The orangutan, Sandra, has been legally granted the status of ‘non-human person.’ Although, a great victory for those who promote animal rights, this has raised questions about the contemporary approaches to personhood. Recent relational ontological shifts, evident in both secular and theological anthropology, risks unfortunate consequences. Like a snake eating its own tail, without proper circumspection, relational ontology is in danger of postulating a problematic circularity of persons creating persons out of nothing. This article explores these recent shifts, the possible pitfalls of relational ontology, and proposes certain theological desiderata.

Abortion remains a controversial topic, with pro-life and pro-choice advocates clashing fiercely. However, public polling demonstrates that the vast majority of the Western public holds a middle position: being in favour of abortion but not in all circumstances nor at any time. The intuitions held by the majority seem to imply a contradiction: two early foetuses at the same point in development have different moral statuses. Providing coherent philosophical grounding for this intuition has proved challenging. Solutions given by philosophers such as Feinberg, Harman and Räsänen are complex and do not fully account for the lived experience of pregnancy loss. This article argues for a relational ontological construction of human personhood as the basis of foetal personhood. This approach takes seriously the literature of pregnancy loss and the lived experiences of pregnant persons. Focusing on the manner in which persons relate to early foetuses (especially pregnant persons), provides a coherent ground for distinct foetal value. Importantly, this approach is both simple and intuitive. Therefore, it can be more easily adopted by middle. To counter an implied equality of human relationality, the article argues for a clear hierarchy based on relational proximity that affirms pregnant persons? primary role in deciding the moral significance of foetal termination.

On November the 13th, 2022 video footage was released purportedly showing a Tesla Model Y malfunctioning by speeding through the streets of a Chinese city killing two people. Video footage such as this has the potential to undermine trust in AVs. While Tesla has responded by stating they will get to the “truth,” there are questions as to how this truth is to be decided, and perhaps more importantly how the public can trust either Tesla or negative press. We explore the “facts” of the incident and discuss the challenges of building trust in new AVs systems based on transparency. In this article we argue that transparency is more than simply getting to the “truth.” It is fostering a relational dialogue between the facts and stakeholder. Using O’Brien’s window metaphor, this article explores the need for AV manufacturers to consider the content of such incidents, the different perceptions of stakeholders, and the medium through which the content is presented. Apart from the need for independent crash investigators, there is a need for AV manufacturers to go beyond simply’ getting to the truth’ and to engage with the public responsibly.

Illness has a way of disorientating us, as if we are cast adrift in a foreign land. Like strangers in a dessert we seek oasis to recollect ourselves, find refuge and learn to build our own shelters. Using the philosophy of Levinas and Derrida, we can interpret health care providers (HCP), and the sites from which they act (e.g. hospitals), as dwelling hosts that offer hospitality to strangers in this foreign land. While often the dwellings are physical (e.g. hospitals), this is not always the case. Language represents a mobile home of refuge to the sick. Using language the HCP has built a shelter so as to dwell in the land of illness. However, while hospitality is an inviting concept, it also implies hostility. The door that opens may also be slammed shut. This article explores the paradox of the linguistic mobile home offered to patients. It highlights the power of language to construct a safe place in a strange land, but also explores the inherent violence. It ends with an exploration of the ways language can be used by HCP to assist patients to construct their own mobile shelters.