One disappointment for me after setting up this website is that, so far, no one has commented at all, even unfavourably, on my attempted philosophical dialogues.
2022 introduces a possibility of that changing now that both abortion and (un)just war are right back in the spotlight of current affairs. In the meantime, I'll try a little criticism myself.
I don't think I was able to find a philosophical middle ground between the so-called 'pro life' and 'pro choice' positions on abortion, not least because just war theory probably doesn't work either. The old distinction between combatants and civilians is often quite impossible in practice, and there are endless issues around what is justified in terms of self-defence or prevention. There is a reflection on abortion here about whether a notion of self-defence or protection (for the mother) could ever be applied to an unborn child. If that were not enough, we have not resolved the question of what 'innocence' means - is it harmless or blameless for purposes of either war or abortion?
My second offering in the dialogues section is also problematic even if I had managed to raise a few chuckles alongside the serious questions. There is still no hard evidence that we can ever build machines capable of making their own judgements as distinct from mimicing intelligent conduct. Frankly, I tried avoiding any answer to the AI question because I have no idea what the answer might be.
If these dialogues work at all, it's in the sense of raising questions, which is something philosophers are supposed to do even when they can't answer them.