In spring 2020, in response to the COVID-19 crisis, many world leaders imposed universal lockdowns. We argue that these restrictions have not been accompanied by the epistemic practices morally required for their adoption or continuation. While in theory lockdowns can be justified, governments did not meet and have not yet met their justificatory burdens. We will not argue that less stringent policies were optimal or better justified. Rather, we explain how government leaders failed and have continued to fail to meet their epistemic duties by relying upon data, models, and evidence of insufficiently good quality to justify their actions.
How Government Leaders Violated Their Epistemic Duties during the SARS-CoV-2 Crisis
How Government Leaders Violated Their Epistemic Duties during the SARS-CoV-2 Crisis
Recent Publications
- Debating Libertarianism: What Makes Society Just?
- Questioning the Assumptions of Political Discourse A Philosophical Analysis of Fundamental Concepts (2025)
- Common Law Liberalism: A New Theory of the Libertarian Society (Oxford University Press, 2024)
- “Diversity and Group Performance,” Encyclopedia of Diversity, Springer, 2024
- “Evading and Aiding: The Moral Case Against Paying Taxes,” with Christopher Freiman and Jessica Flanigan, Extreme Philosophy, ed. Stephen Hetherington, Routledge (2024)
Recent News
- How Plasma Donations are Helping to Pay Some Americans’ Bills – and Treat Patients Around the World
- America: The human plasma factory
- Office Hours: Evaluating the True Impact of Seemingly Good Acts
- Business as a Force for Good: MBA Students Support Hurricane Helene Victims Through Ethics Project
- New Editorial Team at Philosophy and Public Affairs
