A country seeks more plumbers and doctors, while another wants its own Nobel Laureates, Saints and Olympic champions. Suppose both therefore naturalise suitably talented foreigners. If it is morally permissible for the former to do so, what about the latter?

Some endorse the approach of the first country, but express outrage at the conduct of the second. This seems strange: how is it that a country can naturalise foreigners when they would help it in plumbing, but not when they would contribute to its sporting excellence? I contend this puzzlement arises due to multiple confusions, and argue against the conduct of the second country while affirming that of the first. My concern shall not be on how foreigners are naturalised, but that certain aims should be pursued at all.

Philosophy Seminar Series.
Date: Thursday, 23 Aug 2012
Time: 2-4pm
Venue: Philosophy Resource Room (AS3 #05-23)
Speaker: Jason Phan, Associate Lecturer in Philosophy, Singapore Institute of Management
Moderator: Dr. Neil Sinhababu

About the Speaker: Great puzzlement over why I should be moral drew me into philosophy. Since then, this has morphed into wonder about how we should live. I am very interested in how the world ought to be and have at least a second-order desire to change how it is. This includes thinking about applied ethics, moral psychology and philosophical worldviews, among other things. I am an associate lecturer in philosophy at Singapore Institute of Management, and find Marx wildly more fascinating than Jobs.