Skip to main content

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Skip banner

Web Content Display Web Content Display

INCET logo

Web Content Display Web Content Display

BIOUNCERTAINTY - ERC Starting Grant no. 805498

ERC logo

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Web Content Display Web Content Display

The goal of the Interdisciplinary Centre for Ethics (INCET) at the Jagiellonian University is to encourage and support research activities in philosophy and ethics, in particular research on the classic bioethical dilemmas (e.g. reproductive or end-of-life decisions, organ transplantation, clinical decision making) and on topics that emerge from recent technological, social, and scientific developments (e.g. regulating scientific research, genetic engineering, human enhancement, new healthcare and reproductive technologies, evidence based medicine, preventive medicine, big data, artificial intelligence, algorithmic decision-making). See more information about INCET

 

Web Content Display Web Content Display

News

7th of March 2024 – Maciej Próchnicki – The Robin Hood effect: The effect of income on perceived fairness of mutual compensation in tort damages
seminar

7th of March 2024 – Maciej Próchnicki – The Robin Hood effect: The effect of income on perceived fairness of mutual compensation in tort damages

Interdisciplinary Centre for Ethics UJ (INCET) invites for its next research seminar entitled "The Robin Hood effect: The effect of income on perceived fairness of mutual compensation in tort damages" by Maciej Próchnicki. The meeting takes place on the 7th of March 2024 r. 5:30, Grodzkiej 52, room 25, Kraków and via Teams
29th of February 2024 – Vilius Dranseika – What Does Bioethics Engage With? A Case Study in Citation Analysis
seminar

29th of February 2024 – Vilius Dranseika – What Does Bioethics Engage With? A Case Study in Citation Analysis

INCET invites for its next research seminar entitled "What Does Bioethics Engage With? A Case Study in Citation Analysis" by Vilius Dranseika. The meeting takes place on 29th of February at 5:30 p.m., room 25, Grodzka 52 and via MS Teams.
okładka czasopisma Diametros

"Diametros" - call for papers for a special issue

Diametros invites scholars and researchers to contribute to a special issue: "Bioethics meets political philosophy". The deadline is the 30th of April 2024.
22nd of February 2024 – Callum Macrae – Does Domination Require Unequal Power?
seminar

22nd of February 2024 – Callum Macrae – Does Domination Require Unequal Power?

INCET invites for its next research seminar entitled "Does Domination Require Unequal Power?" by Callum Macrae. The meeting takes place on 22nd of February at 5:30 p.m., room 25, Grodzka 52 and via MS Teams.
The fifth conference of the East European Network for Philosophy of Science, 9-10 September 2024: call for papers

The fifth conference of the East European Network for Philosophy of Science, 9-10 September 2024: call for papers

The East European Network for Philosophy of Science (EENPS), in co-operation with the Interdisciplinary Centre for Ethics, Jagiellonian University, announces the fifth conference of the East European Network for Philosophy of Science in Kraków to be held on September 9-10th 2024. The conference is fully in person. CFP deadline: 22nd February 2024
Call for Abstracts for the Wronging and Making Right: The Morality and Law of Remedial Practices conference (17-19 June 2024)

Call for Abstracts for the Wronging and Making Right: The Morality and Law of Remedial Practices conference (17-19 June 2024)

We are accepting submissions for the upcoming Wronging and Making Right: The Morality and Law of Remedial Practices conference which is going to be held on June 17-19th 2024 at the Jagiellonian University in Kraków. The deadline for CFA is set for 1st of March 2023
1st of Ferbuary 2024 – Christoph Merdes – Christoph Merdes: Rational Injustice, Irrational Justice?
seminar

1st of Ferbuary 2024 – Christoph Merdes – Christoph Merdes: Rational Injustice, Irrational Justice?

We have the pleasure to invite you to another research seminar. Christoph Merdes is going to give a talk: "Rational Injustice, Irrational Justice?”. The seminar will take place on the 1st of February at 5:30 p.m. in the room 25 on Grodzka Street and via MS Teams.
View All

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Recent publications

The Precautionary Principle and Expert Disagreement - a new paper by Lee Elkin

The Precautionary Principle and Expert Disagreement - a new paper by Lee Elkin

The Precautionary Principle is typically construed as a conservative decision rule aimed at preventing harm. But Martin Peterson has argued that the principle is better understood as an epistemic rule, guiding decision-makers in forming beliefs rather than choosing among possible acts. On the epistemic view, he claims there is a principle concerning expert disagreement underlying precautionary-based reasoning called the ecumenical principle.
Are There Cross-Cultural Legal Principles? Modal Reasoning Uncovers Procedural Constraints on Law - a new publication co-authored by Piotr Bystranowski and Vilius Dranseika

Are There Cross-Cultural Legal Principles? Modal Reasoning Uncovers Procedural Constraints on Law - a new publication co-authored by Piotr Bystranowski and Vilius Dranseika

Despite pervasive variation in the content of laws, legal theorists and anthropologists have argued that laws share certain abstract features and even speculated that law may be a human universal. In the present report, we evaluate this thesis through an experiment administered in 11 different countries. Are there cross-cultural principles of law?
okładka czasopisma Semiotics of Law

Do Formalist Judges Abide By Their Abstract Principles? A Two-Country Study in Adjudication - a new publication co-authored by Piotr Bystranowski

Recent literature in experimental philosophy has postulated the existence of the abstract/concrete paradox (ACP): the tendency to activate inconsistent intuitions (and generate inconsistent judgment) depending on whether a problem to be analyzed is framed in abstract terms or is described as a concrete case. One recent study supports the thesis that this effect influences judicial decision-making (...)
okładka czasopisma Semiotics of Law

Resolving empirical controversies with mechanistic evidence - a new publication by Mariusz Maziarz

The results of econometric modeling are fragile in the sense that minor changes in estimation techniques or sample can lead to statistical models that support inconsistent causal hypotheses. The fragility of econometric results undermines making conclusive inferences from the empirical literature. I argue that the program of evidential pluralism, which originated in the context of medicine and encapsulates to the normative reading of the Russo-Williamson Thesis that causal claims need the support of both difference-making and mechanistic evidence (...)
okładka czasopisma Semiotics of Law

Can I Feel Your Pain? The Biological and Socio-Cognitive Factors Shaping People’s Empathy with Social Robots - a new article by Joanna Malinowska

This paper discuss the phenomenon of empathy in social robotics and is divided into three main parts. Initially, I analyse whether it is correct to use this concept to study and describe people’s reactions to robots. I present arguments in favour of the position that people actually do empathise with robots. I also consider what circumstances shape human empathy with these entities. I propose that two basic classes of such factors be distinguished: biological and socio-cognitive. (...)
okładka czasopisma Semiotics of Law

Conscience and the Burden Inquiry—What and Why Should be Investigated in Exemption Cases? - a new publication by Wojciech Ciszewski

The article focuses on a crucial segment of a discussion regarding the legitimacy of conscientious exemptions, namely the burden inquiry. I argue that the main justifications advanced for the incommensurable religious costs account and the subjective religious costs account do not stand up to critical scrutiny, and that the objective religious costs account is the most plausible position in this debate.
okładka czasopisma Semiotics of Law

Anchoring effect in legal decision-making: A meta-analysis - a new publication co-authored by Piotr Bystranowski

We conducted a meta-analysis to examine whether numeric decision-making in law is susceptible to the effect of (possibly arbitrary) values present in the decision contexts (anchoring effect) and to investigate which factors might moderate this effect.
okładka czasopisma American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience

Authenticity, Self-Defining Memories, and the Direction of Change - peer commentary by Vilius Dranseika in AJOB Neuroscience

Vilius Dranseika wrote an open peer commentary to Zawadzki and Adamczyk's target article: "Personality and Authenticity in Light of the Memory-Modifying Potential of Optogenetics". The article and commentaries were published in the new issue of AJOB Neuroscience.
okładka czasopisma American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience

Assessing the quality of evidence from epidemiological agent-based models for the COVID-19 pandemic - a new article by Mariusz Maziarz and Martin Zach

In this short paper we raise the issue of assessing the quality of evidence from epidemiological agent-based models with respect to the problem of confounding. The unprecedented spread of the novel coronavirus requires governments worldwide to make decisions regarding mitigation and suppression measures. Some of these decisions have been based on agent-based models (ABMs) (Adam 2020), which are an emerging group of epidemiological models that supplement the traditional compartmental models.
okładka czasopisma Revus

Tort liability without taking responsibility: A challenge to David Enoch’s idea of taking tort liability - a new article by Maciej Juzaszek

If someone denied the existence of resultant moral luck, s/he would probably argue that the no-fault compensation system is fairer than a standard account of tort liability. Agents are not responsible for the consequences and harms they cause but only for the risks they create. David Enoch recently argued that such an approach lacks personal liability taken on by agents. I believe that Enoch’s position is incoherent and taking responsibility is irrelevant for tort liability.
okładka czasopisma the British Journal of Aesthetics

A paper co-authored by Vilius Dranseika on the Oxford University Press 'Best of 2020' list!

A paper co-authored by Vilius Dranseika - a researcher in the BIOUNCERTAINTY project at the Interdisciplinary Centre for Ethics at the Jagiellonian University - has been proclaimed one of the three best articles published in The British Journal of Aesthetics in 2020. Congratulations!

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Our activities

Nested Portlets Nested Portlets

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Web Content Display Web Content Display

Web Content Display Web Content Display