Many philosophers have argued against “speciesism”—an attitude of bias toward the interests of members of one’s own species. In reply, Douglas MacLean defends a speciesist or humanist outlook on morality, exploring the ways in which ethics is inextricably tied to practices that define what it is to live a distinctively human life.

Economic analysis presents climate change as a collective action problem, a market failure, or a problem about the allocation or distribution of property rights. Mark Sagoff argues that it is none of these. Economic theory cannot provide a useful way—either a model, method, or metaphor—to think about climate change. The reasons to reduce greenhouse gases are not economic, but ethical.

Common sense would suggest that the acquisition of precision-guided munitions should make it easier to avoid “collateral” damage in war. But U.S. military theorists have drawn the opposite conclusion: namely, that the more precise the weapon, the more permissive the standard for targeting should be. Henry Shue explains why this has happened—and why it is factually mistaken and morally misguided.

Google’s recent decision to withdraw its business from China in the wake of cyber censorship should lead other multinational corporations to recognize that ethical commitments should not be set aside for the purpose of market strategies.

As peace negotiations in the Mideast continue to fail, perhaps we should consider an alternative way of conceiving the proposal for creating two independent Arab and Jewish states. What would the two-state solution look like if rather than turning away from the underlying reality of a common homeland, we were to embrace that reality?

Philosophers have argued convincingly that Intelligent Design cannot simply be defined out of classrooms as nonscience. But the move from the conclusion that intelligent design is not nonscience to the conclusion that it is legitimate to teach it in public schools is deeply mistaken.