Podcasts about moral judgment

https://youtu.be/y-WB-fhVJls Podcast audio: In this episode of The Ayn Rand Institute Podcast, Onkar Ghate and Tristan de Liège discuss why the traditional conception of forgiveness is evil and indicate how to think of it from an Objectivist perspective. Among the topics covered: How forgiveness is conventionally understood; Why the idea of “forgive and forget” enables injustice; Why forgiving a murderous dictator like Putin would be horrific; Why a rational view of forgiveness must be rooted in justice; The story of Mosab Hassan Yousef as an example of earning forgiveness; How healing from injustice comes from maintaining a positive value context, not forgiveness; Whether there is need for a separate concept of forgiveness. Recommended in this podcast are the Ayn Rand Lexicon entries on “Mercy,” “Justice,” and “Moral Judgment.” The podcast was recorded on February 14, 2025 and posted on February 19, 2025. Listen and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Watch archived podcasts here.

In the quiet suburb of Cherry Hill, a respected rabbi orchestrates the brutal murder of his wife to pursue an affair with a radio host, unraveling a community's trust and exposing a tangled web of deceit and betrayal. Subscribe on your favorite podcasting apps: https://talkmurder.com/subscribeSupport us on patreon: https://patreon.com/talkmurderSee our technology: https://talkmurder.com/gearContent warning: the true crime stories discussed on this podcast can involve graphic and disturbing subject matter. Listener discretion is strongly advised.Fair use disclaimer: some materials used in this work are included under the fair use doctrine for educational purposes. Any copyrighted materials are owned by their respective copyright holders. Questions regarding use of copyrighted materials may be directed to legal [@] Talkocast.com

In the quiet suburb of Cherry Hill, a respected rabbi orchestrates the brutal murder of his wife to pursue an affair with a radio host, unraveling a community's trust and exposing a tangled web of deceit and betrayal. Subscribe on your favorite podcasting apps: https://talkmurder.com/subscribeSupport us on patreon: https://patreon.com/talkmurderSee our technology: https://talkmurder.com/gearContent warning: the true crime stories discussed on this podcast can involve graphic and disturbing subject matter. Listener discretion is strongly advised.Fair use disclaimer: some materials used in this work are included under the fair use doctrine for educational purposes. Any copyrighted materials are owned by their respective copyright holders. Questions regarding use of copyrighted materials may be directed to legal [@] Talkocast.com

If you're honest, you probably have an opinion on people with tattoos. And that makes you a lot like the police (and judges and juries).

Ayn Rand's novels and nonfiction essays contain a wealth of material on the psychological dimensions of philosophical ideas and principles. But in one of those essays she also cautions about the danger of “psychologizing.” We'll explore aspects of how to extract the action-guiding value of the psychological dimensions of philosophical ideas that she highlights while avoiding the pitfall of psychologizing. Recorded at OCON on July 2, 2023, in Miami, Florida.

He's been on the top of Stigall's interview wish list for a while now and today it finally happens. After last week's column "The Remaking of America," Victor Davis Hanson explains what went into writing the piece, does he believe in Stigall's shadow presidency theory, and what's the path forward for America? Plus, the Husk and his failed press secretary finally address the Maui fires and bungle it in spectacular fashion. Emerald Robinson is live covering Mike Lindell's two-day summit on election integrity and gives you details on what to expect, how to participate, and when Mike's plan will be rolled out. The Washington Post is concerned nobody is changing their minds about the coming election and the candidates from which we have to choose. And are they teeing up another round of COVID tyranny? - For more info visit the official website: https://chrisstigall.com Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/chrisstigallshow/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/ChrisStigall Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/chris.stigall/ Listen on Spotify: https://tinyurl.com/StigallPod Listen on Apple Podcasts: https://bit.ly/StigallShowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Join us for a LIVE #KerfefeBreak with Keri Smith, Kamran Pasha and Libby Emmons, Friday, July 1st at 12pm CDT. Keri, Libby and Kamran discuss Roe v Wade, RBG, where we are culturally on abortion, Biden's new Energy Department hire (Sam Brinton), the new Elvis movie and whether we should bring back moral judgment.

In this episodes, Vivek is hosted by Lila Rose to undertake a nuanced conversation on the decline in the US population replacement rate and its potential ramifications. They delve into the loss of national identity and self-confidence as pivotal reasons for this demographic shift. Vivek emphasizes the need to address the root cause before discussing potential solutions, identifying ideologies contributing to the decline such as contraceptive, divorce, and gender ideologies.The discussion takes a thought-provoking turn as they frame the pro-life debate as a human rights issue, critiquing the modern societal unwillingness to make sacrifices. Ramaswamy passionately advocates for reviving national character and family values, stressing the adverse effects of policies like Lyndon Johnson's Great Society on family structures. They explore the possibility of cash benefits for families with multiple children, and discuss reallocation of government spending to incentivize behavior that benefits society. Lastly, they voice their perspectives on abortion, its moral implications, and the critical role of states in defining their policies on it. This episode is a stirring reflection on the importance of valuing individual lives and our shared principles.--Donate here: https://t.co/PE1rfuVBmbFor more content follow me here:Twitter - @VivekGRamaswamyInstagram - @vivekgramaswamyFacebook - http://facebook.com/VivekGRamaswamyTruth Social - @VivekRamaswamyRumble - @VivekRamaswamy--00:36 - Lila Rose discusses the impending crisis of the US population's decline.01:15 - Vivek Ramaswamy identifies loss of national self-confidence as a cause of population decline.03:32 - Emphasis on addressing root causes of population decline before discussing solutions.04:05 - Contributing ideologies to population decline are introduced.05:10 - Rose underscores the impact of high abortion rates on the US population.06:35 - Ramaswamy reframes the pro-life debate as a human rights issue.10:53 - Agreement on the loss of moral identity and importance of service to others.13:44 - Discussion on the revival of national character and family values in America.18:04 - Support expressed for pro-family policies like child tax credits.21:45 - Ramaswamy reveals he would cut Planned Parenthood's funding as president.22:31 - Assertion of abortion as a form of murder.24:21 - Importance of conversations about adoption and sexual responsibility highlighted.27:20 - Ramaswamy shares his personal beliefs on making moral judgments on life.31:00 - Vision for winning the battle against abortion shared.34:13 - Ramaswamy emphasizes the sanctity of individual lives in the pro-life stance. 

Emotions are an integral part of our daily lives, shaping our experiences, choices, and relationships. In this podcast, we will embark on an illuminating journey through the realms of philosophy, science, and psychology to unravel the complexities of emotions. We will explore their functions, value judgments, connections to cognition, and the role of the subconscious in emotional responses. Additionally, we will delve into the principles of classifying emotions, their distinction from other affective states, and their impact on moral choices and judgments. Emotions and Awareness: Our emotions serve as a powerful means of communication, providing essential information about our inner states and experiences. By heightening our awareness of emotions, we can better understand ourselves, navigate social situations, and make informed decisions. Emotions and Value-Judgments: Emotions are often deeply intertwined with our value judgments, shaping our perceptions of the world around us. Our emotional reactions to situations, people, or ideas reflect our underlying beliefs and values, guiding our actions and choices. The Biological Function of Emotions: From an evolutionary standpoint, emotions play a crucial role in our survival and adaptation. They serve as an essential mechanism for rapid decision-making, communication, and bonding, enabling us to respond effectively to threats and opportunities in our environment. The Role of the Subconscious in Emotional Responses: Our emotional responses are influenced by the intricate interplay between conscious and subconscious processes. The subconscious mind stores memories, experiences, and patterns that impact our emotional reactions, often beyond our conscious awareness. Emotions Distinguished from Other Affective States: Emotions are distinct from other affective states such as moods, feelings, and sentiments. While emotions are intense, short-lived reactions to specific events or stimuli, other affective states are typically more diffuse, enduring, and less directly connected to specific triggers. Principles of Classifying Emotions: Classifying emotions can be approached through various dimensions, such as their valence (positive or negative), arousal (high or low), and intensity (strong or weak). This multidimensional approach enables a more comprehensive understanding of the emotional spectrum. Emotions and Cognition: Emotions and cognition are deeply interconnected, with each influencing the other. Our emotional states can shape our perceptions, decision-making, and problem-solving abilities, while our cognitive processes can modulate our emotional experiences. Emotions and Objectivity: While emotions can sometimes cloud our judgment and skew our perceptions, they also hold the potential for enhancing objectivity. By acknowledging and analyzing our emotional responses, we can gain valuable insights and refine our understanding of the world around us. Intellectual Techniques of Analyzing One's Emotional Responses: To analyze our emotional responses, we can employ various intellectual techniques, such as self-reflection, journaling, mindfulness, and cognitive restructuring. These tools help us dissect our emotions, identify patterns, and develop a deeper understanding of our emotional landscape. Emotions and Moral Choice: Our emotions can significantly influence our moral choices, driving us toward actions that align with our values and ethical principles. By examining our emotions, we can better comprehend our moral compass and make more informed decisions. Emotions and Moral Judgment of Self and Others: Emotions play a crucial role in our moral judgments, shaping our evaluations of ourselves and others. While emotions can provide valuable insights into moral dilemmas, it is essential to strike a balance between emotional sensitivity and rationality to arrive at fair and objective judgments. Emotions as Advocates, Not Judges: It is crucial to recognize that emotions serve as advocates rather than judges in our lives. They provide us with valuable information and signals about our experiences, helping us navigate through the complex web of relationships, decisions, and challenges we encounter. Emotions can act as powerful motivators, pushing us to pursue our goals or alerting us to potential dangers. However, they should not be viewed as definitive judges of our actions or the actions of others. Instead, we must learn to understand and interpret our emotional responses, using them as a source of guidance while maintaining a balanced perspective. By embracing our emotions as advocates, we can harness their power to enrich our lives, foster self-awareness, and cultivate empathy for ourselves and others.   Conclusion: Emotions play an indispensable role in shaping our lives, experiences, and relationships. Through the exploration of the many dimensions of emotions, we gain valuable insights into their functions, connections to cognition, and influence on our moral choices and judgments. By recognizing and embracing the multifaceted nature of emotions, we can deepen our understanding of ourselves and others, cultivate empathy, and make better-informed decisions. As we navigate the complex web of our emotional landscape, it is crucial to remember that emotions are advocates, not judges, guiding us through life's challenges and opportunities. By harnessing the power of emotions and developing emotional intelligence, we can create a more fulfilling, authentic, and compassionate existence.   Please go to www.abqpodcast.com where you can get show notes, resources, and links to everything we talked about today to help you navigate your journey as an entrepreneur and business owner. Be sure to follow me on Instagram at @abqjasonrigby  or Twitter at @abqjasonrigby also don't forget to sign up for our email list where I drop exclusive business strategies & marketing secrets to help you and your business grow!

Sind wir Menschen Vernunftwesen, oder lassen wir uns doch eher von unseren Gefühlen leiten, wenn wir im Alltag moralische Urteile fällen? Anna und Benedikt diskutieren über Rationalismus und Sentimentalismus in der Moralpsychologie.Literaturhinweise:Greene, J. (2008): The Secret Joke of Kant's Soul. In: Moral Psychology Vol. 3, hg. von W. Sinnott-Armstrong. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, S. 35-79.Haidt, J. (2001): The Emotional Dog and Its Rational Tail: A Social Intuitionist Approach to Moral Judgment. Psychological Review 108 (4), S. 814-834.Haidt, J. (2012): The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion. New York: Pantheon Books.Schälike, J. (2018): Vernunft oder Gefühl? Was uns moralisch antreibt. In: Was treibt uns an? Motivation und Frustration aus Sicht der Hirnforschung, hg. von C. Gorr und M.C. Bauer. Berlin: Springer, S. 177-194.

https://youtu.be/jHGFlyHnhFQ Acting against our better judgment is a bit of a puzzle: if we know what's “best,” & nothing is preventing us, why don't we do it? Who is it that's doing the controlling (or being controlled) in “self-control?” THUNK Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/THUNKShow - Links for the Curious - First Person Plural (Bloom, 2008) - https://pdodds.w3.uvm.edu/files/papers/others/everything/bloom2008a.pdf A Multiple Self Theory of the Mind - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.2466/02.09.28.CP.1.5 A Dual-Self Model of Impulse Control (Fudenberg & Levine, 2006) - https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=9f0ba1f9eef4ff2493ccbd0a50f8af7635d4f6b7 From dual processes to multiple selves: Implications for economic behavior (Alós-Ferrer & Strack, 2014) - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167487013001517 I, Too, Sail Past - Odysseus and the Logic of Self-Control (Sally, 2000) - https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David-Sally/publication/4775007_I_Too_Sail_Past_Odysseus_and_the_Logic_of_Self-Control/links/5dee77dc4585159aa470e787/I-Too-Sail-Past-Odysseus-and-the-Logic-of-Self-Control.pdf Reflection and Reasoning in Moral Judgment - https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01210.x Emotions and Decision Making (Lerner et al, 2014) - https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/jenniferlerner/files/annual_review_manuscript_june_16_final.final_.pdf Fluctuating capacity and advance decision-making in Bipolar Affective Disorder — Self-binding directives and self-determination (Gergel & Owen, 2015) - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252715000680 The Stanford Marshmallow Prison Experiment - https://hotelconcierge.tumblr.com/post/113360634364/the-stanford-marshmallow-prison-experiment Embodied Akrasia: James On Motivation And Weakness Of Will - https://www.jstor.org/stable/26493690 Discourse on the Passions (Hume) - https://davidhume.org/texts/p/full Weakness of Will (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/weakness-will/

01:00 Whatever Happened to the Scandal That Derailed Kevin McCarthy's Last Bid for Speaker? https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/05/the-forgotten-scandal-that-derailed-mccarthys-speakership.html 04:00 Harvard Professor: How Women Compete For Partners https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4jKAgYL0gg 14:30 Who are the upper class livestreamers? 22:00 How to compete in the attention economy, https://decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm/episode/interview-with-neil-levy-on-intellectual-virtue-signalling 30:00 Virtue Signalling Is Virtuous, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=146676 39:30 Lex Fridman's reading list for 2023, https://www.patreon.com/DecodingTheGurus 44:00 Tom Clancy is excellent, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Clancy 57:00 David Pizarro on moral situationism, https://www.verybadwizards.com/9 1:29:30 Prison rape and race 1:49:00 A Person-Centered Approach to Moral Judgment, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=146684 1:54:00 The Left vs Religion 2:25:00 Cum Town - Steven Seagal, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzIHyF7UWY4 https://www.verybadwizards.com/9 https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/2017/11/06/ep176-1-situationism-milgram/ https://decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm/episode/interview-with-neil-levy-on-intellectual-virtue-signalling https://noahcarl.substack.com/p/where-did-wokeness-come-from https://www.patreon.com/parrotroom/posts What's The Matter With Kansas? (2004) https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=146614 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report https://www.economist.com/christmas-specials/2022/12/20/why-cricket-and-america-are-made-for-each-other https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Life_and_Loves https://www.sportstiger.com/news/what-is-the-new-cricketing-term-bazball https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendon_McCullum Messi & Ye, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=146549 Israel's dumb culture, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=146547 The Atlantic: WHY IS MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE LIKE THIS?, https://radixjournal.substack.com/p/negative-theology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Goldhagen https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-12-16/as-tom-girardi-skated-the-state-bar-went-after-black-attorneys https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/12/12/stephen-miller-america-first-legal-biden-race-policies/ https://study.com/academy/lesson/abductive-reasoning-definition-examples.html https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/kanye-west-gavin-mcinnes-nick-fuentes-jews-forgive-hitler-1234642059/ https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ye-s-hate-spewing-career-tanking-descent-through-the-alt-media/ar-AA157LPl https://www.latimes.com/sports/soccer/story/2022-12-12/world-cup-underdog-morocco-france-semifinal FT columnist quits twitter because it is low status, https://www.ft.com/content/8a040159-502d-491d-8ad3-2200609dae71 https://forward.com/culture/527354/hitler-demon-president-biden-tweet-kanye-west-nick-fuentes-trump/ https://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/three.html https://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/gentiles.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/12/09/reopening-mass-shootings-walmart-club-q/ https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ye-s-hate-spewing-career-tanking-descent-through-the-alt-media/ar-AA157LPl https://anchor.fm/aksubversive/episodes/Steve-Sailer---A-Lifetime-Of-Noticing-e1rsv89 https://radixjournal.substack.com/p/good-times

3 plot/application points from this lesson: 1) Moral Judgment; 2) False Prophets & Disciples; and 3) The Foundation for Building Life

In contrast to the "judge not, lest ye be judged" commonplace, Ayn Rand thought we should never fail to pronounce moral judgment. But there is confusion among her readers about what this means, about why moral judgment is necessary, and how this view relates to the rest of her philosophy. Rand's fiction and nonfiction philosophical work both shed light on the meaning and importance of moral judgment. Join Onkar Ghate and Ben Bayer to explore the philosophical roots, implications, and applications of this provocative view.

On episode 127, we welcome philosopher Mark White to discuss the philosophy of Thor; how his hammer was used to distinguish and judge worthiness; the similarities and differences between the various schools of ethics - virtue ethics, deontology, and utilitarianism; the golden mean of virtue ethics and its allowance of moral imperfection; the necessity of self-doubt to moral character and the balance of maintaining it with a sense of pride; the importance of not taking your partner for granted and continuing to improve; and Thor's epiphany and love of humanity, exploring how they differentiated him from other gods. Mark D. White is a professor in the Department of Philosophy at the  College of Staten Island/CUNY, where he teaches courses in philosophy,  economics, and law. He is the author of several  books—A Philosopher Reads Marvel Comics' Civil War: Exploring the  Moral Judgment of Captain America, Iron Man, and Spider-Man (Ockham Publishing), The Virtues of Captain America: Modern-Day Lessons  on Character from a World War II Superhero and Batman and Ethics  (both from Wiley-Blackwell), The Manipulation of Choice: Ethics and  Libertarian Paternalism, The Illusion of Well-Being: Economic Policymaking Based on Respect and Responsiveness, and The Decline on the Individual: Reconciling Autonomy with Community (all from Palgrave  Macmillan) —as well as over 60 academic  journal articles and book chapters in the intersections between economics, philosophy, and law. Mark is the editor of Palgrave's Perspectives from Social Economics series. His newest book is called A Philosopher Reads Marvel Comics' Thor: If They Be Worthy. | Mark D. White | ►Website | https://www.profmdwhite.com ► Instagram | https://www.instagram.com/profmdwhite ► Twitter| https://twitter.com/profmdwhite ► A Philosopher Reads Marvel Comics' Thor: If They Be Worthy  Link | To Be Determined (Update Coming Soon!)  Where you can find us: | Seize The Moment Podcast | ► Facebook | https://www.facebook.com/SeizeTheMoment ► Twitter | https://twitter.com/seize_podcast  ► Instagram | https://www.instagram.com/seizethemoment ► TikTok | https://www.tiktok.com/@seizethemomentpodcast ► Patreon | https://www.patreon.com/user?u=32208666

When President Biden declared, off-script, that Vladimir Putin cannot remain in power, many pundits reacted by calling it a gaffe that could be taken as declaring a policy of "regime change" in Russia. Why do so many assume that a political leader's moral condemnation of a regime is a call for war? Why don't they see the other important functions of moral judgment in foreign policy? Join Ben Bayer and Agustina Vergara Cid to explore answers to these questions as they apply to our relationship to Russia and to other areas of American foreign policy. Podcast audio:

DOCUMENTATION AND ADDITIONAL READING PART 1 (0:0 - 7:1): ────────────────── Christian Just War Theory: Some Principles for Thinking Christianly in Light of Attacks on Civilian Areas in Ukraine PART 2 (7:2 - 13:47): ────────────────── War in Ukraine Brings a Return to Objective Truth in Post-Christian Europe: The Sobering Reality of War and Moral Urgency to Confront Truth NEW YORK TIMES (ROGER COHEN) A Surge of Unifying Moral Outrage Over Russia's War PART 3 (13:48 - 19:30): ────────────────── The Oligarch Paradox: So What is Oligarchy, and What's behind the Western Strategy to Force Russia's Oligarchs to Suffer? PART 4 (19:31 - 25:26): ────────────────── Various Aspects of Culture Coalesce around a Moral Judgment as FIFA and the Metropolitan Opera Cancel Russia: The Inescapability and Comprehensiveness of the Biblical Worldview NEW YORK TIMES (JAVIER C. HERNáNDEZ) Metropolitan Opera Says It Will Cut Ties With Pro-Putin Artists

Moral preemption is the dominant strategy in hierarchical societies and is often used to score victories over opponents. Read the article by Nie Huihua: https://www.caixinglobal.com/2022-02-10/opinion-history-reveals-why-chinas-netizens-are-obsessed-with-moral-judgement-101840056.html Narrated by Nandini Venkata. Are you a big fan of our shows? Then please give our podcast account, China Business Insider, a 5-star rating on Spotify, Apple, or wherever you listen to podcasts!

Moral preemption is the dominant strategy in hierarchical societies and is often used to score victories over opponents.Read the article by Nie Huihua: https://www.caixinglobal.com/2022-02-10/opinion-history-reveals-why-chinas-netizens-are-obsessed-with-moral-judgement-101840056.htmlNarrated by Nandini Venkata.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Disgust is often thought of as a negative emotion, and even moreso when it comes to morality. Many have argued that the feeling we have when we are morally disgusted by others has a questionable evolutionary history, is not always reliably produced, and has inspired acts of great evil in our past. In his paper, Victor Kumar argues that it's not all bad though, and that moral disgust can sometimes be a fitting response to moral wrongs. Specifically, he argues that disgust is fitting when it is evoked by moral wrongs that pollute social relationships by eroding shared expectations of trust. In these cases, moral disgust can help right certain wrongs, serve as a useful tool for social signalling, and enourage political organization. Links and Resources * Victor Kumar (http://www.victorkumar.org/) * The paper (https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/p/pod/dod-idx/foul-behavior.pdf?c=phimp;idno=3521354.0017.015;format=pdf) * Is Disgust a "Conservative" Emotion? (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31619133/) * How Disgust Affects Social Judgments (https://psyarxiv.com/axhvn/?fbclid=IwAR3aDV5JSa2dxU_lhLVRAHStUSJK953vXL0QxjSop4f8moBMq6d3sEKptEs) * Martha Nussbaum, "From Disgust to Humanity" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWCe_b_8ZlM) * Steve Stich on disgust (https://www.canal-u.tv/video/fmsh/debunking_morality_a_hodgepodge_of_multipurpose_kludges.29523) * Yuck! The Nature and Moral Significance of Disgust By Daniel Kelly (https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/yuck) * Does Disgust Influence Moral Judgment? by Joshua May (https://philpapers.org/archive/MAYDDI-3.pdf) Paper Quotes Many philosophers are skeptical of moral disgust, perhaps because they assume that it is tied exclusively to conservative norms and values. I have shown, to the contrary, that disgust is implicated in important moral norms and values that are shared by liberals and conservatives. Disgust is repurposed in ways that support these norms and values, by motivating an important form of punishment, tracking the spread of moral violations, and expressively coordinating collective action. Disgust accurately reflects the nature of certain wrongs that commonly elicit moral revulsion. Instead of ridding ourselves of disgust, then, we would do better to understand its fittingness and unfittingness, its uses and its hazards, and thus arrive at a richer appreciation of its suitability for moral life. Special Guest: Victor Kumar.

Is it fair to say you've been outraged by some of the risky things you've seen people doing during this pandemic? And is it also fair to say that maybe (just maybe) your assessment of how risky those things were.... was very, very biased? Also, why are so many of us so anxious about life going back to normal?

In this episode of the podcast, Dr. Ryan Moyer speaks with social psychologist Dr. David Pizarro about moral judgment. They discussed how emotions can influence moral judgments, if too much empathy can be a bad thing, how disgust can impact your political attitudes, and how to balance emotion & reason when forming moral judgments. For more on David, follow him on Twitter or check out his podcast, Very Bad Wizards. Why Do We Do That? is a psychology podcast that deconstructs human behavior from the perspectives of social scientists, psychologists, and others that use applied psychology in their work. Website | Instagram | Twitter | YouTube

Présentation du big boss de la philosophie morale : l'utilitarisme. Vouloir maximiser le bonheur du plus grand nombre, c'est forcément bien, non ? Pas si vite... Le site de Singer où vous pouvez télecharger gratuitement son livre en anglais : https://www.thelifeyoucansave.org/ Les livres dont je parle (liens d'affiliation): Kymlicka, les théories de la justice : https://amzn.to/2MWoJ7K Singer, Sauver une vie :  https://amzn.to/2FmXFu5 Greene, Les tribus morales : https://amzn.to/2tzT9FO Bloom, Against empathy : https://amzn.to/2tuLjgY Haidt, The righteous mind : https://amzn.to/2MWMwUV Le podcast avec Singer : https://80000hours.org/podcast/episodes/peter-singer-advocacy-and-the-life-you-can-save/ Le discours d'Himmler : https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/himmler-poznan/ Ce n'est que grâce à vos dons que je peux faire des vidéos ! Si vous aimez mon travail et souhaitez qu'il continue, n'hésitez pas à me soutenir financièrement sur uTip ou Tipeee : https://utip.io/homofabulus https://tipeee.com/homofabulus/ (Vous pouvez aussi y acheter des t-shirts et mugs stylés. Merci à toutes et tous pour votre soutien !) Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/H0moFabulus/ Twitter : https://twitter.com/homofabulus pour les infos strictement liées à la chaîne et https://twitter.com/stdebove pour mon compte perso alimenté plus régulièrement Insta : https://www.instagram.com/stephanedebove/ Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-Dmq5q3-FIBknv1TVIR__Q Musique : Perfect Time, Toby Tranter Références 1. Bourget, D. & Chalmers, D. J. What do philosophers believe? Philosophical Studies 170, 465–500. issn: 15730883 (2013). 2. Williams, B. Moral Luck (Cambridge University Press, 1981). 3. Greene, J. D. An fMRI Investigation of Emotional Engagement in Moral Judgment. Science 293, 2101–2105. issn: 00368075 (2001). 4. Baron, J. Blind justice: Fairness to groups and the do-no-harm principle. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 8, 71–83. issn: 10990771 (1995). 5. Baron, J. & Ritov, I. Intuitions about penalties and compensation in the context of tort law. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 7, 17–33. issn: 08955646 (1993). 6. Baumard, N. The Origins of Fairness: How Evolution Explains Our Moral Nature (Oxford University Press, 2015). 7. SPERBER, D. Intuitive and Reflective Beliefs. Mind & Language 12, 67–83 (1997). 8. Descartes, R. Meditations on First Philosophy 1–33 (1641). 9. Greene, J. D., Morelli, S. A., Lowenberg, K., Nystrom, L. E. & Cohen, J. D. Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment. Cognition 107, 1144–1154. issn: 00100277 (2008). 10. Goodin, R. E. Utilitarianism as a public philosophy (Cambridge University Press, 1995). 11. Brink, D. O. Utilitarian Morality and the Personal Point of View. The Journal of Philosophy 83, 417–438 (1986). 12. Kymlicka, W. Contemporary Political Philosophy - an introduction 3, 276–277. isbn: 0198782748 (2012). 13. Smart, J. J. C. ( J. C. & Williams, B. Utilitarianism : for and against 155. isbn: 9780521098229 (University Press, 1973).

In the spirit of the 2020 US presidential election, Dr. Jonathan Baron and I discuss moral judgment and individual decision-making in today's episode. Dr. Baron is the founding editor of the open-access journal Judgment and Decision Making and has been on several other journals' editorial boards. He is a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the Association for Psychological Science, and was the President of the Society for Judgment and Decision Making.* Dr. Baron's work has occurred primarily within the field of judgment and decision making, a multi-disciplinary area that applies psychology to problems in economics, law, business, and public policy. This field began by contrasting human decision behavior to individual decision-making and judgment theories such as probability theory and expected utility. Baron's research has extended the focus of judgment and decision making to social problems of resource allocation and ethical decisions. Among the concepts associated with his work are omission bias (the tendency for people to excuse acts of omission more easily than acts of commission) and protected values (principles on which people are unwilling to accept tradeoffs).* Dr. Baron is the author of Thinking and Deciding. The text takes a broad-based, introductory-level view of psychological decision theory, and has seen use as a textbook. He has also authored Morality and Rational Choice, Against Bioethics, and Judgment Misguided.* During our interview, we discussed:-The trends of political polarization and conspiracy thinking.-The problems of improving everyday decisions as a result of institutional issues.-Applying general principles of decision analysis.-The evolution of a person's social standards.-Omission bias in politics.-The cost-benefit analysis of environmental policies.-The expression of moral and moralistic values regarding the political issues of gay marriage and abortion.-The role of empathy in the utilitarian point of view.-The factors that affect moral judgment.*** To learn more about Dr. Jonathan Baron, check out https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~baron/!*** Interested in sponsoring the podcast? Please complete our podcast sponsorship form.*** If you enjoy the podcast, would you please consider leaving a short review on Apple Podcasts/Itunes? It takes less than 60 seconds and other listeners and guests definitely appreciate them!

Can the fact that something is morally wrong to believe affect whether the evidence you have justifies that belief? In her paper, Georgi Gardiner argues that the answer is "no". We should follow the evidence where it leads and align our beliefs with the evidence. And if we do that, she argues, we’ll discover that morally wrong beliefs—such as racist beliefs--simply don’t align with the evidence. On this view, racist beliefs are irrational because they are unsupported by evidence or reflect cognitive errors in statistical reasoning, not because they are immoral. Links and Resources Georgi Gardiner (https://sites.google.com/site/georgigardiner/) The paper (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1E10KHE0lGSlgyCJVSFr_YrqtFfCxwqG4/view) On the Epistemic Costs of Implicit Bias by Tamar Gendler (https://www.philosophy.rutgers.edu/joomlatools-files/docman-files/Gendler%20(2011)%20On%20the%20Epistemic%20Costs%20of%20Implicit%20Bias%20May%202011%20Phil%20Studies.pdf) Varieties of Moral Encroachment by Renée Jorgensen Bolinger (https://www.reneebolinger.com/uploads/1/0/2/6/102668958/varietiesofencroachment.pdf) Radical moral encroachment: The moral stakes of racist beliefs by Rima Basu (https://philpapers.org/archive/BASRME-2.pdf) Doxastic Wronging by Rima Basu & Mark Schroeder (https://philpapers.org/archive/BASDW.pdf) Beyond Accuracy: Epistemic Flaws with Statistical Generalizations by Jessie Munton (https://80a93457-7df3-471f-8728-538bb500333a.filesusr.com/ugd/131a85_e293fd8b510042e1a63022ca9b3011b9.pdf) Paper Quotes "Advocates of moral encroachment aim to describe a person whose beliefs are epistemically impeccable—well supported by the evidence and conscientiously considered—yet morally wrong because racist. My contention is that no such belief can exist. If a belief is morally wrong then there is some corresponding prior epistemic error. The belief is not well supported by the evidence and/or it is not interpreted through a morally appropriate understanding, and that understanding is not epistemically well supported. If a belief is epistemically well supported it cannot be racist since no true fact is genuinely racist. With the right background understanding we see that since everyone is equal, any differences based on gender, race, and so on are morally insignificant." Special Guest: Georgi Gardiner.

I ask the philosopher Barbara Herman five questions about herself. Barbara Herman is Griffin Professor of Philosophy and Professor of Law at UCLA. Her books include "Moral Literacy" (2008) and "The Practice of Moral Judgment" (2006).

------------------Support the channel------------ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenter SubscribeStar: https://www.subscribestar.com/the-dissenter PayPal: paypal.me/thedissenter PayPal Subscription 1 Dollar: https://tinyurl.com/yb3acuuy PayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9l PayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpz PayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9m PayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao ------------------Follow me on--------------------- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheDissenterYT Anchor (podcast): https://anchor.fm/thedissenter Dr. H. Clark Barrett is Professor in the Department of Anthropology, and the Director of the Center for Behavior, Evolution and Culture at UCLA. His research has focused on learning and conceptual development in several domains, including “theory of mind,” or the ability to make inferences about others' thoughts and intentions, and learning about danger. He's the author of the book The Shape of Thought: How Mental Adaptations Evolve. In this episode, we talk about consciousness, theory of mind, moral judgment, and cross-cultural studies of the human mind. We start with consciousness, and we discuss the role that it plays and what functions it might serve from an evolutionary perspective. Then, we talk about theory of mind, and we question if a mentalistic basis of morality, and more specifically moral judgment, is found across all societies, or is culturally variable. In the second part of the talk, we mention the WEIRD problem, and how to improve the science of the human mind, develop a true cognitive science of the human mind, and improve psychological studies. -- A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS/SUPPORTERS: KARIN LIETZCKE, ANN BLANCHETTE, PER HELGE LARSEN, LAU GUERREIRO, JERRY MULLER, HANS FREDRIK SUNDE, BERNARDO SEIXAS, HERBERT GINTIS, RUTGER VOS, RICARDO VLADIMIRO, BO WINEGARD, CRAIG HEALY, OLAF ALEX, PHILIP KURIAN, JONATHAN VISSER, DAVID DIAS, ANJAN KATTA, JAKOB KLINKBY, ADAM KESSEL, MATTHEW WHITINGBIRD, ARNAUD WOLFF, TIM HOLLOSY, HENRIK AHLENIUS, JOHN CONNORS, PAULINA BARREN, FILIP FORS CONNOLLY, DAN DEMETRIOU, ROBERT WINDHAGER, RUI INACIO, ARTHUR KOH, ZOOP, MARCO NEVES, MAX BEILBY, COLIN HOLBROOK, SUSAN PINKER, THOMAS TRUMBLE, PABLO SANTURBANO, SIMON COLUMBUS, PHIL KAVANAGH, JORGE ESPINHA, CORY CLARK, MARK BLYTH, ROBERTO INGUANZO, MIKKEL STORMYR, ERIC NEURMANN, SAMUEL ANDREEFF, FRANCIS FORDE, TIAGO NUNES, BERNARD HUGUENEY, ALEXANDER DANNBAUER, OMARI HICKSON, PHYLICIA STEVENS, FERGAL CUSSEN, YEVHEN BODRENKO, HAL HERZOG, NUNO MACHADO, DON ROSS, JOÃO ALVES DA SILVA, JONATHAN LEIBRANT, JOÃO LINHARES, OZLEM BULUT, NATHAN NGUYEN, STANTON T, SAMUEL CORREA, ERIK HAINES, MARK SMITH, J.W., JOÃO EIRA, TOM HUMMEL, SARDUS FRANCE, DAVID SLOAN WILSON, YACILA DEZA-ARAUJO, AND IDAN SOLON! A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, JIM FRANK, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, IAN GILLIGAN, SERGIU CODREANU, LUIS CAYETANO, MATTHEW LAVENDER, TOM VANEGDOM, CURTIS DIXON, BENEDIKT MUELLER, AND VEGA GIDEY! AND TO MY EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS, MICHAL RUSIECKI, ROSEY, AND JAMES PRATT!

More Content on Narcissism, Psychopathy, Sociopathy and Antisocial Personality DisorderFor even more, scientifically informed content on psychology and personality check out Dr. Grande's YouTube channel.You can also subscribe to Mental Health // Demystified with Dr. Tracey Marks and Healthy // Toxic, two new shows coming soon!Ars Longa MediaTo learn more about or to support Ars Longa Media and this podcast, go to arslonga.media. We welcome your feedback at info@arslonga.media.

In this episode of Tent Talks, I speak with Dr. David Pizarro, who is a professor of psychology at Cornell University, and cohost of the popular podcast, Very Bad Wizards. In this episode, Professor Pizarro and I talk about his podcast, his work on moral judgment, disgust sensitivity and trustworthiness, and the art of rapContinue reading "44. Moral Judgment, Disgust Sensitivity, and Political Affiliation (with Professor David Pizarro)"

Is Big Data able to take decisions for us, humans? In this episode, we talk to the Big Data expert from nPowered, Piotr Jegier about the traps that many of us will encounter as we start to rely more any more on data. We dive into the topic of cognitive biases and try to understand in what domains humans still can't be replaced by AI.IMPORTANT LINKSnPowered - what we doPiotr's twitterFlat Earthers' documentary - BEHIND THE CURVE | Official HD Trailer (2018) | DOCUMENTARY | Film Threat Trailers (YT)Things that correlate, but that does not really mean anything (Spurious Correlations by Tyler Vigen)The software that helps judges make bail decisions, which does not like black peopleJohn Cleese on Creativity, including open vs. closed mode (YT)Modern portfolio theory, ie. making sure your many mistakes of forecasting compensate each other (Wikipedia)Traveling Wilburys, the supergroup and the history behind their nameAn article on The Butterfly Effect and Edward Lorenz's contribution to the Chaos TheoryOn the often-discussed death of strategy in business in these turbulent times - IMD: Strategy is dead? Long live strategic thinking!. Diagnostics, alternatives and choice By Emeritus Professor Paul StrebelAn interesting article on what you might make when you do strategy, includes the strategy statement and the strategic sweet spot: - Can You Say What Your Strategy Is? by David J. Collis and Michael G. RukstadComments by the CEO of T-Mobile Poland on "turning the tanker around"Ethics and addiction in tech product design: How Technology is Hijacking Your Mind — from a Magician and Google Design Ethicist, by Tristan HarrisWhat is the Turing Test? (a short video from Cnet on YT)On the General AI and the control problem (YT) - Can we build AI without losing control over it? | Sam Harris (TED)Confirmation Bias - a good intro by Shahram Heshmat Ph.D. on Psychology TodayA Vox article outlining the work of Dan Kahan on how the (politically) motivated reasoning makes us stupid, and how scientific curiosity can counteract this effectA place where you can learn more on Open Science movement and pre-register your research hypotheses - Center for Open Science - preregister your hypothesesAI Control Problem (Wikipedia)An episode of Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast, "The Destroyer of Worlds" on the difficult and risky early years of the nuclear cold war on EarthA selection of 10 particularly non-obvious "For Dummies" booksAn inspiring introduction and overview of Getting Things Done method (and book) by its creator, David Allen, on Google Tech TalksAn accessible and irreverent discussion of the Extended Mind article by Andy Clark and David Chalmers and the distributed cognition concept, on the Very Bad Wizards podcastPeter Thiel's favorite job interview question, as written up by QuartzThe original article on the primacy and precedence of (moral) emotions compared to reasoning - more accessible writeups are also easy to find online - The Emotional Dog and Its Rational Tail: A Social Intuitionist Approach to Moral Judgment, Jonathan Haidt, University of Virginia

------------------Support the channel------------ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenter SubscribeStar: https://www.subscribestar.com/the-dissenter PayPal: paypal.me/thedissenter PayPal Subscription 1 Dollar: https://tinyurl.com/yb3acuuy PayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9l PayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpz PayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9m PayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao ------------------Follow me on--------------------- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheDissenterYT Anchor (podcast): https://anchor.fm/thedissenter Dr. Peter DeScioli is Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at Stony Brook University. His research investigates how the human mind uses principles of strategy to solve problems in the social world. Much of his work has focused on moral condemnation, especially the functions of morally judging other people, moralistic punishment, and moral impartiality. In another line of work, he studies how people form alliances, how they choose their loyalties to others, and how they display and conceal their loyalties. A third project looks at our sense of ownership by using a virtual environment to observe resource disputes in the laboratory. In recent years, he has been designing online games for experiments about politics, including redistribution of wealth, social safety nets, alliance formation, and political negotiation. In this episode, we talk about the evolution of (human) morality, and several of its features, mostly based on a presentation by Dr. DeScioli. First, he tells us about some of the basics on the evolutionary psychology of morality. We talk specifically about evolved algorithms of the mind and moral modules. We then get into how we go from moral intuitions to explicit moral rules, and the role of culture. After that, we discuss moral judgment and the side-taking hypothesis, as well as some of the moral mysteries that it solves. Finally, we discuss the psychology of coordination and common knowledge. -- Follow Dr. DeScioli's work: Faculty Page: https://bit.ly/2MgHvbW Website: https://bit.ly/2QrWRJg The Evolution Institute profile: https://bit.ly/30qWClw ResearchGate profile: https://bit.ly/2YUakwl SLIDES from the presentation: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1jcDfpRm9U-Bq1Wi78dqTZt3Q61NLh41R -- A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS: KARIN LIETZCKE, ANN BLANCHETTE, SCIMED, PER HELGE HAAKSTD LARSEN, LAU GUERREIRO, RUI BELEZA, MIGUEL ESTRADA, ANTÓNIO CUNHA, CHANTEL GELINAS, JERRY MULLER, FRANCIS FORD, HANS FREDRIK SUNDE, BRIAN RIVERA, ADRIANO ANDRADE, YEVHEN BODRENKO, SERGIU CODREANU, ADAM BJERRE, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, AIRES ALMEIDA, BERNARDO SEIXAS, HERBERT GINTIS, RUTGER VOS, AND RICARDO VLADIMIRO! A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, ROSEY, AND JIM FRANK!

In this episode of Functional Philosophy, I answer the following question: 00:48 - "Should a competent (that is, not mentally retarded or mentally hindered in some significant way) adult be held equally culpable for both their conscious premises and those they hold implicitly? I’m referring specifically to those most fundamental to a person’s philosophy, such as free will, benevolent vs. malevolent universe premise, and whether they hold the cardinal virtues to be moral or immoral. I feel as though evasion is the only way one can refrain from consciously considering these most important issues, and it also requires evasion and/or dishonesty to consciously adopt morally abhorrent premises. Is this correct, or am I missing something?" *** Functional Philosophy is the weekly Q&A podcast that helps you develop the philosophical foundations required to achieve certainty, success, and happiness. Subscribe to hear Objectivist philosopher Charles Tew answer your questions on Ayn Rand's philosophy and its application to politics, career, romance, and more. New episodes on Mondays. Website: https://www.charlestew.com YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/charlestew Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/charlestew

------------------Support the channel------------ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenter SubscribeStar: https://www.subscribestar.com/the-dissenter PayPal: paypal.me/thedissenter PayPal Subscription 1 Dollar: https://tinyurl.com/yb3acuuy PayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9l PayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpz PayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9m PayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao ------------------Follow me on--------------------- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheDissenterYT Dr. Cory Clark is an Assistant Professor of Quantitative Social Psychology at Durham University, UK. Dr. Clark does research in Moral Psychology, Political Psychology, Experimental Philosophy, and Motivated Cognition. She's also the cohost of Psyphilopod. In this episode, we focus on experimental philosophy, moral judgment, beliefs in free will and determinism, and political bias. We first talk about the new field of experimental philosophy, and how it differs from how philosophy was traditionally done. We then get into some specific topics like people's belief in free will and their need to attribute moral responsibility, and how they deal with a deterministic view of the world that comes from science. Also, how people judge themselves and others differently, or the fundamental attribution error. And how liberals and conservatives think about free will, determinism and compatibilism. We then move on to discuss biases, starting off with what is the best way to think about them; in what ways political biases are special; and the impact they have on science. Finally, we got through what we know about how liberals and conservatives deal with different viewpoints and ideas, and several hypotheses to explain where that comes from. -- Follow Dr. Clark's work: Faculty page: https://bit.ly/2TO0dpP Website: https://www.coryjclark.com/ Articles on Researchgate: https://bit.ly/2Hxk36e Twitter handle: @ImHardcory -- A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS: KARIN LIETZCKE, ANN BLANCHETTE, SCIMED, PER HELGE HAAKSTD LARSEN, LAU GUERREIRO, RUI BELEZA, MIGUEL ESTRADA, ANTÓNIO CUNHA, CHANTEL GELINAS, JIM FRANK, JERRY MULLER, FRANCIS FORD, HANS FREDRIK SUNDE, BRIAN RIVERA, ADRIANO ANDRADE, YEVHEN BODRENKO, SERGIU CODREANU, ADAM BJERRE, JUSTIN WATERS, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK AND AIRES ALMEIDA! A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY FIRST PRODUCER, Yzar Wehbe!

In today’s episode, we give low-temp takes on Fahrenheit vs. Celsius, and high-temp takes on meaning! After blowing Robyn’s mind by demystifying DMs, unpacking the truly disturbing original version the “Baby Shark” song, and choosing our animal sidekicks (editor’s note: Brian’s would be a mischievous but loyal cartoon wolf named Wolfram), we continue our deep dive into some of Lonergan’s lesser-known writings. This week’s discussion is focused on Lonergan’s 1965 lecture, “Dimensions of Meaning,” which appears in Volume 4 of The Collected Works of Bernard Lonergan. True to its title, “Dimensions of Meaning” is a discussion of meaning, but—true to form—Lonergan means something very specific by “meaning.” What is the relationship of language and meaning? How does the mediation of meaning shape social and cultural development? How does meaning serve a constitutive function? Do we make meanings? Where do the natural sciences fit? These and similar questions are what drive today’s discussion. TITLE NAMED IN MAIN SEGMENT Jaspers, Karl. The Origin and Goal of History. Abingon: Routledge, 2016. Lonergan, Bernard J.F. “Dimensions of Meaning.” In Collection: Papers by Bernard J.F. Lonergan, edited by Frederick E. Crowe and Robert M. Doran, 232–45. Collected Works of Bernard Lonergan, Volume 4. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993. Lonergan, Bernard J.F. Insight: A Study of Human Understanding. Edited by Frederick E. Crowe and Robert M. Doran. 5th Edition. Collected Works of Bernard Lonergan, Volume 3. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992. Lonergan, Bernard J.F. Method in Theology. Edited by Robert M. Doran and John D. Dadosky. Collected Works of Bernard Lonergan, Volume 14. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2017. Lonergan, Bernard J.F. Verbum: Word and Idea in Aquinas. Edited by Frederick E. Crowe and Robert M. Doran. Vol. Volume 2. Collected Works of Bernard Lonergan. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997. O’Regan, Cyril. “The ‘Gift’ of Modernity.” Church Life Journal (Notre Dame), March 20, 2018. https://churchlife.nd.edu/2018/03/20/the-gift-of-modernity/ Piaget, Jean. The Moral Judgment of the Child. New York: Free Press, 1997. TREASURES OLD AND NEW Exciting update: we have a Patreon! Check out the page at https://www.patreon.com/systematically and please consider making a much-appreciated donation. There reating and posting each episode of Systematically We’re still working through what special content we will provide for our subscribers (mini-episodes, submission opportunities, merch, etc.), but we promise the perks will be exciting. As always, your support is greatly appreciated! Our theme music is “14 Ghosts II” by Nine Inch Nails, available at https://archive.org/details/nineinchnails_ghosts_I_IV “14 Ghosts II” is used under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike license. We would like to thank Trent Reznor and Nine Inch Nails for the use of this track. Follow us and chat with us on Twitter @SystematicPod Email us at SystematicallyPodcast@gmail.com Subscribe and Review us on iTunes: Systematically Podcast Subscribe on iTunes! Please search for Systematically Podcast, hit the “Subscribe” button, and—if you’re feeling so inclined—leave us a review. As Jon points out, five is a good number of stars! Lastly, if you enjoy our conversations, please share them with your friends!

In this episode of Functional Philosophy, I answer the following questions: 00:39 - "Do you think the obsession with sports teams in America and globally is an expression of collectivism inculcated within the culture? If so, to what extent do you think this is responsible for said obsession?" 13:50 - "I'm constantly seeing people express the idea that it is wrong to judge someone based on their beliefs. Instead, that a man may only be judged for his actions. For example, it would be wrong to say that a Muslim is evil just because he believes in Islam, and that people should self-sacrifice for Allah. Rather, it would only be appropriate to judge a Muslim as being evil if he actually acted out his beliefs by murdering infidels[...] My response to this would be to point out that beliefs lead to action, and that people who poison their minds with falsehoods will inevitably be influenced by them in action. I also like to appeal to absurdity by saying something such as the following: "Hannibal Lecter is evil because he wants to murder and eat people, and he likely will, if given the opportunity. But if we strap him to a table such that he is unable to move, and therefore act out his evil beliefs, is he no longer evil?" In addition to this, I've heard Jordan Peterson say that a man's beliefs are defined by the way he acts. So, if someone doesn't act according to his stated beliefs, then he doesn't actually hold those beliefs[...] Should people be judged for their beliefs, and, if so, why? How do people's beliefs, not actions, relate to my happiness? What does belief even mean?" *** Functional Philosophy is the show in which Objectivist philosopher Charles Tew helps you gain and strengthen the philosophical foundations required to achieve certainty, success, and happiness. If you're curious to see how Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism can bring revolutionary clarity to your life, give it a listen. Website: www.charlestew.com YouTube: www.youtube.com/charlestew Patreon: www.patreon.com/charlestew

In today’s episode, we begin by discussing our most memorable cooking failures, asking a proverbial chicken/egg question: “Does Robyn have no memories of her cooking failures because her culinary record is perfect, or is Robyn’s culinary record perfect because her memory has selectively deleted her cooking failures?” Regardless of where you stand on this issue, we doubt you’ll disagree that her area of research is fascinating. This research is focused on the theology of children, which is the topic of today’s main segment. Robyn walks us through contemporary debates about children’s humanity, dignity, agency, etc., pointing out how much work remains to be done within this burgeoning field. Robyn then gives us an introduction to her own work in developing a nuanced, holistic, and honest account of children and their decision-making, especially as this relates to theological anthropology and ethics. Jon shares his Treasures Old and New, and then we say goodbye. Exciting reminder: We are now on iTunes! Please search for Systematically Podcast, hit the “Subscribe” button, and—if you’re feeling so inclined—leave us a review. As Jon points out, five stars is a good number! TITLES NAMED IN MAIN SEGMENT Blackwood, Jeremy W. And Hope Does Not Disappoint: Love, Grace, and Subjectivity in the Work of Bernard J. F. Lonergan, S.J. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 2017. Derrida, Jacques. The Animal That Therefore I Am. Edited by Marie-Louis Mallet. Translated by David Wills. New York: Fordham University Press, 2008. Doran, Robert M. Theology and the Dialectics of History. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1990. Jensen, David H. Graced Vulnerability: A Theology Of Childhood. Cleveland: Pilgrim Press, 2005. Gandolfo, Elizabeth O’Donnell. The Power and Vulnerability of Love: A Theological Anthropology. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2015. Lonergan, Bernard J.F. Insight: A Study of Human Understanding. Edited by Frederick E. Crowe and Robert M. Doran. 5th Edition. Collected Works of Bernard Lonergan, Volume 3. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992. Lonergan, Bernard J.F. Method in Theology. Edited by Robert M. Doran and John D. Dadosky. Collected Works of Bernard Lonergan, Volume 14. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2017. Piaget, Jean. The Moral Judgment of the Child. New York: Free Press, 1997. Rahner, Karl. “Ideas for a Theology of Childhood.” In Theological Investigations, Volume 8: Further Theology of the Spiritual Life 2. 33–50. London/New York: Darton, Longman & Todd/Herder and Herder, 1971. Rothko, Mark, and Kate Prizel Rothko. The Artist’s Reality: Philosophies of Art. Edited by Christopher Rothko. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006. Wall, John. “Childhood Studies, Hermeneutics, and Theological Ethics.” Journal of Religion 86, no. 4 (2006): 523–548. Wall, John. “Fatherhood, Childism, and the Creation of Society.” In Journal of the American Academy of Religion 75, no. 1 (2007): 52–76. Wall, John. “Human Rights in Light of Childhood.” In International Journal of Children’s Rights 16 (2008) 523–543. “TREASURES OLD AND NEW” Walsh, J. P. M. The Mighty from Their Thrones: Power in Biblical Tradition. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2004. George, Robert P., and R. J. Snell. Mind, Heart, and Soul: Intellectuals and the Path to Rome. Charlotte: TAN Books, 2018. Our theme music is “14 Ghosts II” by Nine Inch Nails, available at https://archive.org/details/nineinchnails_ghosts_I_IV “14 Ghosts II” is used under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike license. We would like to thank Trent Reznor and Nine Inch Nails for the use of this track. Follow us on Twitter @SystematicPod Email us at SystematicallyPodcast@gmail.com Subscribe and Review us on iTunes: Systematically Podcast

This is Albert Mohler for Townhall.com. On the issue of pornography, the New York Times has just given us an example of what moral surrender looks like. The cover story of the magazine is titled, “What Teenagers Are Learning From Online Porn.” The main argument is that pornography has become the main vehicle for sex education amongst American teenagers. Access appears to be such a given in terms of the adolescent experience in our nation today that the New York Times Magazine article is mostly important because of its central message: This is simply a reality you're going to have to find a way to deal with it. In one amazing paragraph, the author—Maggie Jones—actually suggests that the moral issue is not whether or not teenagers are looking at pornography, but what kind of pornography they are viewing and whether or not it brings out a certain form of sexism in them. It’s as if—as a society—we’re really past the ability to render moral judgment. It’s another dark milestone in the moral context of our culture. I’m Albert Mohler.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

"Don Clausen and I have been friends for 40 years. We met at what was then USL at, appropriately enough, a protest over tuition hikes. We fluctuated in and out of touch before reconnecting in the early years of this century here in Lafayette. By this time Don was well into his career as a social worker specializing in one form or another of addictive behaviors. Over the years we've had hundreds of conversations that have mixed social, cultural and political analysis with the insights he's gleaned through what are now the three decades of his work in the field. He's been working on his Ph.D. in Social Work at Jackson State University in Mississippi. He's ABD — all but dissertation — at this point and the conversations have gotten richer as he's brought what he's learned from his research of the history of the field of addiction treatment to our ongoing conversations. This is the third time Don's appeared on the podcast. This conversation covers some of the earliest days of the addiction as a disease model and, in it, Clausen discusses some of the moral and class biases that have shaped the field from its early days and which I would say distort it today. Dr. Benjamin Rush shaped the field from its earliest days. He was the first to classify addiction as a disease. Later academicians and practitioners applied a moral judgment to the disease model and treatment programs based on that analysis have flourished for more than 150 years. What is clear is that the moral judgments were applied to the addictions (primarily alcohol) of the lower classes, while addictions of the upper classes (which included drugs) were written off as 'products of success.' We talk about that where the moral judgments were and were not applied. We also delve into the way society conditions us for addiction and abandons us by not providing us the tools to understand and address those itches we try to scratch or numb with substances of choice — some legal, some not. The next time Don is on the show, he'll be a full Ph.D. and I'll have to defer to his knowledge. Until then, we'll rumble!"

Mark Valeri from Washington University in St. Louis delivers a talk titled “Free Conscience, Moral Judgment, and Social Affections in Evangelical New England.” Response by Joanna Brooks from San Diego State University. This talk was included in the session titled “Evangelical New England.” Part of “Religious Affections in Colonial North America,” a conference held at The Huntington Jan. 27–28, 2017.

In this lecture, Professor Matt Zwolinski discusses how price-gougers and sweatshop owners may benefit consumers and workers, even when the benefits they bestow would be described as "exploitation" by some observers. Zwolinski briefly discusses how and under what conditions these relationships can be mutually beneficial, and then asks why so many people think that price-gougers and sweatshop owners who provide opportunities to the poor that would otherwise be unavailable are worse than people who do nothing at all to help the poor. Zwolinski argues that our intuitions about these cases are misleading, and that we should revise them if we discover that people who protest sweatshops and price-gouging make the poor worse off than they would be without them.

Marvel's Civil War is a unique event in the comic book world. It's not superheroes fighting a giant monster or facing the end of the universe. It's heroes battling against each other over ideology.   Today, we're diving into the philosophy of Iron Man, Captain America, and Spider-Man with the Comics Professor himself Mark D. White about his latest book, A Philosopher Reads Marvel Comics' Civil War: Exploring the Moral Judgment of Captain America, Iron Man, and Spider-Man!   You can find the book on Amazon here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/1910780103 And find out more about Mark on his website: http://www.profmdwhite.com/   Whose side are you on? Let us know on twitter! @NerdSync

On to Book 3 of Paradise Lost: Shelley on God's viciousness; God's jokes about Satan; similarities between the Son and Satan (via their courage) and God and Satan (via their gaming for humanity).  Question of justifying the ways of God to men: do we judge whether he's just?  How? Euthyphro dilemma.  Luther on God's apparently unjust ways (can't be justified independently to us).  Poetry in hell; philosophy in hell.

Silke Ackermann, Nigel Biggar and Liz Bruton debate the ethics of science and scientists going to war Silke Ackermann (Director, Museum of the History of Science) Liz Bruton (Co-curator, “Dear Harry”… Henry Moseley: A Scientist Lost to War) and Nigel Biggar (Regius Professor of Moral and Pastoral Theology, University of Oxford) will discuss the ethics of scientists going to war in response to the current Museum of the History of Science exhibition exploring the life and legacy of talented English physicist Henry Moseley. When Moseley was killed on the battlefield at Gallipoli in August 1915, newspapers on all sides of the conflict denounced his tragic death with one English newspaper headline proclaiming that Moseley was "too valuable to die". Moseley's death contributed to a changing attitude to scientists and science going to war with scientists and engineers being kept away from the frontline. Instead the work of scientists and engineers - research and expertise - is used to meet military goals with scientific research increasingly relying on military funding. In this discussion, the speakers discuss the ethics of scientific research being used for military ends as well as whether scientists being held back from frontline service means others serve and die in their place.

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on major branches of philosophy, displaying the confederate flag, taxpayer-funded abortions, and more in this 15 March 2015 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on major branches of philosophy, displaying the confederate flag, taxpayer-funded abortions, and more in this 15 March 2015 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on fractional reserve banking, fraud, and deception, people unworthy of the truth, deception in a business partner, and more in this 8 March 2015 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on fractional reserve banking, fraud, and deception, people unworthy of the truth, deception in a business partner, and more in this 8 March 2015 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell discussed "Responsibility & Luck, Chapter Six" with listeners in this 15 January 2015 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell discussed "Responsibility & Luck, Chapter Six" with listeners in this 15 January 2015 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell discussed "Responsibility & Luck, Chapter Five" with listeners in this 4 December 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell discussed "Responsibility & Luck, Chapter Five" with listeners in this 4 December 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on psychics in a free society, fear of leading a worthless life, and more in this 5 October 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on psychics in a free society, fear of leading a worthless life, and more in this 5 October 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on blaming crime victims, constitutional carry, hijacking Ayn Rand's ideas, and more in this 21 September 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on blaming crime victims, constitutional carry, hijacking Ayn Rand's ideas, and more in this 21 September 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell interviewed Kelly Elmore about "Why Growth Mindsets Matter" in this 28 August 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell interviewed Kelly Elmore about "Why Growth Mindsets Matter" in this 28 August 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell podcast on "Moral Conflicts and the Virtue of Justice" in this 20 August 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell podcast on "Moral Conflicts and the Virtue of Justice" in this 20 August 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on compulsory vaccination, requiting evil with good, and more in this 3 August 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on compulsory vaccination, requiting evil with good, and more in this 3 August 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell discussed "Responsibility & Luck, Chapter Four" with listeners in this 17 July 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell discussed "Responsibility & Luck, Chapter Four" with listeners in this 17 July 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell discussed "Responsibility & Luck, Chapter Three" with listeners in this 19 June 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell discussed "Responsibility & Luck, Chapter Three" with listeners in this 19 June 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell discussed "Responsibility & Luck, Chapter Two" with listeners in this 5 June 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell discussed "Responsibility & Luck, Chapter Two" with listeners in this 5 June 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Tamler and David leech off of their listeners and dedicate an episode to their favorite comments, questions, and criticisms from the past few weeks (but not before Tamler goes on a rant about bicycle helmets). Included in this episode: Does doing research on hypothetical moral dilemmas actually say anything about how people would act in real life? Do people make different moral judgments in their native language than in a more recently acquired language? Do Tamler and David only appeal to intuitions when it's convenient for the view they are defending? Do they hold "barbaric" views about justice and revenge? Does doing philosophy make your life better? And, perhaps most importantly, why do we seem to mention porn on every episode? LinksBicycle helmet effectiveness [wikipedia.org]Tamler's appearance on The Partially Examined Life podcast [partiallyexaminedlife.com]Axons and Axioms podcast [axonsandaxioms.com]Spacetime Mind podcast [spacetimemind.com]A valuable site if you're interested in putting together your own podcast: Dan Benjamin's Podcasting Handbook [podcastinghandbook.co]If you like the music we use, you can listen/download here: soundcloud.com/peezismynamePea Soup Blog [peasoup.typepad.com]Qualia [wikipedia.org]Judith Jarvis Thomson's "A Defense of Abortion" [wikipedia.org]Entranced by Reality by Ian Corbin (Review of "A Life Worth Living: Albert Camus and the Quest for Meaning" by Robert Zaretsky). [theamericanconservative.com]Iranian killer's execution halted at last minute by victim's parents by Saeed Kamali Dehghan [theguardian.com]Academic Articles MentionedBartels, Daniel M. (2008), "Principled Moral Sentiment and the Flexibility of Moral Judgment and Decision Making," Cognition, 108, 381-417. [uchicago.edu]Costa, A., Foucart, A., Hayakawa, S., Aparici, M., Apesteguia, J., Heafner, J., & Keysar, B. (2014). Your Morals Depend on Language. PloS one, 9(4), e94842. [plosone.org]Gold, N., Colman, A. M., & Pulford, B. D. (2014). Cultural differences in responses to real-life and hypothetical trolley problems. Judgment and Decision Making, 9, 65-76. [sjdm.org]Special thanks to listeners (in order of question-appearance) Jakub Maly, Mark Ellis, Derek Leben, Jennifer Cohen, Rob Sica, Larson Landes, Billie Pritchett, Dave Herman, Otakar Horak, Monique Oliveira, Paul Bello, and Dag Soras. 

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell discussed "Responsibility & Luck, Chapter One" with listeners in this 22 May 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell discussed "Responsibility & Luck, Chapter One" with listeners in this 22 May 2014 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

The final part of Professor Dan Robinson's series on Reid's critique of David Hume. “Like all other sciences, morals must have first principles, and all moral reasoning is based on them... In all rational belief, the thing believed is either a first principle or something inferred by valid reasoning from first principles”. As for utility, “Suppose that mice rescue the distressed person by chewing through the cords that bound him. Is there moral goodness in this act of the mice?” Beyond the armchair and other precincts of untrammeled speculation, one finds that, there is little purchase on a morality of pleasure and utility. Indded, “If what we call ‘moral judgment’ isn’t really a judgment but merely a feeling, it follows that the moral principles that we have been taught to consider as an immutable law to all intelligent beings have no basis except an arbitrary structure and fabric in the constitution of the human mind…Thus, by a change in our structure immoral things could become moral…There are beings who can’t perceive mathematical truths; but no defect, no error of understanding, can make what is true to be false”.

The final part of Professor Dan Robinson's series on Reid's critique of David Hume. “Like all other sciences, morals must have first principles, and all moral reasoning is based on them... In all rational belief, the thing believed is either a first principle or something inferred by valid reasoning from first principles”. As for utility, “Suppose that mice rescue the distressed person by chewing through the cords that bound him. Is there moral goodness in this act of the mice?” Beyond the armchair and other precincts of untrammeled speculation, one finds that, there is little purchase on a morality of pleasure and utility. Indded, “If what we call ‘moral judgment’ isn’t really a judgment but merely a feeling, it follows that the moral principles that we have been taught to consider as an immutable law to all intelligent beings have no basis except an arbitrary structure and fabric in the constitution of the human mind…Thus, by a change in our structure immoral things could become moral…There are beings who can’t perceive mathematical truths; but no defect, no error of understanding, can make what is true to be false”.

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on free will and moral responsibility, values destroyed by statism, leaving an inmate boyfriend, privacy in marriage, and more in this 17 November 2013 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on free will and moral responsibility, values destroyed by statism, leaving an inmate boyfriend, privacy in marriage, and more in this 17 November 2013 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell podcast on "Reading of Responsibility & Luck, Chapter One" in this 15 November 2013 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell podcast on "Reading of Responsibility & Luck, Chapter One" in this 15 November 2013 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Dave and Tamler try their best to do a show without guests--we talk about moral persuasion, motivated reasoning, and whether it's legitimate to use emotionally charged rhetoric in a philosophical argument. Plus, we describe how students proceed through the "Stages-of-Singer," and Tamler finally defends himself against Dave's slanderous accusation of hypocrisy about animal welfare. LinksThomson, J. J. (1971). A defense of abortion.  Philosophy & Public Affairs,1, 47-66.Marquis, D. (1989). Why abortion is immoral.  The Journal of Philosophy, 86(4), 183-202.Ditto, P. H., & Lopez, D. F. (1992). Motivated skepticism: Use of differential decision criteria for preferred and nonpreferred conclusions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63 (4), 568.Ditto, P.H., Pizarro, D.A., & Tannenbaum, D. (2009). Motivated Moral Reasoning. In B. H. Ross (Series Ed.) & D. M. Bartels, C. W. Bauman, L. J. Skitka, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 50: Moral Judgment and Decision Making. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Dawson, E., Gilovich, T., & Regan, D. T. (2002). Motivated Reasoning and Performance on the Wason Selection Task. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1379-1387.Sam's House, an orphanage in Nepal [sams-house.org] The identifiable victim effect [wikipedia.org] Tamler's mediocre TEDx talk on Moral Persuasion [youtube.com]10 Classic South Park Impressions (including Sally Struthers) [youtube.com]*musical breaks in this episode stolen from DJ Premier and Jay Electronica. Please don't sue.  

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on identifying dangerous people, evolution and Objectivism, and more in this 4 August 2013 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Philosopher Dr. Diana Brickell answered questions on identifying dangerous people, evolution and Objectivism, and more in this 4 August 2013 episode of Philosophy in Action Radio. http://www.PhilosophyInAction.com

Neuroscientists are now discovering how hormones and brain chemicals shape social behavior, opening potential avenues for pharmacological manipulation of ethical values. In this talk, I will present an overview of recent studies showing how altering brain chemistry can change moral judgment and behavior. These findings raise new questions about the anatomy of the moral mind, and suggest directions for future research in both neurobiology and practical ethics.

Scientists find that when the area of the brain responsible for understanding the intent of others is disrupted, moral judgment is also affected. Christie Nicholson reports

Mathias Thaler is a Senior Researcher at the Centro de Estudos Sociais, Universidade de Coimbra (Portugal). He holds a PhD in Philosophy from the University of Vienna, and specializes in contemporary political theory, intercultural philosophy, and international justice. His recent projects include work on the contributions of intercultural philosophy to human rights discourse, an examination of the uses and abuses of moral speech acts in political contexts beyond the nation state, and a critical exploration of the relationship between morality and politics.