Sitian Liu

This article reviews Peter Singer’s concept of Effective Altruism (EA) through the lens of care ethics and proposes a preliminary idea for their integration. Singer advocates for maximizing good through efficiency-driven moral practices, such as pursuing high-income careers to increase charitable donations or supporting interventions like farm animal welfare that promise significant measurable impact. However, from the perspective of care ethics (CE), this approach overlooks the importance of personal relationships and emotional bonds. Additionally, its outcome-oriented reasoning may lead to neglecting the most vulnerable groups, potentially sacrificing individual rights in favor of maximizing overall well-being. To ensure that EA evolves and remains relevant, especially in humanitarian work, integrating it with CE presents a promising path forward. By balancing EA’s focus on maximizing impact with CE’s emphasis on relational responsibility, contextual awareness, and emotional engagement, we can develop a more holistic ethical framework for humanitarian action. This integrated approach could also foster a more robust and equitable vision of global development and social justice, one that values both effective outcomes and the dignity and agency of those affected.

The widespread use of English in the field of philosophy facilitates international collaboration but may also pose significant challenges in understanding, analyzing, or producing information for both native (NES) and non-native English speakers (NNES). These challenges have not yet been systematically investigated. We conducted an international survey of philosophers (_N_ = 1,615), comparing NES and NNES, while controlling for their academic position (e.g., student, staff, etc.) and other relevant variables. Responses indicated that NNES needed up to twice as long as NES to read English articles and nearly twice as long to prepare English presentations. Additionally, even NNES with the highest English proficiency reported significantly more English manuscript rejections, greater avoidance of attending or asking questions at philosophy events in English, and more frequent feelings of ridicule for their English use. No statistically significant difference was observed in the reported time required to complete an English draft, but NNES tended to report shorter times, possibly reflecting greater reliance on external assistance to detect linguistic errors. Finally, while extensive use of English may help NNES overcome difficulties with English, 88% of NNES respondents reported that it also reduced their ability to discuss philosophy in their native language. This study provides the first systematic, quantitative evidence of English-related epistemic challenges that many NNES may face in philosophy, highlighting significant linguistic inequities.

The widespread use of English in the field of philosophy facilitates international collaboration but may also pose significant challenges in understanding, analyzing, or producing information for both native (NES) and non-native English speakers (NNES). These challenges have not yet been systematically investigated. We conducted an international survey of philosophers (N = 1,615), comparing NES and NNES, while controlling for their academic position (e.g., student, staff, etc.) and other relevant variables. Responses indicated that NNES needed up to twice as long as NES to read English articles and nearly twice as long to prepare English presentations. Additionally, even NNES with the highest English proficiency reported significantly more English manuscript rejections, greater avoidance of attending or asking questions at philosophy events in English, and more frequent feelings of ridicule for their English use. No statistically significant difference was observed in the reported time required to complete an English draft, but NNES tended to report shorter times, possibly reflecting greater reliance on external assistance to detect linguistic errors. Finally, while extensive use of English may help NNES overcome difficulties with English, 88% of NNES respondents reported that it also reduced their ability to discuss philosophy in their native language. This study provides the first systematic, quantitative evidence of English-related epistemic challenges that many NNES may face in philosophy, highlighting significant linguistic inequities.

Profiling, often perceived as an art rather than a science, has had its legitimacy as an epistemic tool in legal inquiry questioned due to critiques concerning the reliability of statistics and other investigative techniques employed in the profiling process. However, substantial evidence indicates that profiling effectively expedites investigations by examining facts and characteristics common to specific criminal activities, such as serial murder and drug trafficking. In this article, I present a novel defense of profiling's scientific validity in legal inquiries, emphasizing its crucial role in the judicial process of sexual crimes. Section 1 provides a concise introduction to profiling, laying the groundwork for the subsequent discussion. In Section 2, I argue that profiling should be recognized as a science by drawing on the epistemology of imagination and underscoring the scientific nature of its reasoning style, as well as the methodologies used to gather evidence for legal inquiries. Finally, Section 3 further substantiates the epistemological role of profiling by exploring the potential benefits of integrating bias in profiling from a feminist perspective. Through this analysis, I aim to highlight the significance and validity of profiling as an essential tool in contemporary legal inquiries.

Since the late 20th century, the gender gap in philosophy has received widespread attention from the academic community. Although research on this issue has made some initial progress in certain countries and has contributed to the implementation of relevant policies, gender gap in philosophy remains a global issue, particularly in East Asian countries. Therefore, further exploration of this topic remains necessary. This paper aims to establish a research agenda based on an analysis of existing studies to address the challenges and consequences of gender gap in philosophy. From a feminist perspective, I seek to explore the manifestations, roots, and impacts of gender gap, as well as various solutions, with a particular focus on ethics of care and intersectionality. By identifying the limitations of current research, I will also provide feasible suggestions for future studies to advance the in-depth exploration of gender equality in philosophy.