#Home - Interdyscyplinarne Centrum Etyki (INCET)
BIOUNCERTAINTY - ERC Starting Grant no. 805498
Interdyscyplinarne Centrum Etyki UJ (INCET) jest samodzielną jednostką organizacyjną Wydziału Filozoficznego UJ. Pracownicy INCET prowadzą badania z zakresu filozofii i etyki, w szczególności dotyczące klasycznych problemów bioetycznych (np. początek i koniec życia ludzkiego, alokacja zasobów w służbie zdrowia, decyzje kliniczne) oraz tych wynikających z najnowszych postępów oraz wyzwań naukowych, technologicznych, czy społecznych (np. regulowanie badań naukowych, inżynieria genetyczna, udoskonalenie człowieka, nowe technologie medyczne i reprodukcyjne, medycyna prewencyjna, wykorzystania sztucznej inteligencji, algorytmów i "big data" w medycynie). Więcej informacji o INCET
Aktualności
seminar
23 maja 2024 - Jeffrey Hanson - The measure of meaningfulness at work
20.05.2024
Interdyscyplinarne Centrum Etyki UJ (INCET) zaprasza na kolejne otwarte seminarium badawcze! Referat zatytułowany "The measure of meaningfulness at work" wygłosi Jeffrey Hanson. Spotkanie odbędzie się 23 maja o godzinie 17:30 w sali 25 przy ul. Grodzkiej 52 oraz za pośrednictwem platformy MS Teams.
Nabór na miejsce w Szkole Doktorskiej Nauk Humanistycznych w projekcie Nowe technologie reprodukcyjne a filozofia: problem nietożsamości, szkoda, okresy kontrfaktyczne
26.04.2024
Wkrótce rozpoczynamy realizację nowego projektu badawczego "Nowe technologie reprodukcyjne a filozofia: problem nietożsamości, szkoda, okresy kontrfaktyczne" finansowanego przez Narodowe Centrum Nauki w ramach konkursu Preludium BIS 4, nr 2022/47/O/HS1/02794; Kierownik projektu: dr hab. Tomasz Żuradzki, prof. UJ.
Funding opportunity – Marie Skłodowska-Curie Postdoctoral Fellowships
24.04.2024
Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) offer an opportunity to fund applicants’ own research fellowships at the Interdisciplinary Centre for Ethics (INCET) - a research centre within the Faculty of Philosophy of the Jagiellonian University in Kraków. Expressions of interest should be submitted by 8 May 2024.
seminar
25 kwietnia 2024 - Bartosz Janik - Rules and interpretation: behavioral account
22.04.2024
Interdyscyplinarne Centrum Etyki UJ (INCET) zaprasza na kolejne otwarte seminarium badawcze! Referat zatytułowany "Rules and interpretation: behavioral account" wygłosi Bartosz Janik. Spotkanie odbędzie się 25 kwietnia wyjątkowo o godzinie 15:30 w sali 25 przy ul. Grodzkiej 52 oraz za pośrednictwem platformy MS Teams.
seminar
18 kwietnia 2024 – Tomasz Krawczyk – Meaningful inclusion? Influence of Research Institutions on Epistemic Injustice in Public Involvement
15.04.2024
Interdyscyplinarne Centrum Etyki UJ (INCET) zaprasza na kolejne otwarte seminarium badawcze! Referat zatytułowany "Meaningful inclusion?
Influence of Research Institutions on Epistemic Injustice in Public Involvement" wygłosi Tomasz Krawczyk. Spotkanie odbędzie się 18 kwietnia o godzinie 17:30 w sali 25 przy ul. Grodzkiej 52 oraz za pośrednictwem platformy MS Teams.
Najnowsze publikacje
Are There Cross-Cultural Legal Principles? Modal Reasoning Uncovers Procedural Constraints on Law - nowy artykuł współautorstwa Piotra Bystranowskiego i Viliusa Dranseiki
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?
The Precautionary Principle and Expert Disagreement - nowa publikacja autorstwa Lee Elkina
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 observer memories (accurate) memories? Insights from experimental philosophy - nowy artykuł współautorstwa Viliusa Dranseiki
A striking feature of our memories of the personal past is that they involve different visual perspectives: one sometimes recalls past events from one’s original point of view (a field perspective), but one sometimes recalls them from an external point of view (an observer perspective). In philosophy, observer memories are often seen as being less than fully genuine and as being necessarily false or distorted. This paper looks at whether laypeople share the standard philosophical view by applying the methods of experimental philosophy.
Resolving empirical controversies with mechanistic evidence - nowy artykuł Mariusza Maziarza
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 (...)
Can I Feel Your Pain? The Biological and Socio-Cognitive Factors Shaping People’s Empathy with Social Robots - nowy artykuł Joanny Malinowskiej
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. (...)
Conscience and the Burden Inquiry—What and Why Should be Investigated in Exemption Cases? - nowa publikacja Wojciecha Ciszewskiego
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.
Objective consequentialism and the plurality of chances - nowy artykuł Leszka Wrońskiego
I claim that objective consequentialism (OC) faces a problem stemming from the existence in some situations of a plurality of chances relevant to the outcomes of an agent’s acts. I suggest that this phenomenon bears structural resemblance to the well-known Reference Class problem. I outline a few ways in which one could attempt to deal with the issue, suggesting that it is the higher-level chance that should be employed by OC.
Assessing the quality of evidence from epidemiological agent-based models for the COVID-19 pandemic - nowa publikacja Mariusza Maziarza i Martina Zacha
In this 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.
Agent‐based modelling for SARS‐CoV‐2 epidemic prediction and intervention assessment: A methodological appraisal - nowa publikacja Mariusza Maziarza i Martina Zacha
Our purpose is to assess epidemiological agent‐based models—or ABMs—of the SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic methodologically. The rapid spread of the outbreak requires fast‐paced decision‐making regarding mitigation measures.
