<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<urlset xmlns="http://www.sitemaps.org/schemas/sitemap/0.9" xmlns:image="http://www.google.com/schemas/sitemap-image/1.1" xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:video="http://www.google.com/schemas/sitemap-video/1.1">
  <url>
    <loc>https://www.philosophicalandfinancialthoughts.uk/articles</loc>
    <changefreq>daily</changefreq>
    <priority>0.75</priority>
    <lastmod>2026-09-03</lastmod>
  </url>
  <url>
    <loc>https://www.philosophicalandfinancialthoughts.uk/articles/Blog Post Title One-3zaa9-zlxng-afyyj-jg7ad-mc4r2</loc>
    <changefreq>monthly</changefreq>
    <priority>0.5</priority>
    <lastmod>2026-09-03</lastmod>
    <image:image>
      <image:loc>https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/6a9598979606a34ddb4653d9/1788386688802-5B2ZCM51G4VPRNHITBEI/unsplash-image-oA1aVtEcWaE.jpg</image:loc>
      <image:title>Articles - What does a Just Society look like John Rawls - Make it stand out</image:title>
      <image:caption>Abstract: What does a just society look like? One that is virtuous and ethical? And for that matter, what does an ethical society even look like – a meritocracy, an authoritarian order, a communitarian one? How fine-grained do we need to get: should we stop at social policy? These are exactly the questions John Rawls spent much of his career trying to answer, across a series of works spanning over thirty years and leaving behind a monumental legacy. Without a shadow of a doubt, Rawls is the most influential liberal political philosopher of the twentieth century. He first laid out his central ideas in his 1971 magnum opus, A Theory of Justice, where he introduced the concept that would define his life's work: Justice as Fairness. As the name on the tin suggest, Justice as fairness implies that a just society inaugurates some level of fairness – specifically, on equal basic liberties for all, paired with social arrangements that permit inequalities only when they work to the benefit of society's least advantaged members. In this article, I outline the basics of Rawls’s model for a just society. I begin by explaining what Rawls means by ‘justice’. Next, I provide a brief exposition of the crucial aspects of his theory. Then, to assess the plausibility of the model Rawls provides for a just society, I examine feminist critiques from Hanshaw and Held that reveal acute issues with the theory. To see why this is problematic, the subsequent discussion shifts to the principles of justice that are chosen by the Rawlsian deliberator, where I argue that these principles are ill-equipped to combat injustice that arises from misrecognition. In light of these flaws, I claim that the Rawlsian framework as originally formulated cannot be entirely conducive to a just society.</image:caption>
    </image:image>
  </url>
  <url>
    <loc>https://www.philosophicalandfinancialthoughts.uk/articles/Blog Post Title One-3zaa9-zlxng-xbkmm-naw9y-xg8tg-nz8b3</loc>
    <changefreq>monthly</changefreq>
    <priority>0.5</priority>
    <lastmod>2026-09-03</lastmod>
    <image:image>
      <image:loc>https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/6a9598979606a34ddb4653d9/1788377565016-LPQ79TPAOQA1VYUUB777/unsplash-image-DKix6Un55mw.jpg</image:loc>
      <image:title>Articles - The Magic of Emotions Jean-Paul Sartre’s Sketch - Make it stand out</image:title>
      <image:caption>Abstract: Emotions and magic? Sounds like a strange pairing, right? But there's real method to this madness. For readers of Sartre, ‘magic’ isn't used in the non-literal sense; it's his term for a phenomenon he considered fundamentally irrational: emotion itself. This idea gets its fullest treatment in Being and Nothingness (1949), but its roots lie in an earlier, more compact work– Sketch for a Theory of Emotions (1939) – which is the focus of this piece. I'll start by laying out Sartre's phenomenological account of emotional experience. From there, I turn to a key objection raised by Richmond, who argues that Sartre's analysis is internally inconsistent. I then examine Hatzimoysis's attempt to defend Sartre against this charge and ultimately argue that his response falls short, leaving the inconsistencies unresolved. On this basis, I conclude that Sartre's account doesn't offer a complete picture of what it's like to feel an emotion. Still, as we'll see, there's more than one compelling idea buried in his theory – even if the overall picture doesn't quite hold together.</image:caption>
    </image:image>
  </url>
  <url>
    <loc>https://www.philosophicalandfinancialthoughts.uk/articles/blog-post-title-three-y3peb-4lwnz-pd9y5-drh94-dsz7a</loc>
    <changefreq>monthly</changefreq>
    <priority>0.5</priority>
    <lastmod>2026-09-03</lastmod>
    <image:image>
      <image:loc>https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/6a9598979606a34ddb4653d9/1788448468590-432LDHJ370WOEJ638IXB/unsplash-image-VIcTzkzNZR8.jpg</image:loc>
      <image:title>Articles - Can the Harm of Hate speech be neutralized through Counter Speech - Make it stand out</image:title>
      <image:caption>Abstract: In the UK society is more fractured than ever, hate speech, racism and bigoted stereotypes are unfortunatley on the rise. Perhaps, to counteract the harmful effects of hate speech, legislation is not the only way. Perhaps depositing more speech can undo the harmful effects of hate speech. In this article I examine whether counterspeech can effectively undo the harms caused by hate speech. I begin by briefly outlining the concept of counterspeech and hate speech. Then, I turn to an innovative formulation of counterspeech advanced by Maxime Lepoutre. Following, I assess the efficacy of Lepoutre’s formulation, suggesting that its application can be widened and need not rely solely on the state. Next, I note the parameters of the theory, ultimately arguing that Lepoutre's account can alleviate certain harms, such as those affecting a target's social standing, but not all. For instance, psychological harms inflicted by harmful speech.</image:caption>
    </image:image>
  </url>
  <url>
    <loc>https://www.philosophicalandfinancialthoughts.uk/articles/blog-post-title-two-t5my5-k4xmd-4y2zn-aw3f9-5jwf8</loc>
    <changefreq>monthly</changefreq>
    <priority>0.5</priority>
    <lastmod>2026-09-03</lastmod>
    <image:image>
      <image:loc>https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/6a9598979606a34ddb4653d9/1788386307046-ICEHZKUAHX7ELWEJXPLZ/unsplash-image-hoKgCD9kfTE.jpg</image:loc>
      <image:title>Articles - Does Pornography Silence Women? - Make it stand out</image:title>
      <image:caption>Abstract: Does Pornogprahy Silence the Voices of Women? This evasive question has been a hot topic in legal jurisprudence, as the connection between the two seem tangible, yet is difficult to pinpoint. In this article I briefly outline Rae Langton's account Pornogprahy, Speech and Silence. Then, I suggest narrowing the scope of pornographic material that Langton’s argument is best served against. Following, I explore the unintended consequences of Langton’s argument, focusing on Nellie Wieland, who argues that Langton’s scenario entails consent is correctly interpreted, thereby defending a rapist's lack of mens rea. Where my overall aim is twofold: (I) resolving a causal issue of Langton’s argument, (II) vindicating Langton from the moral issues furnished by Wieland.</image:caption>
    </image:image>
  </url>
  <url>
    <loc>https://www.philosophicalandfinancialthoughts.uk/home</loc>
    <changefreq>daily</changefreq>
    <priority>0.75</priority>
    <lastmod>2026-09-02</lastmod>
    <image:image>
      <image:loc>https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/6a9598979606a34ddb4653d9/1787160064.020787-IUFDWMPMPMDSOMNLUZWE/imgg-gg3p-BCFX--A-0aa4a236.png</image:loc>
    </image:image>
    <image:image>
      <image:loc>https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/6a9598979606a34ddb4653d9/1787159946.880727-OWEQQXXEISBRRPVSGQZJ/imgg-gg3p-BCFX-Z-ee909bc8.png</image:loc>
    </image:image>
  </url>
  <url>
    <loc>https://www.philosophicalandfinancialthoughts.uk/about</loc>
    <changefreq>daily</changefreq>
    <priority>0.75</priority>
    <lastmod>2026-09-02</lastmod>
    <image:image>
      <image:loc>https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/6a9598979606a34ddb4653d9/1780932028.768261-WRDZKOZMLPWHNIXNETAJ/imgg-gg3p-BC-DQ-G-388c6114.png</image:loc>
    </image:image>
  </url>
  <url>
    <loc>https://www.philosophicalandfinancialthoughts.uk/contact</loc>
    <changefreq>daily</changefreq>
    <priority>0.75</priority>
    <lastmod>2026-09-02</lastmod>
    <image:image>
      <image:loc>https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/6a9598979606a34ddb4653d9/1780932029.245059-QEGOTTMBDCNDCBJFHMUK/imgg-gg3p-BC-DQ-F-7be99eb1.png</image:loc>
    </image:image>
  </url>
  <url>
    <loc>https://www.philosophicalandfinancialthoughts.uk/scheduling</loc>
    <changefreq>daily</changefreq>
    <priority>0.75</priority>
    <lastmod>2026-09-02</lastmod>
    <image:image>
      <image:loc>https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/6a9598979606a34ddb4653d9/1788199108110-7O3O6KHCEFKJ69NQ11ON/unsplash-image-Ubs4WISHgr4.jpg</image:loc>
    </image:image>
    <image:image>
      <image:loc>https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/6a9598979606a34ddb4653d9/1780932031.11286-ZBCPULHSCKQTWCTIVHHM/imgg-gg3p-BC-DQ-U-4232d553.png</image:loc>
    </image:image>
    <image:image>
      <image:loc>https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/6a9598979606a34ddb4653d9/1780932030.666711-XXLFNVQKEZLHLUCFZDRO/imgg-gg3p-BC-DRJ-7294db71.png</image:loc>
    </image:image>
    <image:image>
      <image:loc>https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/6a9598979606a34ddb4653d9/1780932030.666711-XXLFNVQKEZLHLUCFZDRO/imgg-gg3p-BC-DRJ-7294db71.png</image:loc>
    </image:image>
  </url>
  <url>
    <loc>https://www.philosophicalandfinancialthoughts.uk/group-events-1</loc>
    <changefreq>daily</changefreq>
    <priority>1.0</priority>
    <lastmod>2026-08-31</lastmod>
  </url>
</urlset>

