Project description
Investigating the 'veil of ignorance' to increase impartiality
Views rooted in bias or prejudice tend to influence individuals when discussing controversial social matters. Consequently, the challenge of enhancing impartiality has become crucial for humanity. The MSCA-funded IMPARTIAL project aims to explore the methodological suitability of a specific tool employed by philosophers to encourage impartial reasoning: the ‘veil of ignorance’ (VOI) thought experiment. This thought experiment seeks to eliminate knowledge regarding one's gender, race, income, and other morally irrelevant attributes that may distort judgment. The project will assess the extent to which irrelevant factors impact VOI reasoning, evaluate the effectiveness of such reasoning, and explore the philosophical implications arising from the results.
Objective
We are living in an age of increased moral disagreement and polarization. One explanation for this trend is partiality. People on one or both sides of contested social issue (abortion, COVID-19, climate change, etc.) do not give equal or adequate weight to the interests of all those concerned. Their views are based on bias or prejudice. Finding ways of increasing impartiality may therefore be one of the most important tasks that humanity currently faces. My project attempts to contribute to this task. In particular, I will investigate one particular device that philosophers have used to promote impartial reasoning, namely the so called “veil of ignorance” thought experiment — an attempt to abstract from knowledge about one’s gender, race, income and other morally irrelevant characteristics that might distort one’s judgments.
Previous research has only focused on people’s actual choices behind the veil of ignorance. My project, in contrast, will investigate the methodological appropriateness of this thought experiment. (1) How robust is the VOI (i.e. to what extent are the judgments people arrive at by engaging in the thought experiment influenced by irrelevant factors)? (2) How effective is the VOI (i.e. to what extent does it fulfill the function it was supposed to fulfill)? (3) What are the larger philosophical implications of these findings?
The framework that I will use in investigating these questions is that of experimental philosophy. That is, I will run empirical studies on people’s intuitions to inform philosophical argumentation. Being supervised by leading experts at the Universities of Tokyo (outgoing phase), Graz (return phase), Oxford (secondment) and Auckland (secondment), my research has the potential to significantly impact a number of debates in both philosophy and psychology — and hopefully, it can also make a small contribution to making morality more impartial in public discourse.
Fields of science (EuroSciVoc)
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
This project's classification has been validated by the project's team.
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
This project's classification has been validated by the project's team.
Programme(s)
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
-
HORIZON.1.2 - Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA)
MAIN PROGRAMME
See all projects funded under this programme
Topic(s)
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Funding Scheme
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
HORIZON-TMA-MSCA-PF-GF - HORIZON TMA MSCA Postdoctoral Fellowships - Global Fellowships
See all projects funded under this funding scheme
Call for proposal
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
(opens in new window) HORIZON-MSCA-2022-PF-01
See all projects funded under this callCoordinator
Net EU financial contribution. The sum of money that the participant receives, deducted by the EU contribution to its linked third party. It considers the distribution of the EU financial contribution between direct beneficiaries of the project and other types of participants, like third-party participants.
8010 GRAZ
Austria
The total costs incurred by this organisation to participate in the project, including direct and indirect costs. This amount is a subset of the overall project budget.