Author: Colin Turfus

Colin Turfus is a quantitative risk manager with 16 years experience in investment banking. He has a PhD in applied mathematics from Cambridge University and has published research in fluid dynamics, astronomy and quantitative finance.

On Ends and Means

A perennial question in philosophy is whether the end can be said to justify the means. The philosopher whose name is most associated with the advocacy of this idea is Niccolò Machiavelli, a 16th century diplomat and government official of the Florentine Republic, best known for his writing about political philosophy. The fact that the… Continue reading On Ends and Means

Donald Trump, High Prophet of Neoiconoclasm

One thing that both Trump’s critics and his supporters can probably agree on is his being the cause of a major reconfiguring of the world order as he calls time on a plethora of US and global institutions. But is it the case that these changes are a consequence mainly of his agency? Or is he merely uncovering fault lines which have existed for some time?

The Diversity Deficit in the Moral Sphere

This is a presentation made at the 5th ICHJA conference in Korea. We argue that an important first step in the pushback against cultural socialist hegemony is in recognizing and publicizing the ways in which it is being exercised and in understanding the contours of the contemporary moral landscape which facilitate the hegemony. There needs… Continue reading The Diversity Deficit in the Moral Sphere

Blessed Are the Equity-Deserving

We trace the origins of the concept of equity in the promotion of social justice in Canada. Rather than preventing denial of opportunities and benefits it has entrenched the same through the designation of “disadvantaged” groups whose members are deemed “equity-deserving”, in contrast to the others who are not. The UK should learn from the backlash this is generating in Canada.

The Decline of Virtue

It was observed by Haidt (2012) based on his moral foundations theory that the difference in perspective between liberals and conservatives is not so much in the values they espouse as in the weights they assign to them, with liberals in particular citing the embodiment of care (kindness) as the overriding moral imperative at the… Continue reading The Decline of Virtue

Beyond the Culture Wars – An Enactivist Approach

To understand the Culture Wars which characterise much of what passes for political debate in Anglophone countries these days, it is important to understand their roots in identity politics, defined as political or social activity by or on behalf of a racial, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender, or other group, usually undertaken with the goal of… Continue reading Beyond the Culture Wars – An Enactivist Approach

On Stereotyping, Part 2 – Should stereotyping be considered harmful?

Designed by freepik

In Part 1 of this article where I asked Is it OK to stereotype people?, I pointed out how modern cognitive science, understood in particular in terms of the paradigm of Active Inference, leads us to conclude that stereotyping is intrinsic to all observing, understanding and learning. So any attempt to stigmatise people for engaging… Continue reading On Stereotyping, Part 2 – Should stereotyping be considered harmful?

On Stereotyping, Part 1 – Is it OK to stereotype people?

Spitting Image Productions/ITV

It is a commonplace assumption that stereotyping people is a bad thing which we should do our utmost to avoid. Perhaps this is a position you would agree with, on the grounds that it is wrong to make generalisations since this can result in us misjudging people and potentially treating them unfairly. But I would… Continue reading On Stereotyping, Part 1 – Is it OK to stereotype people?

“Know Thyself” Is the Beginning of Science.

Scientists should understand themselves as both learners and active creators of knowledge, according to a recent research paper on “Distributed Science: The Scientific Process as Multi-Scale Active Inference.” The study disputes the traditional inductive scientific method and suggests a Bayesian model, whereby multiple theories are weighed side by side for plausibility. The model also factors in the role of personal and community-wide interests affecting scientific advancement. Caution is called for when interpreting science-based policies, since scientific understanding is always evolving.