Adam Swift

Adam Swift (born 1961) is a British political philosopher and sociologist who specialises in debates surrounding liberal egalitarianism. He has published books on communitarianism, on the philosophical aspects of school choice, on social justice, on the ethics of the family, and on how to make education policy, as well as an introduction to contemporary political philosophy.

For the rugby league footballer, see Adam Swift (rugby league).

Family and education

Swift's father was the actor Clive Swift and he was the nephew of David Swift. His mother is novelist Margaret Drabble. He is the brother of British poet and essayist Rebecca Swift and television presenter Joe Swift.

Swift studied PPE at Balliol College, Oxford. He then did an MPhil in Sociology at Nuffield College, and subsequently became a Fellow of Balliol College. His DPhil was on the topic of 'A Sociologically Informed Political Theory'.[1]

Career

Swift was the Founding Director of the Oxford Centre for the Study of Social Justice.[2] Since September 2018, he has been Professor of Political Theory in the Department of Political Science at University College London.

Swift writes for both academic and non-academic audiences, and is an occasional contributor to political debates about education.[3][4]

Swift is a member of Giving What We Can, an international society for the promotion of poverty relief.[5]

Books
  • Educational Goods: Values, Evidence and Decision Making (with Harry Brighouse, Helen F. Ladd and Susanna Loeb, (2018)
  • Family Values: The Ethics of Parent-Child Relationships (with Harry Brighouse) [2014]
  • Political Philosophy: A Beginner’s Guide for Students and Politicians [2001, 4th edition 2019] [6]
  • How Not To Be A Hypocrite: School Choice for the Morally Perplexed Parent [2003]
  • Against the Odds? Social Class and Social Justice in Industrial Societies (with Gordon Marshall and Stephen Roberts) [1997]
  • Liberals and Communitarians (with Stephen Mulhall) [1992, 2nd edition 1996]
gollark: Perhaps we are HIGHLY smart unlike random internet people and OBVIOUSLY picked the correct® answer, or perhaps we just hold similar philosophical/intellectual/whatever views which make us more inclined to one-box.
gollark: I mean, maybe the average internet rabble is just bad at understanding what "perfect prediction" means, but you could probably argue that it's "rational" at the time of choosing to take both, even if it's... acausally...? worse for you. Nobody here appears to have.
gollark: It's paradoxical because it breaks decision theories somewhat.
gollark: That's kind of the point of the paradox?
gollark: Yes, all versions of it have that.

References
  1. Bodleian Library Catalogue
  2. Politics Department Profile
  3. The Great Liberal Dilemma of Private Schools
  4. It's hard, but let me defend Diane Abbott
  5. "List of Members". Retrieved 22 November 2012.
  6. "Polity | Polity Books".


This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.