Current research

Current work

My current projects explore responsibility in institutions, moral standing, social comparison, and the origins of institutional decisions. Published articles are under Publications; drafts are under Working papers.

Project 01 · Working title

When Institutions Stop Answering Back

This draft examines who can explain and defend institutional decisions when automated procedures take over parts of the reasoning. A named supervisor may remain in place without being able to question or change what the system decides.

Main question

Who can answer for an automated institutional decision, and what do they need to do so meaningfully?

Status and planned work

Draft manuscript, 2026; companion paper on typologies of answerability failure.

Project 02 · Working title

Standing Is Not an Ordering

The partition thesis separates two questions: who counts morally, and whose claims take priority? Using information ethics as a test case, this paper argues that an inclusive account of moral standing does not by itself tell us how to rank competing claims. The manuscript is under review.

Main question

Does knowing who counts morally tell us whose claims should come first?

Status and planned work

Journal article (under review, 2026); follow-up paper on standing and ordering in AI moral-status debates.

Project 03 · Working title

Comparative Desire and Social Violence

Digital platforms do more than display inequality. They can shape what people feel entitled to, and turn frustrated expectations into grievance. This paper examines how comparison can contribute to social violence. It is published in Philosophy & Social Criticism.

Main question

When does comparison with others turn into a sense of injustice, and how can that lead to social violence?

Status and planned work

Journal article (Philosophy & Social Criticism, 2026); book-length treatment of post-mimetic relationality as a general social configuration.

Project 04 · Working title

Second-Order Provenance

Knowing where data came from is not enough. We also need to know who chose the thresholds, rankings, and categories used to interpret it, and why those choices are justified. This project calls that second-order provenance and develops a way to examine it in institutions.

Main question

Can an institution account for both its data and the rules that make that data matter?

Status and planned work

Working paper; operational audit framework co-developed with ClaimBuilder.ai; workshop paper on institutional recordkeeping as moral infrastructure.