of the biosphere, we may be in the process of creating a world where human existence is marginalised and modern civilisation is crushed. Even if we manage to cling to the more hospitable corners of this grave new world, nuclear war, bioterrorism or malicious use of nanotechnology or artificial intelligence could render human beings extinct. From the point of view of the universe, human existence doesn’t matter. Are we doomed to come round to this perspective ourselves, or will we inevitably cling to our human-centred picture of world?Rebecca Newberger Goldstein received her doctorate in philosophy from Princeton University. Her award-winning books include the novels The Mind-Body Problem and 36 Arguments for the Existence of God: A work of fiction, and her latest nonfiction effort, Plato at the Googleplex.Francesca Minerva is a philosopher and medical/bio ethicist. She is currently the Deputy Director of CAPPE Melbourne (Centre of Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics).Huw Price is the Bertrand Russell Professor of Philosophy at Cambridge University and co-founder of the Centre for Study of Existential Risk.

Governments and society are increasingly reliant on cyber systems. That reliance makes us vulnerable to cyber attacks, which can have powerful impacts on people's lives. Because of this, in liberal democratic societies governments have a duty to ensure cybersecurity in order to protect their citizens and, arguably, the people of other nations. But as recent events following the revelations of Edward Snowden have demonstrated, there is a risk that their pursuit of cybersecurity might overstep the mark and subvert the fundamental right to privacy. In this NSC seminar, the presenters will demonstrate that managing the risks of cybersecurity involves trade-offs: between security and privacy; individual rights and the good of a society; and between the types of burdens placed on particular groups in order to protect others. These trade-offs are often ethical in nature, involving questions of how we act, what values we should aim to promote, and what means of anticipating and responding to the risks are reasonably -- and publicly -- justifiable. Associate Professor Mick Keelty is an Adjunct Professor at the Australian Graduate School of Policing and Security, CSU in canberra. He was commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) from 2001 to 2009. He served two terms as AFP commissioner and has thirty five years of policing experience at local, national and international levels. Dr Adam Henschke works in the areas of ethics and cybersecurity. He is a Research Fellow at the National Security College, Australian National University, a Research Associate with the Centre of Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, CSU Canberra, and was recently a Visiting Assistant Professor in the Department of Politics and Public Administration, University of Hong Kong. He co-edited The Routledge Handbook of Ethics and War and is currently co-editing a book on the ethics of cyber warfare. Mr Shannon Brandt Ford is a Lecturer in Intelligence and Security Studies with the Australian Graduate School of Policing and Security, CSU Canberra. He spent ten years as a Defence Strategist and Intelligence Analyst, and has taught at the Australian National University, the Australian Defence Force Academy (University of NSW) and the Australian Defence College. Mr Ford was the Chief Investigator on a recent National Security College funded research project on the ethics of cybersecurity.

Paper given by Robbie Arrell (Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, University of Melbourne). Special relationships generate associative duties that exhibit robustness across change. It seems insufficient for friendship, for example, if I am only disposed to fulfil associative duties towards you as things stand here and now. However, robustness is not required across all variations. Were you to become monstrously cruel towards me, we might expect that my associative duties towards you would not be robust across that kind of change. The question then is this: is there any principled way of distinguishing those variations that require robustness of the disposition to fulfil associative duties from those that don’t? In this paper I suggest a way of answering this question that draws on the distinction between how things have value, and how we value things – a distinction that is central to the broader account of the sources and generation of associative duties that I propose.

Professor Clive Hamilton delivers a critique of the consequentialist approach to the ethics of geoengineering, the approach that deploys assessment of costs and benefits in a risk framework to justify climatic intervention. Professor Hamilton argues that there is a strong case for preferring the natural, and that the unique and highly threatening character of global warming renders the standard approach to the ethics of climate change unsustainable. Moreover, the unstated metaphysical assumption of conventional ethical, economic and policy thinking - modernity's idea of the autonomous human subject analysing and acting on an inert external world - is the basis for the kind of "technological thinking" that lies at the heart of the climate crisis. Technological thinking both projects a systems framework onto the natural world and frames it as a catalogue of resources for the benefit of humans. Recent discoveries by Earth system science itself - the arrival of the Anthropocene, the prevalence of non-linearities, and the deep complexity of the earth's processes - hint at the inborn flaws in this kind of thinking. The grip of technological thinking explains why it has been so difficult for us to heed the warnings of climate science and why the idea of using technology to take control of the earth's atmosphere is immediately appealing. Professor Clive Hamilton is a Visiting Academic, Department of Philosophy, and Senior Visiting Research Associate, Oxford University Centre for the Environment. He is Professor of Public Ethics at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics (CAPPE) and holds the newly created Vice-Chancellor's Chair at Charles Sturt University, Australia. He was the Founder and for 14 years the Executive Director of The Australia Institute, a public interest think tank. He is well known in Australia as a public intellectual and for his contributions to public policy debate. His extensive publications include writings on climate change policy, overconsumption, welfare policy and the effects of commercialisation. Recent publications include The Freedom Paradox: Towards a post-secular ethics and Requiem for a Species: Why we resist the truth about climate change.

Leopold for the 21st Century: What Would He Say to the Yale FES Class of 2009? Moderated by Mary Evelyn Tucker. Discussion by Sally Collins, Clive Hamilton, Wes Jackson, Bruce Jennings, Gene Likens and Melina Shannon DiPietro. The Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies hosted a Symposium on April 3rd, 2009 honoring the centennial of the graduation of Aldo Leopold from the school and his acclaimed contributions to environmental conservation. Leopold became a leading and radical voice in American conservation, launching his land ethic in his celebrated book, “A Sand County Almanac.” The day-long symposium appraised the Leopold legacy, examined his relevance today, and explored how his land ethic might be reformulated for the global environmental and social challenges of the 21st century. This is a recording of the final plenary: Leopold for the 21st Century: What Would He Say to the Yale FES Class of 2009? The discussion was moderated by Mary Evelyn Tucker, Senior Lecturer and Research Scholar at Yale and Co-Founder of the Forum on Religion and Ecology. Discussants were: Sally Collins, Director of Office of Ecosystem Services & Markets, U.S. Department of Agriculture; Clive Hamilton, author of “Growth Fetish” and co-author of “Affluenza,” and Charles Sturt Professor of Public Ethics, Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, Canberra, Australia; Wes Jackson, the Founder and President of the Land Institute and a MacArthur fellowship recipient; Bruce Jennings, Director of the Center for Humans and Nature in New York; Gene Likens, an ecologist and Founding Director and President Emeritus of the Institute of Ecosystem Studies; and Melina Shannon-DiPietro, Director of the Yale Sustainable Food Project.

Peter Singer has been called "the world’s most influential living philosopher," by The New Yorker and Time Magazine listed him in “The Time 100,” their annual listing of the world’s 100 most influential people. He is DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, and laureate professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, University of Melbourne. He writes a regular column for Free Inquiry magazine, and is the author of dozens of books, including Practical Ethics, Rethinking Life and Death, and Animal Liberation (which has sold more than a half million copies), Writings on an Ethical Life, One World: Ethics and Globalization, The President of Good and Evil (about George W. Bush), and The Way We Eat. His most recent book is The Life You Can Save: Acting Now To End World Poverty. In this conversation with D.J. Grothe, Peter Singer details how twenty-six thousand children die each day of preventable diseases and poverty worldwide, and contrasts this toll with the public's moral outrage over the blackest days in our history, such as 9/11/2001. He talks about the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth regarding the poor, and questions why most Christians today have seemed not to make ending world poverty a priority, instead focusing on issues such as abortion and homosexuality, which are not mentioned by Jesus. Singer argues that when people in affluent societies value even small luxuries more highly than saving the lives of the world's poor, that it is morally equivalent to standing by when one could easily save someone from drowning. He says that "if you're not doing something serious to end world poverty, that you're not living an ethical life." He suggests that much philanthropy, such as charitable giving to the arts, should be less of a priority than fighting world poverty. He recommends various aid organizations that merit financial support, such as Oxfam International, and highlights GiveWell, whose purpose is to evaluate the effectiveness of other aid organizations. He suggests that it is often more efficient for private organizations to administer aid than it is for governments to provide poverty relief. He argues against various challenges to his position: that giving to the poor may foster their dependence, that charity should begin at home, that the poor deserve their lot, and that our lack of concern about the world's poor may be a natural function of our evolved human nature to care primarily about our own kin. He argues that while his ethics is informed by the worldview based in the sciences and Darwinism, that it is not derived from Darwinism, and he argues against "Social Darwinism," and "the survival of the fittest." He explores the strategic implications that the demanding nature of his ethics has for its more widespread adoption in society. He talks about the meaning and sense of purpose that fighting to end world poverty may create in one's life. And he expresses the hope that skeptical and nonreligious people will become more motivated to fight world poverty, even without religious incentives, and that they will become part of a new culture of giving.

One of the most controversial and influential philosophers alive today, Peter Singer is DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, and laureate professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, University of Melbourne. He writes a regular column for Free Inquiry magazine, and is the author of dozens of books, including Practical Ethics, Rethinking Life and Death, Animal Liberation, and Writings on an Ethical Life. In this discussion with D.J. Grothe, Peter Singer defends vegetarianism, arguing that we should give equal consideration to all "beings who have interests." He draws ethical distinctions between human fetuses and animals, such as dogs and cats. He argues against "dominionism," which is the idea that humanity is special, and that other animals were made by God for humanity's benefit. He attacks "speciesism," and explains why he did not sign the Humanist Manifesto 2000. He describes factory farming, and the commercial imperatives that he says cause animals to be treated as mere property. He talks about the decision to become a vegetarian, and what keeps secularists and scientists from making the decision, in terms of the question he posed to Richard Dawkins at a recent Center for Inquiry conference. And he considers how working with the religious may advance vegetarianism in society.

One of the most controversial and influential philosophers alive today, Peter Singer is DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, and laureate professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, University of Melbourne. He writes a regular column for Free Inquiry magazine, and is the author of dozens of books, including Practical Ethics, Rethinking Life and Death, Animal Liberation, and Writings on an Ethical Life. In this conversation with D.J. Grothe, Peter Singer explores how controversial or compatible his views are with religious thought and in what sense his ethics is informed by a naturalistic or Darwinian understanding of the origins of life. He discusses the value of human life as regards end-of-life questions such as doctor-assisted suicide, and offers justification for the involuntary euthanasia of severely disabled infants. He details what it means to be genuinely "pro-life." And he shares his views on stem cell research and abortion, arguing how that even though abortion is killing a human life, it is not unethical. He also explains what qualities of life would make killing it unethical.

Peter Singer has been called "the world's most influential living philosopher," by The New Yorker and Time Magazine listed him in "The Time 100," their annual listing of the world's 100 most influential people. One of the most controversial philosophers alive today, he is DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, and laureate professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, University of Melbourne. He has been recognized as the Australian Humanist of the Year by the Council of Australian Humanist Societies, and is a Humanist Laureate of the International Academy of Humanism. He writes a regular column for Free Inquiry magazine, and is the author of dozens of books, including Practical Ethics, Rethinking Life and Death, and Animal Liberation, which has sold more than a half million copies, Writings on an Ethical Life, One World: Ethics and Globalization, The President of Good and Evil, about George Bush, and In Defense of Animals. His most recent book, which is written with Jim Mason, is The Way We Eat: Why Our Food Choices Matter. In this wide-ranging conversation with D.J. Grothe, Peter Singer discusses The Way We Eat and the ethics of vegetarianism, topics in bioethics such as abortion and euthanasia, and what world poverty may demand from citizens in developed nations. He addresses common challenges to his robust system of secular ethics, and explores other implications of utilitarianism. He also considers reasons why people should be moral even if there is no God.