1
Lantz G. Applied Ethics: What Kind of Ethics and What Kind of Ethicist? Journal of applied philosophy. 2000;17:21–8.
2
Norman R. Applied Ethics: What is Applied to What? Utilitas. 2000;12:119–36.
3
LaFollette H, editor. Ethics in practice: an anthology. Fourth edition. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley Blackwell 2014.
4
Wiley InterScience (Online service). A companion to applied ethics. Oxford: Blackwell 2005.
5
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/
6
Copp D, editor. The Oxford handbook of ethical theory. New York: Oxford University Press 2007.
7
Copp D, editor. The Oxford handbook of ethical theory. New York: Oxford University Press 2007.
8
Thomson JJ. A Defense of Abortion. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1971;1:47–66.
9
Marquis D. Why Abortion is Immoral. The Journal of Philosophy. 1989;86:183–202. doi: 10.2307/2026961
10
Cudd AE. Sensationalized Philosophy: A Reply to Marquis’s ‘Why Abortion is Immoral’. The Journal of Philosophy. 1990;87:262–4. doi: 10.2307/2026833
11
Tooley M. Abortion and Infanticide. Philosophy & public affairs (Online)  Philosophy & public affairs [electronic resource] Philos public aff (Online)  Philosophy and public affairs (Online) Philosophy and public affairs. 1972;2:37–65.
12
Cohen AI, Wellman CH. Contemporary debates in applied ethics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub 2005.
13
Davis N. Abortion and Self-Defense. Philosophy & public affairs (Online)  Philosophy & public affairs [electronic resource] Philos public aff (Online)  Philosophy and public affairs (Online) Philosophy and public affairs. 1984;13:175–207.
14
Boonin-Vail D. A Defense of ‘A Defense of Abortion’: On the Responsibility Objection to Thomson’s Argument. Ethics. 1997;107:286–313.
15
McDaniel I. The Responsibility Objection to Abortion: Rejecting the Notion that the Responsibility Objection Successfully Refutes a Woman’s Right to Choose. Bioethics. 2015;29:291–9. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12097
16
Gibson RF. On an Inconsistency in Thomson’s Abortion Argument. Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition. 1984;46:131–9. doi: 10.1007/BF00353495
17
Finnis J. The Rights and Wrongs of Abortion: A Reply to Judith Thomson. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1973;2:117–45.
18
Brody B. Thomson on Abortion. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1972;1:335–40.
19
Sparrow R. ‘A Not-So-New Eugenics’. Hastings Center report (Online)  The Hastings Center report [electronic resource] Hastings cent rep (Online)  The Hastings Center report (Online). 2011;41:32–44.
20
Public Affairs Quarterly.
21
Kuhse H, Singer P. Bioethics: an anthology. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Pub 2006.
22
Buchanan AE. From chance to choice: genetics and justice. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press 2000.
23
Bostrom N, Ord T. The Reversal Test: Eliminating Status Quo Bias in Applied Ethics. Ethics (Chicago, Ill : Online)  Ethics [electronic resource] Ethics (Online)  Ethics (Online). 2006;116:656–79.
24
Savulescu J, Bostrom N. Human enhancement. New York, NY: Oxford University Press 2011.
25
Savulescu J, Meulen RHJ ter, Kahane G. Enhancing human capacities. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell 2011.
26
Life Sciences, Society and Policy | Full text | Procreative Beneficence, Obligation, and Eugenics. doi: 10.1186/1746-5354-3-3-43
27
Singer P. Animal liberation: towards an end to man’s inhumanity to animals. London: Paladin 1977.
28
LaFollette H. Ethics in practice: an anthology. Fourth edition. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley Blackwell 2014.
29
Davis SL. The Least Harm Principle May Require that Humans Consume a Diet Containing Large Herbivores, Not a Vegan Diet. Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Ethics. 2003;16:387–94. doi: 10.1023/A:1025638030686
30
McPherson T. A Case for Ethical Veganism Intuitive and Methodological Considerations. Journal of Moral Philosophy. 2014;11:677–703.
31
Korsgaard K. A Kantian Case for Animal Rights.
32
Singer P. Utilitarianism and Vegetarianism. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1980;9:325–37.
33
Regan T. The Moral Basis of Vegetarianism. Canadian Journal of Philosophy. 1975;5:181–214.
34
Fairlie S. Meat: a benign extravagance. 1st ed. East Meon: Permanent Pub 2010.
35
Savoury A. How to green the world’s deserts and reverse climate change.
36
Sinnott-Armstrong W, Howarth RB. Perspectives on climate change: science, economics, politics, ethics. Amsterdam: Elsevier JAI 2005.
37
KAGAN S. Do I Make a Difference? Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2011;39:105–41. doi: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2011.01203.x
38
NEFSKY J. Consequentialism and the Problem of Collective Harm: A Reply to Kagan. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2011;39:364–95. doi: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2012.01209.x
39
Andreou C. Environmental Damage and the Puzzle of the Self-Torturer. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2006;34:95–108. doi: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2006.00054.x
40
Lawson, B. Individual Complicity in Collective Wrongdoing. In: Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. Published Online First: 2013.
41
Parfit D. Reasons and persons. Oxford: Clarendon 1984.
42
Jamieson, Dale. When Utilitarians Should Be Virtue Theorists. Utilitas; Jun2007, Vol. 2007;19:160–83.
43
Wündisch J. Green Votes not Green Virtues: Effective Utilitarian Responses to Climate Change. Utilitas. 2014;26:192–205. doi: 10.1017/S0953820813000307
44
Spiekermann K. Small impacts and imperceptible effects: Causing harm with others.
45
Glover J, Scott-Taggart MJ. It Makes no Difference Whether or Not I Do It. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes. 1975;49:171–209.
46
Broad CD. On the Function of False Hypotheses in Ethics. International Journal of Ethics. 1916;26:377–97.
47
Pinkert F. What if i cannot make a difference (and know it). Ethics. 2015;125:971–98. doi: 10.1086/680909
48
Zwolinski, Matt. SWEATSHOPS, CHOICE, AND EXPLOITATION. Business Ethics Quarterly. 2007;17:689–727.
49
Peter Singer. Famine, Affluence, and Morality. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1972;1:229–43.
50
Pogge T. Real World Justice. The Journal of Ethics. 2005;9:29–53. doi: 10.1007/s10892-004-3313-z
51
Green K. Distance, Divided Responsibility and Universalizability. The Monist. 2003;86:501–15. doi: 10.5840/monist200386330
52
MacAskill W. Replaceability, Career Choice, and Making a Difference. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 2014;17:269–83. doi: 10.1007/s10677-013-9433-4
53
Collins S. Duties to Make Friends. Ethical Theory & Moral Practice. 2013;16:907–21. doi: 10.1007/s10677-013-9422-7
54
Deveaux M. The Global Poor as Agents of Justice. Journal of Moral Philosophy. 2015;12:125–50.
55
PABLO GILABERT. THE DUTY TO ERADICATE GLOBAL POVERTY: POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 2005;7:537–50.
56
Brock G. Global Poverty and Desert. Politics. 2006;26:168–75. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9256.2006.00265.x
57
Risse M. Do We Owe the Global Poor Assistance or Rectification? Ethics & International Affairs. 2005;19:9–18. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-7093.2005.tb00485.x
58
Wenar L. Property Rights and the Resource Curse. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2008;36:2–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2008.00122.x
59
Miller RW. Beneficence, Duty and Distance. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2004;32:357–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2004.00018.x
60
Satz D. What Do We Owe the Global Poor? Ethics & International Affairs. 2005;19:47–54. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-7093.2005.tb00489.x
61
O’Neill O. Global Poverty and the Limits of Academic Expertise. Ethics & International Affairs. 2012;26:183–9. doi: 10.1017/S0892679412000287
62
Spoerl JS. Peter Singer on famine, affluence, and morality: a Christian response. American Journal of Jurisprudence. 1992;37:113–34.
63
McElwee B. Impartial Reasons, Moral Demands. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 2011;14:457–66. doi: 10.1007/s10677-010-9256-5
64
Pogge T. World poverty and human rights: cosmopolitan responsibilities and reforms. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity 2008.
65
Liam B. Murphy. The Demands of Beneficence. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1993;22:267–92.
66
Murphy LB. Moral demands in nonideal theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2000.
67
Pogge T. Priorities of global justice. Metaphilosophy. 2001;32:6–24. doi: 10.1111/1467-9973.00172
68
Unger PK. Living high and letting die: our illusion of innocence. New York: Oxford University Press 1996.
69
Thomson, Judith Jarvis. The Right to Privacy. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 7/1/1975, Vol. 1975;4.
70
Rachels, James. Why Privacy is Important. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 7/1/1975, Vol. 1975;4.
71
Benn SI. A Theory of Freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1988.
72
Allen AL. Unpopular privacy: what must we hide? New York: Oxford University Press 2011.
73
Scanlon, Thomas. Thomson on Privacy. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 7/1/1975, Vol. 1975;4.
74
Benn SI. A Theory of Freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1988.
75
Hughes RLD. Two concepts of privacy. Computer Law & Security Review. 2015;31:527–37. doi: 10.1016/j.clsr.2015.05.010
76
Blaauw, M. THE EPISTEMIC ACCOUNT OF PRIVACY. EPISTEME-A JOURNAL OF INDIVIDUAL AND SOCIAL EPISTEMOLOGY; JUN, 2013, 10 2, p167-p177,  11p. Published Online First: 2013.
77
van den Hoven, M. J. Privacy and the varieties of moral wrong-doing in an information age. Computers & Society; Sep1997, Vol. 1997;27:33–7.
78
Mill JS, Gray J. On liberty, and other essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1998.
79
Parent WA. Privacy, Morality, and the Law. Philosophy & public affairs (Online)  Philosophy & public affairs [electronic resource] Philos public aff (Online)  Philosophy and public affairs (Online) Philosophy and public affairs. 1983;12:269–88.
80
Gerstein RS. Intimacy and Privacy. Ethics (Chicago, Ill : Online)  Ethics [electronic resource] Ethics (Online)  Ethics (Online). 1978;89:76–81.
81
Etzioni A. The limits of privacy. New York, N.Y.: Basic Books 1999.
82
van den Hoven van Genderen, Rob. Trading Privacy for Security [article]. Amsterdam Law Forum, Vol. 2009;1.
83
Lusk, Rachel E. Facebook’s Newest Friend - Employers: Use of Social Networking in Hiring Challenges U.S. Privacy Constructs [comments]. Capital University Law Review, Vol. 2014;42.
84
Wiley InterScience (Online service). A companion to applied ethics. Oxford: Blackwell 2005.
85
Lenman J. On Becoming Redundant or What Computers Shouldn’t Do. Journal of Applied Philosophy. 2001;18:1–11. doi: 10.1111/1468-5930.00169
86
Mitcham C. Convivial software: an end-user perspective on free and open source software. Ethics and Information Technology. 2009;11:299–310. doi: 10.1007/s10676-009-9209-7
87
Bonnefon J-F, Shariff A, Rahwan I. Autonomous Vehicles Need Experimental Ethics: Are We Ready for Utilitarian Cars? Science. ;352:1573–6. doi: 10.1126/science.aaf2654
88
Nozick R. Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books, a member of the Perseus Books Group 2013.
89
Parks JA. Lifting the Burden of Women’s Care Work: Should Robots Replace the ‘Human Touch’? Hypatia. 2010;25:100–20. doi: 10.1111/j.1527-2001.2009.01086.x
90
Collins M. Will Robots Replace Humans? Industrial Maintenance & Plant Operation. 2014;75:46–46.
91
Wolbring, GYumakulov, S. Social Robots: Views of Staff of a Disability Service Organization. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ROBOTICS; AUG, 2014, 6 3, p457-p468,  12p. Published Online First: 2014.
92
Information Technology Wants to Be Free. Academe, v98 n5 p18-23 Sep-Oct 2012. 2012;18–23.
93
Nihlén Fahlquist J. Saving lives in road traffic—ethical aspects. Journal of Public Health. 2009;17:385–94. doi: 10.1007/s10389-009-0264-7
94
Hevelke A, Nida-Rümelin J. Responsibility for Crashes of Autonomous Vehicles: An Ethical Analysis. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2015;21:619–30. doi: 10.1007/s11948-014-9565-5
95
Purves D, Jenkins R, Strawser BJ. Autonomous Machines, Moral Judgment, and Acting for the Right Reasons. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 2015;18:851–72. doi: 10.1007/s10677-015-9563-y
96
Ravid O. Don’t Sue Me, I Was Just Lawfully Texting & Drunk When My Autonomous Car Crashed into You. Southwestern Law Review. 2014;44:175–207.
97
Waytz A, Heafner J, Epley N. The mind in the machine: Anthropomorphism increases trust in an autonomous vehicle. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2014;52:113–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2014.01.005
98
Gurney JK. Sue My Car Not Me: Products Liability and Accidents Involving Autonomous Vehicles. Journal of Law, Technology & Policy. 2013;247–77.
99
Swift A. The morality of school choice. Theory and Research in Education. 2004;2:7–21. doi: 10.1177/1477878504040574
100
Swift A. The morality of school choice reconsidered: a response. Theory & Research in Education. 2004;2:323–42. doi: 10.1177/1477878504046528
101
Anderson E. Rethinking Equality of Opportunity: Comment on Adam Swift’s ‘How Not to Be a Hypocrite’. Theory and Research in Education,. 2004;2:99–110. doi: 10.1177/1477878504043438
102
Macleod CM. The Puzzle of Parental Partiality: Reflections on ‘How Not to Be a Hypocrite--School Choice for the Morally Perplexed Parent’. Theory and Research in Education. 2004;2:309–21. doi: 10.1177/1477878504046526
103
Swift A. A short guide to hypocrisy. New Statesman. 2003;132:16–16.
104
Clayton M, Stevens D. School Choice and the Burdens of Justice. Theory and Research in Education. 2004;2:111–26. doi: 10.1177/1477878504043439
105
Macleod CM. The Puzzle of Parental Partiality: Reflections on How Not to Be a Hypocrite: School Choice for the Morally Perplexed Parent. Theory and Research in Education. 2004;2:309–21. doi: 10.1177/1477878504046526
106
Swift A. How not to be a hypocrite: school choice for the morally perplexed parent. London: Routledge 2003.
107
Power S. Comments on ‘How Not to Be a Hypocrite’: School Choice for the Morally Perplexed. Theory and Research in Education. 2004;2:23–9. doi: 10.1177/1477878504040575
108
Anderson K. How not to be a Hypocrite: School Choice and the Morally Perplexed Parent. Journal of Educational Thought. 2006;40:97–100.
109
Leathwood C. A Critique of Institutional Inequalities in Higher Education (or an Alternative to Hypocrisy for Higher Educational Policy). Theory and Research in Education. 2004;2:31–48. doi: 10.1177/1477878504040576
110
Brighouse H, Swift A. Legitimate Parental Partiality. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2009;37:43–80. doi: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2008.01145.x
111
Leibowitz, Uri D. Moral Deliberation and Ad Hominem Fallacies. Journal of Moral Philosophy; 2015, p1-23, 23p. 2015;1–23.
112
Singer, Peter. Moral Experts. Analysis, 3/1/1972, Vol. 1972;32.
113
Cross B. Moral Philosophy, Moral Expertise, and the Argument from Disagreement. Bioethics. 2016;30:188–94. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12173
114
Gesang, B. ARE MORAL PHILOSOPHERS MORAL EXPERTS? BIOETHICS; MAY, 2010, 24 4, p153-p159,  7p. Published Online First: 2010.
115
Archard, D. WHY MORAL PHILOSOPHERS ARE NOT AND SHOULD NOT BE MORAL EXPERTS. BIOETHICS; MAR, 2011, 25 3, p119-p127,  9p. Published Online First: 2011.
116
Hoffmann, M. How to identify moral experts? An application of Goldman’s criteria for expert identification to the domain of morality. In: Analyse und Kritik. Published Online First: 2012.
117
Burch, Robert W. ARE THERE MORAL EXPERTS? The Monist, 10/1/1974, Vol. 1974;58.
118
Miller, Peter. Who are the Moral Experts? Journal of Moral Education; Oct1975, Vol. 1975;5:3–12.
119
Nielsen, K. On the need for ‘moral experts’: a test case for practical ethics. In: The International journal of applied philosophy. Published Online First: 1984.
120
Hills A. Moral Testimony and Moral Epistemology*. Ethics. 2009;120:94–127. doi: 10.1086/648610
121
Driver, Julia. Autonomy and the Asymmetry Problem for Moral Expertise. Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition, 4/1/2006, Vol. 2006;128.
122
Goldman, Alvin I. Experts: Which Ones Should You Trust? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 7/1/2001, Vol. 2001;63.