#27 - A Conversation with Marianne

06/28/21 • 121 min

There are many overused internet keywords that could be associated with this conversation, but none of them quite seem right. So here's a poem instead:

The Ogre does what ogres can,
Deeds quite impossible for Man,
But one prize is beyond his reach:
The Ogre cannot master speech.

About a subjugated plain,
Among its desperate and slain,
The Ogre stalks with hands on hips,
While drivel gushes from his lips

August 1968, W H Auden

Send us an email at [email protected]

Image from https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/the-august-1968-red-square-protest-and-its-legacy

Audio updated: 05/07/2021

Support Increments

There are many overused internet keywords that could be associated with this conversation, but none of them quite seem right. So here's a poem instead:

The Ogre does what ogres can,
Deeds quite impossible for Man,
But one prize is beyond his reach:
The Ogre cannot master speech.

About a subjugated plain,
Among its desperate and slain,
The Ogre stalks with hands on hips,
While drivel gushes from his lips

August 1968, W H Auden

Send us an email at [email protected]

Image from https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/the-august-1968-red-square-protest-and-its-legacy

Audio updated: 05/07/2021

Support Increments

Previous Episode

#26 - Moral Philosophy Cage Match (with Dan Hageman)

In a rare turn of events, it just so happened that one or perhaps both of your charming co-hosts spewed a bit of nonsense about Derek Parfit in a previous episode, and we had to bring in a heavy hitter to sort us out. Today we're joined by friend of the podcast Mr. Dan Hageman, immuno-oncologist by day and aspiring ethicist by night, who gently takes us to task for misunderstanding Parfit and the role of ethical theorizing, and for ignoring the suffering of pigeons. The critiques land, and convince Vaden that we should dedicate our resources towards providing safe and affordable contraception for Apex predators.

We cover all sorts of ground in this episode, including:

Mistakes we made in our thought experiments episode
Is it possible to over-theorize?
Wild animal suffering
Don't fish eat other fish?!
Feline family planning
Antinatalism
Moral Cluelessness
Population ethics and the repugnant conclusion (Ha!)
Similarities and differences between theoretical physics and theoretical philosophy

References:

Organization for the Prevention of Intense Suffering (OPIS)
Lukas Gloor's post on population ethics
Wild Animal Initiative
Pigeon Contraception (yes, really)
Hilary Greaves on moral cluelessness (talk+transcript, paper)
Better Never to Have Been by David Benatar.

Dan Hageman is a biomed engineer who works in immuno-oncology, but in his not-so-free time strives to sell himself as an amateur philosopher and aspiring 'Effective Altruist'. He spends much of this time trying to keep up with impactful charities focused on the reduction and/or prevention of extreme suffering, and in 2020 helped co-found a hopefully burgeoning side project called ‘Match for More’. He would like to note that the IPAs are to blame for any and all errors/misapprehensions made during his lively discussion with epic friends and podcast hosts, Ben and Vaden.

How many insect lives are morally equivalent to one human life? Send us your best guess at [email protected]. We'll reveal the correct answer in episode 1000.

Update 13/06/21: The original title of this episode was "Meta-ethics Cage Match (with Dan Hageman)"

Special Guest: Dan Hageman.

Support Increments

Next Episode

#28 (C&R Series, Ch. 9) - Why is Logic Applicable to Reality?

Why do logic and mathematics work so well in the world? Why do they seem to describe reality? Why do they they enable us to design circuit boards, build airplanes, and listen remotely to handsome and charming podcast hosts who rarely go off topic?

To answer these questions, we dive into Chapter 9 of Conjectures and Refutations: Why are the Calculi of Logic and Arithmetic Applicable to Reality?.

But before we get to that, we touch on some of the good stuff: evolutionary psychology, cunnilingus, and why Robin is better than Batman.

References:

Conjectures and Refutations, Chapter 9: Why are the Calculi of Logic and Arithmetic Applicable to Reality? https://books.google.ca/books?id=iXp9AwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Ben on Do Explain with Christofer Lovgren
Debate between Spelke and Pinker
Very Bad Wizards discussing the paper "Oral Sex as Infidelity detection" (episode, paper).
Sturgeon's Law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law#:~:text=Sturgeon%27s%20law%20(or%20Sturgeon%27s%20revelation,science%20fiction%20author%20and%20critic.
Eugene Wigner's paper The Unreasonable Effective of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences.
Stoic versus Aristotelian logic. Here is a nice discussion of the differences between the two.
Rob Wiblin's tweet that all probabilities are subjective probabilities (in an otherwise very good thread).
Buhler's three functions of language: (i) Expressive, (ii) Signaling, and (iii) Descriptive. See the "Organon Model".
Piece on Brett Weinstein and Ivermectin.

Quotes:

“The indescribable world I have in mind is, of course, the world I have ‘in my mind’—the world which most psychologists (except the behaviourists) attempt to describe, somewhat unsuccessfully, with the help of what is nothing but a host of metaphors taken from the languages of physics, of biology, and of social life.”

“In so far as a calculus is applied to reality, it loses the character of a logical calculus and becomes a descriptive theory which may be empirically refutable; and in so far as it is treated as irrefutable, i.e. as a system of logically true formulae, rather than a descriptive scientific theory, it is not applied to reality.”

Send us the most bizarre use of evolutionary psychology you've seen at [email protected].

Support Increments