LSE PhD Student Session: Chloé de Canson & Bastian Steuwer

Chloé de Canson: “Rape, Consent, and Coercion”

Abstract: In this paper, I argue that the best way to differentiate between morally good and morally bad sex appeals to the notion of coercion, as opposed to that of consent. The driving consideration is that consent is an attitude de dicto, such that agents consent to things under a description. In light of this, consent becomes unappealing as the distinguishing mark of morally good sex. I propose that we move instead to coercion (or lack thereof), which does not suffer from the same problems.

Bastian Steuwer: “What We Owe … to Whom?”

Abstract: A recent debate among contractualists concerns how to approach cases of risk impositions. There are two main approaches here, ex ante and ex post contractualism. I argue for a new way to draw the distinction between the two by asking whose complaints contractualists should be concerned with. Reframing the debate allows for a new version of ex ante contractualism. This version of ex ante contractualism focuses on the complaints that can be made by rigidly designated individuals. An implication of this view is that it is not required to discount epistemic risk. I argue that such an objection version of ex ante contractualism is superior to both classical ex ante contractualism and ex post contractualism.