Abstract: A traditional set of arguments against anger pertains to the nature of anger itself, showing that anger can waste our energy, escalate out of control, or cloud our judgement. I argue that an additional set of reasons for caution about anger in response to tragedy pertains to the nature of tragedies, especially of political injustice. In political tragedies, communities are likely to disagree on questions of who to hold responsible and of what injustice consists of, making communities simultaneously more vulnerable to the downsides of anger and less likely to be able to experience the benefits of anger.

Draft available upon request.

Abstract: This article outlines a new strategy for moral and civic education using philosophically grounded outreach programming with students in grades 9-12. Our programming is built around the pedagogical core of the National High School Ethics Bowl (NHSEB) program, headquartered at the University of North Carolina’s Parr Center for Ethics. First, we sketch the animating values of that core program, as well as the democratic dispositions it cultivates among participants. We then review some of the key challenges involved with extending this programming to students from underserved schools and communities who are often left out. In our own work, this has focused on schools in the rural American South. We find that the unique challenges faced by schools we work with create similarly unique opportunities for a deliberative brand of educational programming to thrive. Ultimately, philosophy outreach as we’ve experienced with NHSEBBridge is a model for educators at the collegiate and high school levels to understand how expanding access to philosophy creates opportunities to build participants' skills in civil disagreement and moral reasoning.

[full text]

[link]

Abstract: Some contemporary philosophers argue that emotions like anger are especially valuable in political expression, challenging traditional norms of emotional restraint. This paper argues that while emotions can indeed be fruitful, they require specific relational conditions to yield their benefits: evaluative alignment and adequate psychological resources including love, trust, and attention. Political life typically lacks these conditions, making emotional engagement more likely to be harmful than beneficial. Therefore, we should maintain distinct norms of emotional restraint for political contexts while preserving space for intense emotional engagement in intimate relationships and close-knit communities.

Draft available upon request.

Abstract: This paper proposes the concept of academic neurorights: a framework for protecting cognitive liberty within institutions of research and higher education. Just as academic freedom expresses the broader right to freedom of thought through protections for expression, I argue that academic neurorights are the articulation of our more general rights to cognitive liberty—including the right to mental privacy, autonomy over one’s own thought processes, and protection from cognitive surveillance or coercion.

As neurotechnologies capable of detecting, monitoring, and even influencing mental states begin to enter educational and research contexts, the ability to think freely and privately is increasingly under threat. Drawing on the work of Nita Farahany and others who advocate for neurorights, I argue that these technologies challenge not only individual liberty but also the epistemic and ethical foundations of academic life. Thought must be free—not just speech—for genuine inquiry, dissent, and intellectual risk-taking to flourish.