>wins $1m Berggruen prize for philosophy yesterday
>wins $600000 Holberg Prize for outstanding researcher in the arts and humanities in march
Who is Onora O’Neill?
Can she be a meemee like peterson and zizek?
she's made more bank than winners of nobel prizes. She must be good
I have a feeling this was a political choice.
This. As a women she is simply inferior to us as white rational and logical men. Just another day in a cultural marxist world of white genocide
O'Neill has written widely on political philosophy and ethics, international justice, bioethics and the philosophy of Immanuel Kant.
Across various works, O'Neill has defended and applied a constructivist interpretation of Kantian ethics heavily influenced by, and yet critical of, the work of John Rawls, emphasising the importance of trust, consent and respect for autonomy in a just society. She has written extensively about trust, noting "that people often choose to rely on the very people whom they claimed not to trust" and suggesting that we "need to free professionals and the public service to serve the public...to work towards more intelligent forms of accountability...[and] to rethink a media culture in which spreading suspicion has become a routine activity"
I dunno. she seems like a heavyweight.
why does Veeky Forums get stuck discussing the meme philosophers instead of the relevant ones?
>she's a Kantian
Oh boy, this is gonna be good.
fuck that.
Kant's too complicated
>kantian ethics
you cannot be sincere
It seems like much of her "work" is focused on the idea of "trust" (which seems to me dismally boring and borderline useless). I just watched a TED talk she gave and it seems like she can't wrap her aged head around what could possibly be causing society to see a decline in trust when I could, in half a second, point to the research indicating a decline in communal trust/cohesion as you introduce more and more diversity into that community.
Oh well. Some withered bimbo with Labrador brains gets millions of dollars, a seat in the House of Lords, and the world keeps spinning.
>emphasising the importance of trust, consent
spotted the retard leftist
embarrassing
>heavyweight.
>a worthless whore
>Veeky Forums trying to read kant without getting breast-fed by wikipedia, yootoob, academic lecturers or secondary sources.
>Harvard grad
>knew Rawls
>probably knows my girl Korsgaard
>Kantian ethics
She's definitely not /pol/ material, so find a new lady guys
>he thinks Kants broad and comprehensive moral theories map onto contemporary levt V right paradigms.
Too obvious. Try more subtle bait next time.
My initial thoughts also. But then
"Many of Onora O’Neill’s numerous books have had profound significance for the major public issues of our time:
• Faces of Hunger (1986) developed a Kantian approach to questions of international distributive justice and clarified moral obligation to those suffering famine.
• Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics (2002) challenged prevailing explanations of informed consent in medicine, showed that the Kantian notion of principled autonomy provided a better account of the wrongness of coercion and deception, and led to new articulations of the rights of patients and research subjects.
• The Bounds of Justice (2000) rejected the idea that the boundaries of nations set the bounds of our political and economic obligations, and argued influentially that national borders, too, must meet standards of justice; a project continued in
• Justice Across Boundaries: Whose Obligations (2016), which argued that we need to ensure that international human rights are secured by identifying groups, including states and other agencies, that have the obligation of protecting them.
• A Question of Trust (2002), which originated as O’Neill’s Reith Lectures, distinguished between trust and trustworthiness in ways now important to debates on the political and other implications of new media."
>philosophyandculture.berggruen.org
>spotted the retard leftist
spotted the retard who can't discern quoted text when it's not green
>the right winger can't read. Sad
>introduce more and more diversity into that community.
I think the widening of the gini coefficient has a far greater correlation to trust in public authorities than your thinly veiled multi-culturism critique....bearing in mind she was more concerned with trust in public authorities like politicians, academics etc.
increased disparities in wealth goes hand in hand with high-level corruption.....which can include unhelpful immigration policies being imposed to the detriment of a nation's population. Immigration, to the benefit of large multi-national corporations is a secondary symptom, if you will.
disregard this . i suck cocks
ivory tower fags sucking on eachothers cuntflaps with no real world consequences as always
>argumentum ad populum
>appealing to bourgeois bookclub authority
reading is for fags
ye
so she is a good old liberal
nothanks
Hmm I (((wonder))) why she's so successful
Looks like she also won one earlier this year.
dailynous.com
She's an aristocrat with Jews throwing millions at her, must be for something other than her 'work'.
Really, though - what's the point in throwing 1.5 million dollars at some 76 year old Baroness?
to recognise a lifetime of dedication to philosophy
Wew, the withering critiques in this thread. Someone call the committee, they may need to issue a retraction.
I haven't read a single world written by her but judging from the reactions in this thread I'd say she's probably good.
an elaborate money laundering scheme.
Looks like she's an actual philosopher who has spent he majority of her fruitful philosophical career talking about philosophy. What a bitch!
Kant is a horrible read desu
^
God forbid anyone usurp our lord and savior Peterson
this is lefty vs. righty essentially boiling down to:
1. this country no longer shares a common cultural ground
2. this country is no longer fair w/r/t the distribution of money
What if you guys were both right?
N A Z B O L
A
Z
B
O
L
God she's boring. Took one look at this bitches face and thought," Moralizing granny concerned with only micro-issues at best" And low and behold that's exactly what this 'philosopher' is. Seems like she can't even understand the utility of trust and thinks it needs to be distributed to everyone, with the same level of scrutiny and equality you would give out Halloween candy.
hegel is a fuk
>consent
>leftist
if consent isnt an issue for you then taxation isnt theft, state surveillance is nothing to worry about, habeas corpus is a luxury... may as well just gut due process entirely.