because that would encourage people to take risks and ask strangers if hugging is allowed (for people who like to hug) and also allow everyone to practice setting healthy and appropriate boundaries? The world doesn’t care what you do, right? They know that the cat carriers indicate something bad is about to happen. I think you probably also have a natural aversion to killing them because you sympathize and pity them in some sense. If there’s a group on campus that wants to invite a speaker, I think that they should always be allowed to invite that speaker, no matter how bad the person is. Perhaps a counter argument is that by restricting free speech on these issues its actually making the problems of racism worse and not better? Without a code of some kind, very few get hugs — even if they want them. It’s like the interpretation of quantum mechanics. I think humans’ ability to understand the future, their own death, and so on is morally relevant. What I was trying to do was to set up the idea that we can live in a way that is both moral and intellectually fulfilling in a naturalistic universe. 0:15:52 SC: We don’t pick these things randomly, that there is some place that they originate from, and I think that our moral intuitions are it. Utilitarianism again is a standard example. This is for my brother.” And then what is right and wrong is judged only relative to what that society believes. 1:17:21 SC: And the idea is that you need to be on guard against fooling yourself. We construct the rule, and then, we enforce it. I think that doing that in good faith is actually a great force for making the world better, including fighting against racism, sexism, other forms of bias and discrimination. I think you could make a case that it’s more like getting a grade in a class. And again, another parenthesis here, other people might disagree and that’s okay, and we can talk about that, that’s cool, we should do that. Roughly speaking, the number of people who get PhDs who are women is 10%, that seems to be the number that it’s been for a few years now. We can imagine a universe which was not expanding. So we have many different possible universes, and then we go out and do observations, collect data to decide which of those universes we live in. He was the general manager of the basketball team that had just won the NBA title. Great podcast this one kept me up most of the night thinking !! This is part of the job of moral philosophy, to take our sort of inchoate, rambling moral intuitions and systematically turn them into something that is logically clear, that says very definite things that do not contradict each other. You couldn’t… If you wanted to sort of embarrass the people who actually believe that women are not discriminated against, you would come up with a hero like Alessandro Strumia, it turns out in the middle of the talk, you begin to realize his real motivation for giving this talk is that he applied for a job and he didn’t get it and a woman got it, and he became convinced that the forces of political correctness were flooding the market with unqualified women at the expense of much more qualified men. Don’t you have to assume essentially infinite numbers of unevidenced universes? 0:37:40 SC: And I think that these worries are perfectly good worries, I completely agree with these arguments. The issues are important enough that we have to talk about them, and we can at least aspire to do so in the most reasonable way possible. Many thanks for your continued effort to put science & the humanities in the public space. I think that whether or not you let the house be a little bit cooler than is comfortable and wear a sweater to make up for that, that is a matter of personal virtue. So, there’s no question that animals can conceptualize the future in some way. Why are we justifying these rules in the first place? I’m your host, Sean Carroll and today we’re going to have another solo podcast that is to say an episode of Mindscape with only me talking. Now I don't know any of the science here, but apparently meditation does help people too (e.g. Individuals should have the opportunity to pursue whatever they enjoy, and their skills should be developed and honed accordingly. And there’s no right or wrong answer. In my opinion, the poor are nudged far harder than any individual woman away from education and from trying to develop real hopes and independent ideas. If I give you the wave function of the universe, it evolves over time according to the Schrodinger equation or whatever future physics we some day have. So there’s an extent to which one learns to suffer some things in silence. It was officially declared illegal in 1968 with the Fair Housing Act. AG: Indeed. Or just go to the podcast web page, you can find the link and be a patreon patron. Biologie du XXIe siècle : évolution des concepts fondateurs, Barry I Eisenstein, Gerald Medoff, Moselio Schaechter, Soins infirmiers en médecine et chirurgie 5, et Collectif, Johann Prevel, Clotilde Rougé Maillart, Soins infirmiers en médecine et chirurgie 4. And it’s one that makes me not attribute this right to continue existing to animals in the same way that my morally constructed rules attribute it to human beings. Whereas a constructivist doesn’t say that. So what I’m doing here in this discussion, I know that I went on extra long about that, because it is very close to my heart. There should be safe spaces where you can avoid certain kinds of speech, but there should be other spaces where that speech is available, if that’s what you want to go to. So he’s basically the boss of the basketball team. And by doing that, empathy gets in the way of being rational.” Again, this morality and rationality intersection. So you can look on Reddit, there’s a Reddit subreddit dedicated to the IDW, as you might call them, the Intellectual Dark Web, and there it says, the term Intellectual Dark Web refers to the growing community of those interested in space for free dialogue held in good faith. Really excellent. But I like the idea that things like freedom of speech, the free market of ideas, the give and take of dialogue and discussion and openness, the realization that we’re all fallible and imperfect and biased and working to get better. To me, I think it’s work very well worth doing. And you know, look, discrimination and things like that, they don’t necessarily come out of evil or bad impulses. A classic example for Kantians is the idea of lying. If you simply don’t understand that motivation, then you’re not being rational, you’re not being intellectual, you’re not facing up to reality. You need to sort of think a little bit more subtly about when it is okay and it’s not okay to invent this rule about not killing people. How to find meaningfulness in your life? Now, is that unsatisfying, is that not quite as pristine and clear as you would like, especially if you’re used to the kind of theories that we get in math, or logic, or physics? I thought about this yesterday and slept on it. Obviously animals are better at advertising their heat than human. Be aware of what our biases are, even the possibility of biases that we haven’t yet recognized. We don’t have that anymore, so maybe the question we should be asking is not, why is it okay to kill cows, but why is it wrong to kill humans. And the hilarious upshot of this story is that half an hour later, she had built that car and it was zooming around the floor and she was loving it. This has led to practices such as mulesing (removing skin around the anus so that it scars over and does not grow hair there, as it would become easily infected). Let’s put it that way. But this is the task we have before us.” And the other thing we need to do is to communicate. 1:58:00 SC: So if I learned that I can make someone like that’s life easier simply by referring to them using the words that they prefer to be referred by, that sounds to me like the very least I can do. They run away and hide. As a non-moralizing vegetarian who cooks meat at home for the rest of the fam (yes, we do exist), I thought you made a distinction that seemed a false dichotomy. It’s still an empirical question, but one that might not be easy, or even currently possible to answer. This is the kind of thing that we try to do using ideas like a trolley problem thought experiment. 0:53:44 SC: And again, it does affect questions like is it okay to murder pets, other people’s pets? While we are all trying our best to shed our biases.. acknowledge you own too. These are two different impulses that we simultaneously have. The distinction between naturalism versus religion is completely obvious for science. Should we judge it to be wrong to kill animals in of itself? And this is an ongoing controversy about how we should deal with this. Some of us might know the right answers but we don’t agree amongst ourselves. So most naturalists are gonna say that women should be able to get abortions at least for a certain period of their pregnancies. We need to train our empathy to really let us understand where other people are coming from, especially when people have very, very different life situations than we do. But I do, as an enlightenment thinker, as someone who believes that all knowledge is provisional and fallible and subject to updating, I realize that they know something I don’t and I should be able to listen to them and learn something. I do think that this is a topic where, I’m a meat-eater, I’m an omnivore, if you wanna put it that way. Entropy and Information, The Biggest Ideas in the Universe | 19. 0:36:24 SC: And so, I respect vegetarians who become vegetarians for ethical reasons. Among other things, he’s cracked down on Hungarian ideas that he doesn’t agree with in many ways, so much so, that the Central European University which was located in Budapest, has fled. All theories and concepts contain a demiurgical position, The theories of physics have black holes, big bangs, holography, mathematical infinities, etc. I don’t believe that there’s anything quite as easy as the categorical imperative or the greatest good for the greatest number that will ever work.