My research is primarily in epistemology, ethics, political philosophy, and the philosophy of law.
Much of my recent work has been attempting to answer the following broad questions: what do we aim for when we engage in inquiry, and why?
Recent projects within this topic have investigated:
- what is the role of curiosity in motivating inquiry? is curiosity important for how we evaluate inquirers?
- what is the nature of understanding? how does understanding relate to knowing?
- how do groups engage in collective inquiry? what does thinking about collective inquiry tell us about academic communities?
- is legal inquiry (e.g. in the courtroom) fundamentally different from other types of inquiry? what does the answer mean for how we should think about legal norms (e.g. evidence law)?
I’ve also been writing on a number of other questions, particularly looking at them from an epistemic perspective:
- what should we think about the different ‘burdens of proof’ we find in the legal system?
- how should philosophers respond to recent methodological critiques?
- what should political philosophers think about recent secession movements (e.g. in Scotland and Catalonia)?
- how important is the epistemic strength of someone’s belief-set for determining the moral worth of their actions?