Crown University Distinguished Professor in Ethics
Contact Information207 West Duke Building, Durham, NC 27708
Gopal Sreenivasan (Ph.D. 1993, UC Berkeley) joined the Duke faculty in 2008. His primary research interests are in moral and political philosophy. Within those fields, he is interested in many areas, including moral psychology, human rights, and bioethics.
- "Injustice and inequalities in health," Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics (2020).
- "Whither and whether with the formative aim thesis," Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 52(5) (2019): 1331-1357.
- Review of M. Gilbert, RIGHTS AND DEMANDS (Oxford, 2018). Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews (2019).
- "What is adequate understanding?," American Journal of Bioethics 19(5) (2019): 38-40.
- "Emotions, reasons, and epistemology," Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 97(2) (2018): 500-506.
- "Taking international legality seriously: A methodology for human rights." In A. Etinson (ed.) Human Rights: Moral or Political? (Oxford, 2018): 211-229. With Allen Buchanan.
Paper links on this page connect to page proofs. For published versions of articles, see my curriculum vitae, although those links may require a subscription.
Sreenivasan, G. “Ethics and Epidemiology: Residual Health Inequalities.” Public Health Ethics 2, no. 3 (November 2009): 244–49. https://doi.org/10.1093/phe/php030. Full Text
Sreenivasan, G. “Review of D. Estlund, Democratic Authority.” Iyyun: The Jerusalem Philosophical Quarterly 58 (2009): 62–72.
Sreenivasan, G. “Review of M. Otsuka, Libertarianism without inequality.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74, no. 3 (May 2007): 792–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2007.00056.x. Full Text
Sreenivasan, Gopal, and Solomon R. Benatar. “Challenges for global health in the 21st century: some upstream considerations.” Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27, no. 1 (January 2006): 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-005-5752-3. Full Text
Sreenivasan, G. “Does today's international trade agreement bind tomorrow's citizen?” Chicago Kent Law Review 81 (2006): 119–45.