My research in moral theory focuses on a core tension in nonconsequentialist ethics: morality is supposed to be about what one individual owes to another, but it’s also supposed to be about taking everyone into account. I explore this tension between the interpersonal and the universal in various forms across various theories, including Kantianism, contractualism, and rule consequentialism. More broadly, I’m interested in the structure of normative theories and the various roles that rules or principles play in them.

My work in progress also includes new work on the ethics of artificial intelligence: a paper on how AI might affect our ability to lead meaningful lives, and a paper on the limits of our ability to build ethical AI.

Philosophical Quarterly (2025)

I argue that an act can be wrong because it wrongs a particular person. I then show how this thesis serves as a constraint on moral theories, using Kantian ethics as a case study. In particular, I argue that this thesis makes trouble for theories that ground right and wrong in facts about the universalizability of principles.

Noûs (2024)

Contractualists and rule consequentialists evaluate candidate moral rules by imagining that everyone accepts them. Should they do so under the realistic assumption that those who accept the rules will sometimes misapply them? I argue that they must—but if they do, they’ll often miss the moral significance of facts about how we treat particular individuals.

committed to Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics, pending final review

committed to Oxford Studies in Metaethics, pending final review

under review