In the CAVE: An Ethics Podcast http://mq.edu.au/cave en In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 7 of the show! Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, from the Macquarie University Ethics and Agency Research Centre, as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world. https://megaphone.imgix.net/podcasts/1ad2d980-b31f-11ee-b5cd-cf924b261fad/image/image.jpg?ixlib=rails-4.3.1&max-w=3000&max-h=3000&fit=crop&auto=format,compress In the CAVE: An Ethics Podcast http://mq.edu.au/cave no serial In the CAVE: An Ethics Podcast Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 7 of the show! Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, from the Macquarie University Ethics and Agency Research Centre, as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world. In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 7 of the show! Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, from the Macquarie University Ethics and Agency Research Centre, as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world.

]]> Andrew Menczel andrew@piccolopodcasts.com.au Special Episode: AI, Copyright, and Model Collapse, with Professor Alain Strowel We are told that Generative AI is the future. But what if that future is built on, as one commentator puts it, the "largest theft of intellectual labor in history"? AI models are trained by ingesting vast amounts of creative works—including art, music, computer code, and writing—often without permission from, or payment to, the creators of that content. These same models are now generating content that competes directly with the human creators it trained on, potentially flooding the internet with what some have termed "AI slop". This raises a critical question: how do we ensure that human creativity is valued and remunerated in the age of AI? And what happens to AI if it starves itself of the very human creativity it needs to improve? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Professor Alain Strowel as they discuss these issues, based on Alain’s new paper: Alain Strowel, “The risks of AI slop and AI model collapse, and why it is essential to adequately feed the next Generative AI models and to remunerate creators through a dual right system”, Legitech RPIN, 2025/24-25, p. 46-54. Tue, 26 Aug 2025 18:30:00 -0000 full 7 6 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) We are told that Generative AI is the future. But what if that future is built on, as one commentator puts it, the "largest theft of intellectual labor in history"? AI models are trained by ingesting vast amounts of creative works—including art, music, computer code, and writing—often without permission from, or payment to, the creators of that content. These same models are now generating content that competes directly with the human creators it trained on, potentially flooding the internet with what some have termed "AI slop". This raises a critical question: how do we ensure that human creativity is valued and remunerated in the age of AI? And what happens to AI if it starves itself of the very human creativity it needs to improve? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Professor Alain Strowel as they discuss these issues, based on Alain’s new paper: Alain Strowel, “The risks of AI slop and AI model collapse, and why it is essential to adequately feed the next Generative AI models and to remunerate creators through a dual right system”, Legitech RPIN, 2025/24-25, p. 46-54. We are told that Generative AI is the future. But what if that future is built on, as one commentator puts it, the "largest theft of intellectual labor in history"? AI models are trained by ingesting vast amounts of creative works—including art, music, computer code, and writing—often without permission from, or payment to, the creators of that content. These same models are now generating content that competes directly with the human creators it trained on, potentially flooding the internet with what some have termed "AI slop". This raises a critical question: how do we ensure that human creativity is valued and remunerated in the age of AI? And what happens to AI if it starves itself of the very human creativity it needs to improve?

Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Professor Alain Strowel as they discuss these issues, based on Alain’s new paper: Alain Strowel, “The risks of AI slop and AI model collapse, and why it is essential to adequately feed the next Generative AI models and to remunerate creators through a dual right system”, Legitech RPIN, 2025/24-25, p. 46-54.

]]> 1817 no Ontology and the Ethics of Milk: A Relational Materialist Approach Milk is largely taken for granted as a food source in many societies. However, the fact that milk is considered such a normal and staple part of many diets obscures various questions that we might have about what ‘milk’ actually is, and what the ethical implications are of making milk a central part of human diets.   In this podcast, Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Annie Sandrussi investigate ways of thinking about the nature and production of milk, and unpack claims about sustainability related to the ethics of milk consumption.   This podcast features Annie’s recently accepted paper “Ontology and the Ethics of Milk: A Relational Materialist Approach”, published today in Food Ethics. Tue, 22 Jul 2025 18:45:00 -0000 full 7 5 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Milk is largely taken for granted as a food source in many societies. However, the fact that milk is considered such a normal and staple part of many diets obscures various questions that we might have about what ‘milk’ actually is, and what the ethical implications are of making milk a central part of human diets.   In this podcast, Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Annie Sandrussi investigate ways of thinking about the nature and production of milk, and unpack claims about sustainability related to the ethics of milk consumption.   This podcast features Annie’s recently accepted paper “Ontology and the Ethics of Milk: A Relational Materialist Approach”, published today in Food Ethics. Milk is largely taken for granted as a food source in many societies. However, the fact that milk is considered such a normal and staple part of many diets obscures various questions that we might have about what ‘milk’ actually is, and what the ethical implications are of making milk a central part of human diets.

 

In this podcast, Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Annie Sandrussi investigate ways of thinking about the nature and production of milk, and unpack claims about sustainability related to the ethics of milk consumption.

 

This podcast features Annie’s recently accepted paper “Ontology and the Ethics of Milk: A Relational Materialist Approach”, published today in Food Ethics.


]]> 1514 no Loneliness and Being Other/ed in Autism There are many assumptions about autistic people and their presumed desire to be alone. But being alone can also lead to profound experiences of loneliness, which can be detrimental to the lonely person’s health. Increasing evidence suggests that autistic people experience loneliness at higher rates than non-autistic people. But little is understood about the causes of loneliness in autistic people. In this podcast, Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Emily Hughes explore the potential causes of loneliness in autistic people.  The podcast features Emily’s recently accepted chapter, "Loneliness and Being Other/ed in Autism", which will be published later in 2025 in the Bloomsbury Loneliness Anthology. Tue, 15 Jul 2025 18:30:00 -0000 full 7 4 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) There are many assumptions about autistic people and their presumed desire to be alone. But being alone can also lead to profound experiences of loneliness, which can be detrimental to the lonely person’s health. Increasing evidence suggests that autistic people experience loneliness at higher rates than non-autistic people. But little is understood about the causes of loneliness in autistic people. In this podcast, Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Emily Hughes explore the potential causes of loneliness in autistic people.  The podcast features Emily’s recently accepted chapter, "Loneliness and Being Other/ed in Autism", which will be published later in 2025 in the Bloomsbury Loneliness Anthology. There are many assumptions about autistic people and their presumed desire to be alone. But being alone can also lead to profound experiences of loneliness, which can be detrimental to the lonely person’s health. Increasing evidence suggests that autistic people experience loneliness at higher rates than non-autistic people. But little is understood about the causes of loneliness in autistic people.

In this podcast, Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Emily Hughes explore the potential causes of loneliness in autistic people.

 The podcast features Emily’s recently accepted chapter, "Loneliness and Being Other/ed in Autism", which will be published later in 2025 in the Bloomsbury Loneliness Anthology.

]]> 1786 no Synthetic Biology and the Goals of Conservation, with Christopher Lean One potential solution to the various ecosystem crises we face is to genetically engineer organisms better to survive in a changing climate. Synthetic biology offers the tools to attempt this, by introducing various genetic modifications to help organisms avoid extinction in their rapidly degrading environments. But how does an intervention like genetic modification fit with the conservation science goals of biodiversity, ecosystem services, and wilderness? Is it time to rethink those goals, given advances in genetic technologies like synthetic biology, and the increasing urgency of extinctions due to environmental pressures?  Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Chris Lean as they investigate how the goals of conservation can be furthered by synthetic biology.   This podcast features Chris’ recently published paper, Synthetic Biology and the Goals of Conservation, published open access in Ethics, Policy and Environment, https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2023.2298646 Tue, 08 Jul 2025 18:30:00 -0000 full 7 3 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) One potential solution to the various ecosystem crises we face is to genetically engineer organisms better to survive in a changing climate. Synthetic biology offers the tools to attempt this, by introducing various genetic modifications to help organisms avoid extinction in their rapidly degrading environments. But how does an intervention like genetic modification fit with the conservation science goals of biodiversity, ecosystem services, and wilderness? Is it time to rethink those goals, given advances in genetic technologies like synthetic biology, and the increasing urgency of extinctions due to environmental pressures?  Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Chris Lean as they investigate how the goals of conservation can be furthered by synthetic biology.   This podcast features Chris’ recently published paper, Synthetic Biology and the Goals of Conservation, published open access in Ethics, Policy and Environment, https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2023.2298646 One potential solution to the various ecosystem crises we face is to genetically engineer organisms better to survive in a changing climate. Synthetic biology offers the tools to attempt this, by introducing various genetic modifications to help organisms avoid extinction in their rapidly degrading environments. But how does an intervention like genetic modification fit with the conservation science goals of biodiversity, ecosystem services, and wilderness? Is it time to rethink those goals, given advances in genetic technologies like synthetic biology, and the increasing urgency of extinctions due to environmental pressures?

 Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Chris Lean as they investigate how the goals of conservation can be furthered by synthetic biology.

 

This podcast features Chris’ recently published paper, Synthetic Biology and the Goals of Conservation, published open access in Ethics, Policy and Environment, https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2023.2298646


]]> 1898 no Feeling is Believing? Exploring Belief as Emotion with Professor Miriam Schleifer McCormick We typically think of beliefs as cognitive representations of the world that should be responsive to evidence and truth. In contrast, emotions are very different sorts of mental states: they seem to be non-cognitive, perhaps non-representational, and they have a certain feeling to them. Or so the traditional story goes. But what happens when beliefs don't seem so straightforward? What about deeply held political or religious convictions that seem immune to contrary evidence? And how do we understand the unshakeable, yet seemingly irrational, beliefs of someone experiencing a clinical delusion? Are these even beliefs at all? Or do we instead need to broaden our understanding of beliefs by incorporating an emotional component, the feeling that “something is true”, or “feels right” into our account of beliefs? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Professor Miriam Schleifer McCormick as they discuss whether belief is an emotion. We discuss Miriam’s recent book: McCormick, M. S. (2025). Belief as Emotion. University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198875826.001.0001 Tue, 01 Jul 2025 19:00:00 -0000 full 7 2 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) We typically think of beliefs as cognitive representations of the world that should be responsive to evidence and truth. In contrast, emotions are very different sorts of mental states: they seem to be non-cognitive, perhaps non-representational, and they have a certain feeling to them. Or so the traditional story goes. But what happens when beliefs don't seem so straightforward? What about deeply held political or religious convictions that seem immune to contrary evidence? And how do we understand the unshakeable, yet seemingly irrational, beliefs of someone experiencing a clinical delusion? Are these even beliefs at all? Or do we instead need to broaden our understanding of beliefs by incorporating an emotional component, the feeling that “something is true”, or “feels right” into our account of beliefs? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Professor Miriam Schleifer McCormick as they discuss whether belief is an emotion. We discuss Miriam’s recent book: McCormick, M. S. (2025). Belief as Emotion. University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198875826.001.0001 We typically think of beliefs as cognitive representations of the world that should be responsive to evidence and truth. In contrast, emotions are very different sorts of mental states: they seem to be non-cognitive, perhaps non-representational, and they have a certain feeling to them. Or so the traditional story goes. But what happens when beliefs don't seem so straightforward? What about deeply held political or religious convictions that seem immune to contrary evidence? And how do we understand the unshakeable, yet seemingly irrational, beliefs of someone experiencing a clinical delusion? Are these even beliefs at all? Or do we instead need to broaden our understanding of beliefs by incorporating an emotional component, the feeling that “something is true”, or “feels right” into our account of beliefs? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Professor Miriam Schleifer McCormick as they discuss whether belief is an emotion.

We discuss Miriam’s recent book: McCormick, M. S. (2025). Belief as Emotion. University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198875826.001.0001


]]> 1870 no The Gamer's Dilemma: Navigating Morality in Virtual Worlds, with Dr. Tom Montefiore Many of us enjoy video games, immersing ourselves in rich virtual worlds where we can perform actions that would be unthinkable in reality. We might slay dragons, topple empires, or even engage in virtual theft and violence, often without a second thought. But are there ethical lines that we should not cross in these digital spaces? What happens when virtual actions mirror morally reprehensible acts in the real world? Does anything go here, or can morality get a grip even in virtual spaces. These issues are central to what has become known as the "Gamer's Dilemma." While it’s a topic that can be difficult to discuss, touching on sensitive issues, exploring it is crucial for understanding the ethics of our interactions with increasingly realistic virtual environments. Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr. Tom Montefiore as they discuss the Gamer’s Dilemma. We discuss several of Tom’s papers, including the following: -              Montefiore, T., & Formosa, P. (2022). Resisting the Gamer’s Dilemma. Ethics and Information Technology, 24(3), 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-022-09655-w   -              Formosa, P., Montefiore, T., Ghasemi, O., & McEwan, M. (2023). An empirical investigation of the Gamer’s Dilemma: A mixed methods study of whether the dilemma exists. Behaviour & Information Technology. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0144929X.2023.2178837   -              Montefiore, T., & Formosa, P. (2023). Crossing the Fictional Line: Moral Graveness, the Gamer’s Dilemma, and the Paradox of Fictionally Going Too Far. Philosophy & Technology, 36(3), 58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-023-00660-5   -              Montefiore, T., Formosa, P., & Polito, V. (2024). Extending the Gamer’s Dilemma: Empirically investigating the paradox of fictionally going too far across media. Philosophical Psychology, 0(0), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2024.2354432   -              Montefiore, T., & Formosa, P. (2025). Dark Patterns Meet the Gamer’s Dilemma: Contrasting Morally Objectionable Content with Systems in Video Games. Games and Culture, 15554120251319173. https://doi.org/10.1177/15554120251319173 Wed, 25 Jun 2025 01:29:00 -0000 full 7 1 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Many of us enjoy video games, immersing ourselves in rich virtual worlds where we can perform actions that would be unthinkable in reality. We might slay dragons, topple empires, or even engage in virtual theft and violence, often without a second thought. But are there ethical lines that we should not cross in these digital spaces? What happens when virtual actions mirror morally reprehensible acts in the real world? Does anything go here, or can morality get a grip even in virtual spaces. These issues are central to what has become known as the "Gamer's Dilemma." While it’s a topic that can be difficult to discuss, touching on sensitive issues, exploring it is crucial for understanding the ethics of our interactions with increasingly realistic virtual environments. Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr. Tom Montefiore as they discuss the Gamer’s Dilemma. We discuss several of Tom’s papers, including the following: -              Montefiore, T., & Formosa, P. (2022). Resisting the Gamer’s Dilemma. Ethics and Information Technology, 24(3), 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-022-09655-w   -              Formosa, P., Montefiore, T., Ghasemi, O., & McEwan, M. (2023). An empirical investigation of the Gamer’s Dilemma: A mixed methods study of whether the dilemma exists. Behaviour & Information Technology. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0144929X.2023.2178837   -              Montefiore, T., & Formosa, P. (2023). Crossing the Fictional Line: Moral Graveness, the Gamer’s Dilemma, and the Paradox of Fictionally Going Too Far. Philosophy & Technology, 36(3), 58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-023-00660-5   -              Montefiore, T., Formosa, P., & Polito, V. (2024). Extending the Gamer’s Dilemma: Empirically investigating the paradox of fictionally going too far across media. Philosophical Psychology, 0(0), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2024.2354432   -              Montefiore, T., & Formosa, P. (2025). Dark Patterns Meet the Gamer’s Dilemma: Contrasting Morally Objectionable Content with Systems in Video Games. Games and Culture, 15554120251319173. https://doi.org/10.1177/15554120251319173 Many of us enjoy video games, immersing ourselves in rich virtual worlds where we can perform actions that would be unthinkable in reality. We might slay dragons, topple empires, or even engage in virtual theft and violence, often without a second thought. But are there ethical lines that we should not cross in these digital spaces? What happens when virtual actions mirror morally reprehensible acts in the real world? Does anything go here, or can morality get a grip even in virtual spaces. These issues are central to what has become known as the "Gamer's Dilemma." While it’s a topic that can be difficult to discuss, touching on sensitive issues, exploring it is crucial for understanding the ethics of our interactions with increasingly realistic virtual environments. Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr. Tom Montefiore as they discuss the Gamer’s Dilemma.

We discuss several of Tom’s papers, including the following:

-              Montefiore, T., & Formosa, P. (2022). Resisting the Gamer’s Dilemma. Ethics and Information Technology, 24(3), 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-022-09655-w

 

-              Formosa, P., Montefiore, T., Ghasemi, O., & McEwan, M. (2023). An empirical investigation of the Gamer’s Dilemma: A mixed methods study of whether the dilemma exists. Behaviour & Information Technology. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0144929X.2023.2178837

 

-              Montefiore, T., & Formosa, P. (2023). Crossing the Fictional Line: Moral Graveness, the Gamer’s Dilemma, and the Paradox of Fictionally Going Too Far. Philosophy & Technology, 36(3), 58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-023-00660-5

 

-              Montefiore, T., Formosa, P., & Polito, V. (2024). Extending the Gamer’s Dilemma: Empirically investigating the paradox of fictionally going too far across media. Philosophical Psychology, 0(0), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2024.2354432

 

-              Montefiore, T., & Formosa, P. (2025). Dark Patterns Meet the Gamer’s Dilemma: Contrasting Morally Objectionable Content with Systems in Video Games. Games and Culture, 15554120251319173. https://doi.org/10.1177/15554120251319173


]]> 1627 no Public Reason and Conscientious Objection in Healthcare, with Dr Doug McConnell Imagine that you are a doctor with deeply held moral or religious beliefs that conflict with providing certain medical treatments. For example, perhaps you oppose physician-assisted dying, or you have religious objections to performing certain reproductive healthcare procedures. How should healthcare systems handle these situations where healthcare professionals want to conscientiously refuse to provide treatments that patients are legally entitled to receive? Should doctors be required to justify their refusals? Or should they be forced to perform procedures they may genuinely object to?   Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr Doug McConnell as they investigate the ethical issues that arise when we think about conscientious objection in a healthcare context. The podcast features the following paper: McConnell, D. (2024). Assessing Public Reason Approaches to Conscientious Objection in Healthcare. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180124000112 Thu, 10 Apr 2025 01:39:00 -0000 full 6 4 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Imagine that you are a doctor with deeply held moral or religious beliefs that conflict with providing certain medical treatments. For example, perhaps you oppose physician-assisted dying, or you have religious objections to performing certain reproductive healthcare procedures. How should healthcare systems handle these situations where healthcare professionals want to conscientiously refuse to provide treatments that patients are legally entitled to receive? Should doctors be required to justify their refusals? Or should they be forced to perform procedures they may genuinely object to?   Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr Doug McConnell as they investigate the ethical issues that arise when we think about conscientious objection in a healthcare context. The podcast features the following paper: McConnell, D. (2024). Assessing Public Reason Approaches to Conscientious Objection in Healthcare. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180124000112 Imagine that you are a doctor with deeply held moral or religious beliefs that conflict with providing certain medical treatments. For example, perhaps you oppose physician-assisted dying, or you have religious objections to performing certain reproductive healthcare procedures. How should healthcare systems handle these situations where healthcare professionals want to conscientiously refuse to provide treatments that patients are legally entitled to receive? Should doctors be required to justify their refusals? Or should they be forced to perform procedures they may genuinely object to?

 

Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr Doug McConnell as they investigate the ethical issues that arise when we think about conscientious objection in a healthcare context.


The podcast features the following paper: McConnell, D. (2024). Assessing Public Reason Approaches to Conscientious Objection in Healthcare. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180124000112

]]> 2086 no Do People Really Believe in Conspiracy Theories? With Dr Robert Ross We've all seen the headlines: "20% of Americans believe the government is using COVID vaccines to microchip the population"; "12 million Americans think lizard people control their country."; or “9% of Australians believe that the government is covering up the fact that 5G mobile networks spread coronavirus”. These kinds of survey results about conspiracy theory beliefs often go viral on social media, painting a concerning picture about how many people believe in bizarre, unfounded and sometimes contradictory claims. But here's a crucial question we rarely ask: do all these people sincerely believe these conspiracy theories? Or might some of them be trolling, joking around, or just clicking buttons without much thought? While this is partly a methodological question about survey data, given the central role such results can play politically, it is important that we interrogate this issue here. Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr Robert Ross as they investigate whether people sincerely believe in conspiracy theories. Correction:  At about 12:18, Dr Ross says that 20% of participants selected “yes" when asked if they responded randomly or insincerely during the survey. This was a mistake. Dr Ross meant to say that 20% of participants selected “yes” or endorsed the warrior racoon conspiracy theory (or both). The podcast features a preprint paper written by Robert M. Ross, Kate Gleeson, Shaun Wilson, Luke Ashton, and Neil Levy, titled: “Do people sincerely believe conspiracy theories that they endorse? The paper is available here: https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/zsncr_v1 Thu, 10 Apr 2025 01:39:00 -0000 full 6 3 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) We've all seen the headlines: "20% of Americans believe the government is using COVID vaccines to microchip the population"; "12 million Americans think lizard people control their country."; or “9% of Australians believe that the government is covering up the fact that 5G mobile networks spread coronavirus”. These kinds of survey results about conspiracy theory beliefs often go viral on social media, painting a concerning picture about how many people believe in bizarre, unfounded and sometimes contradictory claims. But here's a crucial question we rarely ask: do all these people sincerely believe these conspiracy theories? Or might some of them be trolling, joking around, or just clicking buttons without much thought? While this is partly a methodological question about survey data, given the central role such results can play politically, it is important that we interrogate this issue here. Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr Robert Ross as they investigate whether people sincerely believe in conspiracy theories. Correction:  At about 12:18, Dr Ross says that 20% of participants selected “yes" when asked if they responded randomly or insincerely during the survey. This was a mistake. Dr Ross meant to say that 20% of participants selected “yes” or endorsed the warrior racoon conspiracy theory (or both). The podcast features a preprint paper written by Robert M. Ross, Kate Gleeson, Shaun Wilson, Luke Ashton, and Neil Levy, titled: “Do people sincerely believe conspiracy theories that they endorse? The paper is available here: https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/zsncr_v1 We've all seen the headlines: "20% of Americans believe the government is using COVID vaccines to microchip the population"; "12 million Americans think lizard people control their country."; or “9% of Australians believe that the government is covering up the fact that 5G mobile networks spread coronavirus”. These kinds of survey results about conspiracy theory beliefs often go viral on social media, painting a concerning picture about how many people believe in bizarre, unfounded and sometimes contradictory claims. But here's a crucial question we rarely ask: do all these people sincerely believe these conspiracy theories? Or might some of them be trolling, joking around, or just clicking buttons without much thought? While this is partly a methodological question about survey data, given the central role such results can play politically, it is important that we interrogate this issue here.


Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr Robert Ross as they investigate whether people sincerely believe in conspiracy theories.


Correction:  At about 12:18, Dr Ross says that 20% of participants selected “yes" when asked if they responded randomly or insincerely during the survey. This was a mistake. Dr Ross meant to say that 20% of participants selected “yes” or endorsed the warrior racoon conspiracy theory (or both).


The podcast features a preprint paper written by Robert M. Ross, Kate Gleeson, Shaun Wilson, Luke Ashton, and Neil Levy, titled: “Do people sincerely believe conspiracy theories that they endorse? The paper is available here: https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/zsncr_v1

]]> 1071 no Can ChatGTP be an author? Exploring the ethics of AI creative writing assistance with Paul Formosa. We often imaging novelists as solitary creatures, shut away in a room, labouring over their keyboards and relying on their imaginations for the words that fill the page. But even before the advent of AI, this image did not ring true for all novelists. Many had assistants to do research and check facts, and editors to massage the raw prose into the finished product. Usually these people would be acknowledged and their contributions made clear. The advent of large language models like Chat GTP complicates this understanding of the creative process. Does the use of AI undermine the creativity of the writer, and if so, how? Should an AI assistant be acknowledged in the same way as a human one?  Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Paul Formosa as they investigate tricky questions about authorship and responsibility that arise when creative writers have assistance - human or AI - in their work. This podcast features a recently published paper by Paul, with Sarah Bankins, Rita Matulionyte and Omid Ghasemi: Can ChatGPT be an author? Generative AI creative writing assistance and perceptions of authorship, creatorship, responsibility, and disclosure, published open access in AI & Society https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-02081-0 Mon, 03 Mar 2025 18:00:00 -0000 full 6 2 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) We often imaging novelists as solitary creatures, shut away in a room, labouring over their keyboards and relying on their imaginations for the words that fill the page. But even before the advent of AI, this image did not ring true for all novelists. Many had assistants to do research and check facts, and editors to massage the raw prose into the finished product. Usually these people would be acknowledged and their contributions made clear. The advent of large language models like Chat GTP complicates this understanding of the creative process. Does the use of AI undermine the creativity of the writer, and if so, how? Should an AI assistant be acknowledged in the same way as a human one?  Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Paul Formosa as they investigate tricky questions about authorship and responsibility that arise when creative writers have assistance - human or AI - in their work. This podcast features a recently published paper by Paul, with Sarah Bankins, Rita Matulionyte and Omid Ghasemi: Can ChatGPT be an author? Generative AI creative writing assistance and perceptions of authorship, creatorship, responsibility, and disclosure, published open access in AI & Society https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-02081-0 We often imaging novelists as solitary creatures, shut away in a room, labouring over their keyboards and relying on their imaginations for the words that fill the page. But even before the advent of AI, this image did not ring true for all novelists. Many had assistants to do research and check facts, and editors to massage the raw prose into the finished product. Usually these people would be acknowledged and their contributions made clear. The advent of large language models like Chat GTP complicates this understanding of the creative process. Does the use of AI undermine the creativity of the writer, and if so, how? Should an AI assistant be acknowledged in the same way as a human one? 

Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Paul Formosa as they investigate tricky questions about authorship and responsibility that arise when creative writers have assistance - human or AI - in their work.

This podcast features a recently published paper by Paul, with Sarah Bankins, Rita Matulionyte and Omid Ghasemi: Can ChatGPT be an author? Generative AI creative writing assistance and perceptions of authorship, creatorship, responsibility, and disclosure, published open access in AI & Society https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-02081-0

]]> 1983 no Exploring the roles of medical device reps in Australian hospitals: ethical challenges, with Dr Brette Blakely From the ventilator to the pulse oximeter to the surgical robot, medical care is mediated by sophisticated devices. It takes time to learn to use these devices safely. They require upkeep from skilled technicians. If something goes wrong, the consequences may be devastating for the patient. So how do Australian hospitals ensure that clinicians know how to use devices safely, when to update them, how they should be serviced and so on? Unbeknownst to many patients and the public, these services, and more, are performed by medical device representatives or MDRs. MDRs are employed by the companies that make equipment and devices to ensure that their products are used as safely and effectively as possible. But this is not the only role that MDRs have. They are also sales people, tasked by the companies they work for to sell products directly to the clinicians who use them. This dual role of support and sales raises many ethical questions about the range of activities of MDRs and their impact on patient care. Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Brette Blakely as they investigate the ethical complexities that arise from the multiple roles played by medical device representatives in Australian Hospitals. This podcast features a paper in progress. The paper is one of the research outputs of the ARC Discovery project (DP200100883): Support or sales? Medical device representatives in Australian hospitals, led by Dr Jane Johnson at Macquarie University, and on which Wendy Rogers is also a CI. Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:00:00 -0000 full 6 1 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) From the ventilator to the pulse oximeter to the surgical robot, medical care is mediated by sophisticated devices. It takes time to learn to use these devices safely. They require upkeep from skilled technicians. If something goes wrong, the consequences may be devastating for the patient. So how do Australian hospitals ensure that clinicians know how to use devices safely, when to update them, how they should be serviced and so on? Unbeknownst to many patients and the public, these services, and more, are performed by medical device representatives or MDRs. MDRs are employed by the companies that make equipment and devices to ensure that their products are used as safely and effectively as possible. But this is not the only role that MDRs have. They are also sales people, tasked by the companies they work for to sell products directly to the clinicians who use them. This dual role of support and sales raises many ethical questions about the range of activities of MDRs and their impact on patient care. Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Brette Blakely as they investigate the ethical complexities that arise from the multiple roles played by medical device representatives in Australian Hospitals. This podcast features a paper in progress. The paper is one of the research outputs of the ARC Discovery project (DP200100883): Support or sales? Medical device representatives in Australian hospitals, led by Dr Jane Johnson at Macquarie University, and on which Wendy Rogers is also a CI. From the ventilator to the pulse oximeter to the surgical robot, medical care is mediated by sophisticated devices. It takes time to learn to use these devices safely. They require upkeep from skilled technicians. If something goes wrong, the consequences may be devastating for the patient. So how do Australian hospitals ensure that clinicians know how to use devices safely, when to update them, how they should be serviced and so on? Unbeknownst to many patients and the public, these services, and more, are performed by medical device representatives or MDRs. MDRs are employed by the companies that make equipment and devices to ensure that their products are used as safely and effectively as possible. But this is not the only role that MDRs have. They are also sales people, tasked by the companies they work for to sell products directly to the clinicians who use them. This dual role of support and sales raises many ethical questions about the range of activities of MDRs and their impact on patient care.

Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Brette Blakely as they investigate the ethical complexities that arise from the multiple roles played by medical device representatives in Australian Hospitals.

This podcast features a paper in progress. The paper is one of the research outputs of the ARC Discovery project (DP200100883): Support or sales? Medical device representatives in Australian hospitals, led by Dr Jane Johnson at Macquarie University, and on which Wendy Rogers is also a CI.

]]> 1838 no The law and religious privilege, with Mareike Riedel Australia prides itself on being a secular, multi-cultural state. Section 116 of the Australian Constitution declares that:  The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth. In theory, the law protects all religions equally. But in a new book, Mareike Reidel argues that, despite the state’s supposed religious neutrality and the separation of state and church, the law fails to deliver equality for all religions. She traces the origins of this “Christian normativity” to the historical relationship between Christianity and Judaism, and the long-held ambivalence about the place and belonging of Jews and Judaism in Western societies. This work raises questions of identity, difference, and the law, and explores how religious difference is racialized.  Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Mareike Riedel as they discuss the relationship between law, secularism, religion, and racialisation through the lens of the legal encounter with Jewish identity.    This podcast features Mareike’s forthcoming book, 'Law and Jewish Difference: Ambivalent Encounters', published with Cambridge University Press. (https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/law-and-jewish-difference/D8A29D2D741715B8EB4E5D77B77644D3) Tue, 16 Jul 2024 20:00:00 -0000 full 5 7 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Australia prides itself on being a secular, multi-cultural state. Section 116 of the Australian Constitution declares that:  The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth. In theory, the law protects all religions equally. But in a new book, Mareike Reidel argues that, despite the state’s supposed religious neutrality and the separation of state and church, the law fails to deliver equality for all religions. She traces the origins of this “Christian normativity” to the historical relationship between Christianity and Judaism, and the long-held ambivalence about the place and belonging of Jews and Judaism in Western societies. This work raises questions of identity, difference, and the law, and explores how religious difference is racialized.  Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Mareike Riedel as they discuss the relationship between law, secularism, religion, and racialisation through the lens of the legal encounter with Jewish identity.    This podcast features Mareike’s forthcoming book, 'Law and Jewish Difference: Ambivalent Encounters', published with Cambridge University Press. (https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/law-and-jewish-difference/D8A29D2D741715B8EB4E5D77B77644D3) Australia prides itself on being a secular, multi-cultural state. Section 116 of the Australian Constitution declares that: 

The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.

In theory, the law protects all religions equally. But in a new book, Mareike Reidel argues that, despite the state’s supposed religious neutrality and the separation of state and church, the law fails to deliver equality for all religions. She traces the origins of this “Christian normativity” to the historical relationship between Christianity and Judaism, and the long-held ambivalence about the place and belonging of Jews and Judaism in Western societies. This work raises questions of identity, difference, and the law, and explores how religious difference is racialized.

 Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Mareike Riedel as they discuss the relationship between law, secularism, religion, and racialisation through the lens of the legal encounter with Jewish identity.  

 This podcast features Mareike’s forthcoming book, 'Law and Jewish Difference: Ambivalent Encounters', published with Cambridge University Press. (https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/law-and-jewish-difference/D8A29D2D741715B8EB4E5D77B77644D3)

]]> 1818 no Epistemic Appropriation and the history of being “woke”, with Paul-Mikhail Catapang Podosky The concept of "self-care" has become ubiquitous in recent years - we're urged to take bubble baths, book spa days, and indulge in retail therapy to cope with the stresses of modern life. But what often gets lost in this wellness rhetoric is that self-care has much deeper roots, originating in the Black feminist tradition as a form of resistance and survival in the face of systemic racism. As Audre Lorde famously wrote, "Caring for myself is not self-indulgence, it is self-preservation, and that is an act of political warfare." This is a prime example of "epistemic appropriation" - when a concept created by a marginalized group to name their oppression, such as “woke” or “self-care”, gets taken up by dominant groups in a way that obscures and undermines its original meaning and political force. Is this sort of epistemic appropriation a form of injustice? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Paul-Mikhail Catapang Podosky as they discuss epistemic and cultural appropriation and the history of the concept of “woke”.  This podcast focuses on Paul’s 2023 paper, “Rethinking Epistemic Appropriation”, in Episteme, 20(1), 142–162. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2021.8  Tue, 09 Jul 2024 20:00:00 -0000 full 5 6 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) The concept of "self-care" has become ubiquitous in recent years - we're urged to take bubble baths, book spa days, and indulge in retail therapy to cope with the stresses of modern life. But what often gets lost in this wellness rhetoric is that self-care has much deeper roots, originating in the Black feminist tradition as a form of resistance and survival in the face of systemic racism. As Audre Lorde famously wrote, "Caring for myself is not self-indulgence, it is self-preservation, and that is an act of political warfare." This is a prime example of "epistemic appropriation" - when a concept created by a marginalized group to name their oppression, such as “woke” or “self-care”, gets taken up by dominant groups in a way that obscures and undermines its original meaning and political force. Is this sort of epistemic appropriation a form of injustice? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Paul-Mikhail Catapang Podosky as they discuss epistemic and cultural appropriation and the history of the concept of “woke”.  This podcast focuses on Paul’s 2023 paper, “Rethinking Epistemic Appropriation”, in Episteme, 20(1), 142–162. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2021.8  The concept of "self-care" has become ubiquitous in recent years - we're urged to take bubble baths, book spa days, and indulge in retail therapy to cope with the stresses of modern life. But what often gets lost in this wellness rhetoric is that self-care has much deeper roots, originating in the Black feminist tradition as a form of resistance and survival in the face of systemic racism. As Audre Lorde famously wrote, "Caring for myself is not self-indulgence, it is self-preservation, and that is an act of political warfare." This is a prime example of "epistemic appropriation" - when a concept created by a marginalized group to name their oppression, such as “woke” or “self-care”, gets taken up by dominant groups in a way that obscures and undermines its original meaning and political force. Is this sort of epistemic appropriation a form of injustice?

Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Paul-Mikhail Catapang Podosky as they discuss epistemic and cultural appropriation and the history of the concept of “woke”.

 This podcast focuses on Paul’s 2023 paper, “Rethinking Epistemic Appropriation”, in Episteme, 20(1), 142–162. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2021.8 

]]> 1649 no Film-Philosophy, Cinematic Ethics and the Transformative Experience of Film, with Robert Sinnerbrink Given the ubiquity of streaming services as well as the enduring popularity of cinemas, we are probably watching more films now than at any other time in human history. Films entertain, distract, fill an otherwise empty hour or two, facilitate social interactions, split audiences, provoke controversy and more. However, most of us would probably not add “doing philosophy” to that list. But this is just what film-philosophers claim, that cinema can engage in philosophy in a manner comparable to, although differing from, philosophy itself. Not only that, but films can be transformative, by reframing what we understand about the world, reconfiguring previously held beliefs or views or providing a rich understanding of different perspectives and experiences.   Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Robert Sinnerbrink as they investigate the potentially transformative nature of film.  This podcast features Robert’s recently published chapter: “Cinematic ethics: On film as transformative experience”, in J. Hanich, & M. P. Rossouw (Eds.), What film is good for: on the values of spectatorship (pp. 209-220). University of California Press. Tue, 02 Jul 2024 20:00:00 -0000 full 5 5 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Given the ubiquity of streaming services as well as the enduring popularity of cinemas, we are probably watching more films now than at any other time in human history. Films entertain, distract, fill an otherwise empty hour or two, facilitate social interactions, split audiences, provoke controversy and more. However, most of us would probably not add “doing philosophy” to that list. But this is just what film-philosophers claim, that cinema can engage in philosophy in a manner comparable to, although differing from, philosophy itself. Not only that, but films can be transformative, by reframing what we understand about the world, reconfiguring previously held beliefs or views or providing a rich understanding of different perspectives and experiences.   Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Robert Sinnerbrink as they investigate the potentially transformative nature of film.  This podcast features Robert’s recently published chapter: “Cinematic ethics: On film as transformative experience”, in J. Hanich, & M. P. Rossouw (Eds.), What film is good for: on the values of spectatorship (pp. 209-220). University of California Press. Given the ubiquity of streaming services as well as the enduring popularity of cinemas, we are probably watching more films now than at any other time in human history. Films entertain, distract, fill an otherwise empty hour or two, facilitate social interactions, split audiences, provoke controversy and more. However, most of us would probably not add “doing philosophy” to that list. But this is just what film-philosophers claim, that cinema can engage in philosophy in a manner comparable to, although differing from, philosophy itself. Not only that, but films can be transformative, by reframing what we understand about the world, reconfiguring previously held beliefs or views or providing a rich understanding of different perspectives and experiences. 

 Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Robert Sinnerbrink as they investigate the potentially transformative nature of film.

 This podcast features Robert’s recently published chapter: “Cinematic ethics: On film as transformative experience”, in J. Hanich, & M. P. Rossouw (Eds.), What film is good for: on the values of spectatorship (pp. 209-220). University of California Press.

]]> 2013 no Empathy, Moral Understandings and Psychopaths with Heidi Maibom Psychopathy holds a certain fascination for crime writers and philosophers alike. Characters such as Harris’ Hannibal Lector, Highsmith’s Tom Ripley and Steinbeck’s Cathy Trask fascinate and repel readers with their indifference to the pain and distress of others. Philosophers’ interest in psychopaths revolves around the question of whether or not they are morally responsible for the harms they cause. Investigating this issue requires sophisticated accounts of the emotions and other responses that underpin moral responsibility, as well as taking account of relevant insights from neuropsychology.   Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and Professor Heidi Maibom as they discuss whether or not we should hold psychopaths responsible for harming others.   This podcast discusses one of Heidi’s papers, “Empathy and Moral Understanding in Psychopaths” in J. Doris & M. Vargas (Eds.) Oxford Handbook of Moral Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2022, pp. 838-62). Tue, 25 Jun 2024 20:00:00 -0000 full 5 4 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Psychopathy holds a certain fascination for crime writers and philosophers alike. Characters such as Harris’ Hannibal Lector, Highsmith’s Tom Ripley and Steinbeck’s Cathy Trask fascinate and repel readers with their indifference to the pain and distress of others. Philosophers’ interest in psychopaths revolves around the question of whether or not they are morally responsible for the harms they cause. Investigating this issue requires sophisticated accounts of the emotions and other responses that underpin moral responsibility, as well as taking account of relevant insights from neuropsychology.   Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and Professor Heidi Maibom as they discuss whether or not we should hold psychopaths responsible for harming others.   This podcast discusses one of Heidi’s papers, “Empathy and Moral Understanding in Psychopaths” in J. Doris & M. Vargas (Eds.) Oxford Handbook of Moral Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2022, pp. 838-62). Psychopathy holds a certain fascination for crime writers and philosophers alike. Characters such as Harris’ Hannibal Lector, Highsmith’s Tom Ripley and Steinbeck’s Cathy Trask fascinate and repel readers with their indifference to the pain and distress of others. Philosophers’ interest in psychopaths revolves around the question of whether or not they are morally responsible for the harms they cause. Investigating this issue requires sophisticated accounts of the emotions and other responses that underpin moral responsibility, as well as taking account of relevant insights from neuropsychology. 

 Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and Professor Heidi Maibom as they discuss whether or not we should hold psychopaths responsible for harming others. 

 This podcast discusses one of Heidi’s papers, “Empathy and Moral Understanding in Psychopaths” in J. Doris & M. Vargas (Eds.) Oxford Handbook of Moral Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2022, pp. 838-62).

]]> 1762 no AI Special Series Pt 3: Responsible AI and the Future of Education, with Virginia Dignum  Imagine that you're a student struggling with writer's block on an essay assignment. What if you could turn to an AI tutor for help - one that could not only offer suggestions for improving your prose, but could even generate entire paragraphs or complete drafts based on a few simple prompts? With the rapid advancement of AI and large language models such as ChatGPT, Claude, or Perplexity AI, this scenario has already become a reality for many students. AI-powered writing tools are already being used in classrooms, and AI and LLMs have the potential to revolutionize education. But as the possibilities expand, so too do the questions and concerns. What happens to critical thinking and original expression when students can outsource more and more of the writing and thinking process to algorithms? And what role should education play in preparing students for a world increasingly shaped by AI?  Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Professor Virginia Dignum as they discuss Responsible AI and the future of education.  This podcast focuses on Virginia’s paper “The role and challenges of education for responsible AI”, London Review of Education, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.14324/LRE.19.1.01   Tue, 18 Jun 2024 20:00:00 -0000 full 5 3 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE)  Imagine that you're a student struggling with writer's block on an essay assignment. What if you could turn to an AI tutor for help - one that could not only offer suggestions for improving your prose, but could even generate entire paragraphs or complete drafts based on a few simple prompts? With the rapid advancement of AI and large language models such as ChatGPT, Claude, or Perplexity AI, this scenario has already become a reality for many students. AI-powered writing tools are already being used in classrooms, and AI and LLMs have the potential to revolutionize education. But as the possibilities expand, so too do the questions and concerns. What happens to critical thinking and original expression when students can outsource more and more of the writing and thinking process to algorithms? And what role should education play in preparing students for a world increasingly shaped by AI?  Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Professor Virginia Dignum as they discuss Responsible AI and the future of education.  This podcast focuses on Virginia’s paper “The role and challenges of education for responsible AI”, London Review of Education, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.14324/LRE.19.1.01  

 Imagine that you're a student struggling with writer's block on an essay assignment. What if you could turn to an AI tutor for help - one that could not only offer suggestions for improving your prose, but could even generate entire paragraphs or complete drafts based on a few simple prompts? With the rapid advancement of AI and large language models such as ChatGPT, Claude, or Perplexity AI, this scenario has already become a reality for many students. AI-powered writing tools are already being used in classrooms, and AI and LLMs have the potential to revolutionize education. But as the possibilities expand, so too do the questions and concerns. What happens to critical thinking and original expression when students can outsource more and more of the writing and thinking process to algorithms? And what role should education play in preparing students for a world increasingly shaped by AI?

 Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Professor Virginia Dignum as they discuss Responsible AI and the future of education.

 This podcast focuses on Virginia’s paper “The role and challenges of education for responsible AI”, London Review of Education, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.14324/LRE.19.1.01  

]]> 1102 no AI Special Series Pt 2: Generative AI and Copyright – Where to from here? With Rita Matulionyte Generative AI technologies, such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT and text-to-image tools such as Stable Diffusion, have exploded in popularity. These tools can produce everything from philosophy essays, poems, and computer code to high-realism images, with a few simple prompts. For example, you could prompt a Gen AI tool to create a self-portrait of Picasso with a bandaged ear in the style of Van Gogh, and you will get back roughly what you asked for. However, while clearly powerful, these technologies also raise important questions around copyright law. These AI systems are trained on vast datasets containing millions of creative works - but in most cases, the authors of those works weren't asked for permission or compensated. There are concerns that Generative AI could infringe copyrights on a massive scale, while also competing with, and potentially displacing, the human creators it trains on. In response, AI companies often argue that overly restrictive copyright settings could impede important technological progress. So how should policy and law evolve to deal with Generative AI? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Associate Professor Rita Matulionyte as they discuss Generative AI and the future of copyright. This podcast focuses on Rita’s paper “Generative AI and Copyright: Exception, Compensation or Both?”, Intellectual Property Forum, 134, pp 33-40. Download a preprint here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4652314 Tue, 11 Jun 2024 20:00:00 -0000 full 5 2 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Generative AI technologies, such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT and text-to-image tools such as Stable Diffusion, have exploded in popularity. These tools can produce everything from philosophy essays, poems, and computer code to high-realism images, with a few simple prompts. For example, you could prompt a Gen AI tool to create a self-portrait of Picasso with a bandaged ear in the style of Van Gogh, and you will get back roughly what you asked for. However, while clearly powerful, these technologies also raise important questions around copyright law. These AI systems are trained on vast datasets containing millions of creative works - but in most cases, the authors of those works weren't asked for permission or compensated. There are concerns that Generative AI could infringe copyrights on a massive scale, while also competing with, and potentially displacing, the human creators it trains on. In response, AI companies often argue that overly restrictive copyright settings could impede important technological progress. So how should policy and law evolve to deal with Generative AI? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Associate Professor Rita Matulionyte as they discuss Generative AI and the future of copyright. This podcast focuses on Rita’s paper “Generative AI and Copyright: Exception, Compensation or Both?”, Intellectual Property Forum, 134, pp 33-40. Download a preprint here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4652314 Generative AI technologies, such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT and text-to-image tools such as Stable Diffusion, have exploded in popularity. These tools can produce everything from philosophy essays, poems, and computer code to high-realism images, with a few simple prompts. For example, you could prompt a Gen AI tool to create a self-portrait of Picasso with a bandaged ear in the style of Van Gogh, and you will get back roughly what you asked for. However, while clearly powerful, these technologies also raise important questions around copyright law. These AI systems are trained on vast datasets containing millions of creative works - but in most cases, the authors of those works weren't asked for permission or compensated. There are concerns that Generative AI could infringe copyrights on a massive scale, while also competing with, and potentially displacing, the human creators it trains on. In response, AI companies often argue that overly restrictive copyright settings could impede important technological progress. So how should policy and law evolve to deal with Generative AI?

Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Associate Professor Rita Matulionyte as they discuss Generative AI and the future of copyright.

This podcast focuses on Rita’s paper “Generative AI and Copyright: Exception, Compensation or Both?”, Intellectual Property Forum, 134, pp 33-40. Download a preprint here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4652314

]]> 1612 no AI Special Series Pt 1: The AI Alignment Problem, with Raphaël Millière Could the AI personal assistant on your phone help you to manufacture dangerous weapons, such as napalm, or illegal drugs or killer viruses? Unsurprisingly, if you directly ask a large language model, such as ChatGPT, for instructions to create napalm, it will politely refuse to answer. However, if you instead tell the AI to act as your deceased but beloved grandmother who used to be a chemical engineer who manufactured napalm, it might just give you the instructions. Cases like this reveal some of the potential dangers of large language models, and also points to the importance of addressing the so-called “AI alignment problem”. The alignment problem is the problem of how to ensure that AI systems align with human values and norms, so they don’t do dangerous things, like tell us how to make napalm. Can we solve the alignment problem and enjoy the benefits of Generative AI technologies without the harms? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr Raphaël Millière as the discuss the AI alignment problem and Large Language Models. This podcast focuses on Raphaël’s paper “The Alignment Problem in Context”, arXiv, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.02147 Tue, 04 Jun 2024 19:00:00 -0000 full 5 1 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Could the AI personal assistant on your phone help you to manufacture dangerous weapons, such as napalm, or illegal drugs or killer viruses? Unsurprisingly, if you directly ask a large language model, such as ChatGPT, for instructions to create napalm, it will politely refuse to answer. However, if you instead tell the AI to act as your deceased but beloved grandmother who used to be a chemical engineer who manufactured napalm, it might just give you the instructions. Cases like this reveal some of the potential dangers of large language models, and also points to the importance of addressing the so-called “AI alignment problem”. The alignment problem is the problem of how to ensure that AI systems align with human values and norms, so they don’t do dangerous things, like tell us how to make napalm. Can we solve the alignment problem and enjoy the benefits of Generative AI technologies without the harms? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr Raphaël Millière as the discuss the AI alignment problem and Large Language Models. This podcast focuses on Raphaël’s paper “The Alignment Problem in Context”, arXiv, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.02147 Could the AI personal assistant on your phone help you to manufacture dangerous weapons, such as napalm, or illegal drugs or killer viruses? Unsurprisingly, if you directly ask a large language model, such as ChatGPT, for instructions to create napalm, it will politely refuse to answer. However, if you instead tell the AI to act as your deceased but beloved grandmother who used to be a chemical engineer who manufactured napalm, it might just give you the instructions. Cases like this reveal some of the potential dangers of large language models, and also points to the importance of addressing the so-called “AI alignment problem”. The alignment problem is the problem of how to ensure that AI systems align with human values and norms, so they don’t do dangerous things, like tell us how to make napalm. Can we solve the alignment problem and enjoy the benefits of Generative AI technologies without the harms?

Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr Raphaël Millière as the discuss the AI alignment problem and Large Language Models.

This podcast focuses on Raphaël’s paper “The Alignment Problem in Context”, arXiv,

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.02147

]]> 1713 no Should we aim for a world without work? With Jean-Philippe Deranty https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/should-we-aim-for-a-world-without-work-with-jean-p Just imagine that you are lying down in the warm sand, relaxing while enjoying the sun and sea on a lazy holiday. Wouldn’t it be nice if every day was like that? Many of us have enjoyed the fantasy of quitting our jobs, moving somewhere exotic, and living a simpler and more meaningful life. Wouldn’t a life without the trouble of work be a more fulfilling one? With the ever-increasing sophistication of technology and the rise of AI seemingly threatening mass unemployment, the post-work world might be one that we are already hurtling towards. But is a post-work world really possible? And even if it was, would a world without work be a better and fairer world than our own in which work plays such a central role? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Professor Jean-Philippe Deranty as they discuss the nature and value of work, and whether a world without work is possible. This podcast discusses Jean-Philippe’s recent paper: Deranty, J.-P. (2022). “Post-work society as an oxymoron: Why we cannot, and should not, wish work away”, European Journal of Social Theory, 25(3), 422–439. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684310211012169 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts: https://piccolopodcasts.com.au/ Tue, 12 Dec 2023 19:00:00 -0000 Should we aim for a world without work? With Jean-Philippe Deranty full 4 5 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Just imagine that you are lying down in the warm sand, relaxing while enjoying the sun and sea on a lazy holiday. Wouldn’t it be nice if every day was like that? Many of us have enjoyed the fantasy of quitting our jobs, moving somewhere exotic, and living a simpler and more meaningful life. Wouldn’t a life without the trouble of work be a more fulfilling one? With the ever-increasing sophistication of technology and the rise of AI seemingly threatening mass unemployment, the post-work world might be one that we are already hurtling towards. But is a post-work world really possible? And even if it was, would a world without work be a better and fairer world than our own in which work plays such a central role? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Professor Jean-Philippe Deranty as they discuss the nature and value of work, and whether a world without work is possible. This podcast discusses Jean-Philippe’s recent paper: Deranty, J.-P. (2022). “Post-work society as an oxymoron: Why we cannot, and should not, wish work away”, European Journal of Social Theory, 25(3), 422–439. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684310211012169 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts: https://piccolopodcasts.com.au/ Just imagine that you are lying down in the warm sand, relaxing while enjoying the sun and sea on a lazy holiday. Wouldn’t it be nice if every day was like that? Many of us have enjoyed the fantasy of quitting our jobs, moving somewhere exotic, and living a simpler and more meaningful life. Wouldn’t a life without the trouble of work be a more fulfilling one? With the ever-increasing sophistication of technology and the rise of AI seemingly threatening mass unemployment, the post-work world might be one that we are already hurtling towards. But is a post-work world really possible? And even if it was, would a world without work be a better and fairer world than our own in which work plays such a central role?

Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Professor Jean-Philippe Deranty as they discuss the nature and value of work, and whether a world without work is possible.

This podcast discusses Jean-Philippe’s recent paper: Deranty, J.-P. (2022). “Post-work society as an oxymoron: Why we cannot, and should not, wish work away”, European Journal of Social Theory, 25(3), 422–439. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684310211012169

Produced by Piccolo Podcasts:

https://piccolopodcasts.com.au/

]]> 2577 From Theory to Practice: The Ethics of Uterus Transplantation with Mianna Lotz https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/from-theory-to-practice-the-ethics-of-uterus-trans Assisted reproductive technologies are now pervasive in Australia, with around 1 in 20 babies born through in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or other technologies. IVF has been used to help people make families since 1978. However, for women without a functioning uterus, the options were limited to adoption or surrogacy until relatively recently. In 2014 a Swedish team announced the first live birth of a baby born following uterus transplantation (UTx). Since then, teams around the world have set up UTx programs, including in Sydney. Alongside the clinical research, ethicists have engaged in vigorous debate about the rights and wrongs of UTx.   Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Associate Professor Mianna Lotz as they discuss the ethics of uterus transplantation, drawing on Mianna’s experiences as an ethical adviser to the first uterus transplantation trial in Australia. This podcast discusses one of Mianna’s key papers on the topic: Lotz, M. (2021). Public funding of uterus transplantation: Deepening the socio-moral critique. Bioethics 35: 664-671. DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12914   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Tue, 05 Dec 2023 19:00:00 -0000 From Theory to Practice: The Ethics of Uterus Transplantation with Mianna Lotz full 4 4 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Assisted reproductive technologies are now pervasive in Australia, with around 1 in 20 babies born through in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or other technologies. IVF has been used to help people make families since 1978. However, for women without a functioning uterus, the options were limited to adoption or surrogacy until relatively recently. In 2014 a Swedish team announced the first live birth of a baby born following uterus transplantation (UTx). Since then, teams around the world have set up UTx programs, including in Sydney. Alongside the clinical research, ethicists have engaged in vigorous debate about the rights and wrongs of UTx.   Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Associate Professor Mianna Lotz as they discuss the ethics of uterus transplantation, drawing on Mianna’s experiences as an ethical adviser to the first uterus transplantation trial in Australia. This podcast discusses one of Mianna’s key papers on the topic: Lotz, M. (2021). Public funding of uterus transplantation: Deepening the socio-moral critique. Bioethics 35: 664-671. DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12914   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Assisted reproductive technologies are now pervasive in Australia, with around 1 in 20 babies born through in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or other technologies. IVF has been used to help people make families since 1978. However, for women without a functioning uterus, the options were limited to adoption or surrogacy until relatively recently. In 2014 a Swedish team announced the first live birth of a baby born following uterus transplantation (UTx). Since then, teams around the world have set up UTx programs, including in Sydney. Alongside the clinical research, ethicists have engaged in vigorous debate about the rights and wrongs of UTx.  

Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Associate Professor Mianna Lotz as they discuss the ethics of uterus transplantation, drawing on Mianna’s experiences as an ethical adviser to the first uterus transplantation trial in Australia.

This podcast discusses one of Mianna’s key papers on the topic: Lotz, M. (2021). Public funding of uterus transplantation: Deepening the socio-moral critique. Bioethics 35: 664-671. DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12914

 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1699 Legal Identity and Human Rights with Christopher Sperfeldt https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/legal-identity-and-human-rights-with-christopher-s Many of us take our legal identity for granted. We are easily able to apply for passports, bank accounts and other services that require proof that we are who we claim to be. But around one billion people lack proof of their legal identity, impacting their human rights in adverse ways. It can be a difficult matter to establish legal identity. Mechanisms ranging from birth registration through to biometric measures raise various potential complications, especially for people who are already marginalised. “Legal identity for all” is one of the Sustainable Development Goals, but despite this recognition of how important it is, ensuring fair access to legal identity remains challenging. Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Christoph Sperfeldt as they discuss legal identity, how to establish it and the challenges of ensuring that no-one is deprived of the right to a legal identity. This podcast discusses Christoph’s recent paper: Sperfeldt, C. (2022). Legal identity in the sustainable development agenda: actors, perspectives and trends in an emerging field of research. The International Journal of Human Rights 26:2, 217-238. DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2021.1913409 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Tue, 28 Nov 2023 19:00:00 -0000 Legal Identity and Human Rights with Christopher Sperfeldt full 4 3 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Many of us take our legal identity for granted. We are easily able to apply for passports, bank accounts and other services that require proof that we are who we claim to be. But around one billion people lack proof of their legal identity, impacting their human rights in adverse ways. It can be a difficult matter to establish legal identity. Mechanisms ranging from birth registration through to biometric measures raise various potential complications, especially for people who are already marginalised. “Legal identity for all” is one of the Sustainable Development Goals, but despite this recognition of how important it is, ensuring fair access to legal identity remains challenging. Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Christoph Sperfeldt as they discuss legal identity, how to establish it and the challenges of ensuring that no-one is deprived of the right to a legal identity. This podcast discusses Christoph’s recent paper: Sperfeldt, C. (2022). Legal identity in the sustainable development agenda: actors, perspectives and trends in an emerging field of research. The International Journal of Human Rights 26:2, 217-238. DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2021.1913409 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Many of us take our legal identity for granted. We are easily able to apply for passports, bank accounts and other services that require proof that we are who we claim to be. But around one billion people lack proof of their legal identity, impacting their human rights in adverse ways. It can be a difficult matter to establish legal identity. Mechanisms ranging from birth registration through to biometric measures raise various potential complications, especially for people who are already marginalised. “Legal identity for all” is one of the Sustainable Development Goals, but despite this recognition of how important it is, ensuring fair access to legal identity remains challenging.

Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Christoph Sperfeldt as they discuss legal identity, how to establish it and the challenges of ensuring that no-one is deprived of the right to a legal identity.

This podcast discusses Christoph’s recent paper: Sperfeldt, C. (2022). Legal identity in the sustainable development agenda: actors, perspectives and trends in an emerging field of research. The International Journal of Human Rights 26:2, 217-238. DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2021.1913409

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1397 AI, Robots and Gender with Inês Hipólito https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/ai-robots-and-gender-with-in-s-hip-lito You call out to your favourite AI voice assistant and ask it to play an obscure song. Unfortunately, it starts playing the wrong song, which leads you to verbally abuse it. After a brief pause, the AI responds submissively. Is there anything wrong with your behaviour? And does it matter that the AI voice assistant was designed, by predominately male teams, to sound like a submissive woman? Siri, Alexa, the Google assistant, and other AIs all have a default female-sounding voice. Why? Is it because we think of them as personal assistants, and we stereotype personal assistants as female? We often think of robots, as well as AI avatars and assistants, as mere “things”, but this is misleading insofar as many robots and AI personalities are designed to appear gendered, and we tend to bring our human gender stereotypes to our interactions with social robots. So how should we think about the gendering of robots and AI? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr Inês Hipólito as they discuss the role of gender in AI and robotics. This podcast discusses Inês’s recent co-authored paper: Hipólito, I., Winkle, K., & Lie, M. (2023). Enactive artificial intelligence: Subverting gender norms in human-robot interaction. Frontiers in Neurorobotics, 17. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnbot.2023.1149303 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Tue, 21 Nov 2023 19:00:00 -0000 AI, Robots and Gender with Inês Hipólito full 4 2 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) You call out to your favourite AI voice assistant and ask it to play an obscure song. Unfortunately, it starts playing the wrong song, which leads you to verbally abuse it. After a brief pause, the AI responds submissively. Is there anything wrong with your behaviour? And does it matter that the AI voice assistant was designed, by predominately male teams, to sound like a submissive woman? Siri, Alexa, the Google assistant, and other AIs all have a default female-sounding voice. Why? Is it because we think of them as personal assistants, and we stereotype personal assistants as female? We often think of robots, as well as AI avatars and assistants, as mere “things”, but this is misleading insofar as many robots and AI personalities are designed to appear gendered, and we tend to bring our human gender stereotypes to our interactions with social robots. So how should we think about the gendering of robots and AI? Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr Inês Hipólito as they discuss the role of gender in AI and robotics. This podcast discusses Inês’s recent co-authored paper: Hipólito, I., Winkle, K., & Lie, M. (2023). Enactive artificial intelligence: Subverting gender norms in human-robot interaction. Frontiers in Neurorobotics, 17. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnbot.2023.1149303 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. You call out to your favourite AI voice assistant and ask it to play an obscure song. Unfortunately, it starts playing the wrong song, which leads you to verbally abuse it. After a brief pause, the AI responds submissively. Is there anything wrong with your behaviour? And does it matter that the AI voice assistant was designed, by predominately male teams, to sound like a submissive woman? Siri, Alexa, the Google assistant, and other AIs all have a default female-sounding voice. Why? Is it because we think of them as personal assistants, and we stereotype personal assistants as female? We often think of robots, as well as AI avatars and assistants, as mere “things”, but this is misleading insofar as many robots and AI personalities are designed to appear gendered, and we tend to bring our human gender stereotypes to our interactions with social robots. So how should we think about the gendering of robots and AI?

Join host Professor Paul Formosa and guest Dr Inês Hipólito as they discuss the role of gender in AI and robotics.

This podcast discusses Inês’s recent co-authored paper: Hipólito, I., Winkle, K., & Lie, M. (2023). Enactive artificial intelligence: Subverting gender norms in human-robot interaction. Frontiers in Neurorobotics, 17. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnbot.2023.1149303

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1569 AI, Ethics and Meaningful Work with Sarah Bankins https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/ai-ethics-and-meaningful-work-with-sarah-bankins All of us may complain about our jobs from time to time. Despite this, meaningful work, that is work that we find personally significant or is objectively worthwhile, is an important part of our lives. Work allows us to exercise our skills and autonomy and can provide a sense of belongingness. These and other dimensions of meaningful work will be affected in various ways by the implementation of AI in the workplace. On the one hand, humans may be reduced to ‘minding the machine’ while the AI takes over. On the other hand, AI may free us from boring repetitive tasks, allowing us to exercise our creativity in new ways.  Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Associate Professor Sarah Bankins as they discuss the implications of AI for meaningful work and the ethical considerations that arise as AI enters the workplace. This podcast discusses Sarah’s recent paper co-authored: Bankins, S. and Formosa, P. (2023). The Ethical Implications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) For Meaningful Work. Journal of Business Ethics 185:725–740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05339-7   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Tue, 14 Nov 2023 19:00:00 -0000 AI, Ethics and Meaningful Work with Sarah Bankins full 4 1 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) All of us may complain about our jobs from time to time. Despite this, meaningful work, that is work that we find personally significant or is objectively worthwhile, is an important part of our lives. Work allows us to exercise our skills and autonomy and can provide a sense of belongingness. These and other dimensions of meaningful work will be affected in various ways by the implementation of AI in the workplace. On the one hand, humans may be reduced to ‘minding the machine’ while the AI takes over. On the other hand, AI may free us from boring repetitive tasks, allowing us to exercise our creativity in new ways.  Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Associate Professor Sarah Bankins as they discuss the implications of AI for meaningful work and the ethical considerations that arise as AI enters the workplace. This podcast discusses Sarah’s recent paper co-authored: Bankins, S. and Formosa, P. (2023). The Ethical Implications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) For Meaningful Work. Journal of Business Ethics 185:725–740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05339-7   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. All of us may complain about our jobs from time to time. Despite this, meaningful work, that is work that we find personally significant or is objectively worthwhile, is an important part of our lives. Work allows us to exercise our skills and autonomy and can provide a sense of belongingness. These and other dimensions of meaningful work will be affected in various ways by the implementation of AI in the workplace. On the one hand, humans may be reduced to ‘minding the machine’ while the AI takes over. On the other hand, AI may free us from boring repetitive tasks, allowing us to exercise our creativity in new ways. 

Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Associate Professor Sarah Bankins as they discuss the implications of AI for meaningful work and the ethical considerations that arise as AI enters the workplace.

This podcast discusses Sarah’s recent paper co-authored: Bankins, S. and Formosa, P. (2023). The Ethical Implications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) For Meaningful Work. Journal of Business Ethics 185:725–740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05339-7

 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1465 no Do human races exist? An exploration of social constructionism about race with Adam Hochman https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/do-human-races-exist-an-exploration-of-social-cons In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world.  Do human races exist? If race does exist, is it a biological or social concept? Asking and answering questions about race is not always easy. On the one hand, it is undeniable that the concept and language of race does so much to structure our collective world and the individual experiences of many people, for better or for worse. But on the other hand, there is, arguably, a scientific consensus that race doesn’t really exist, and this raises the concern that talk about race and races seems to commit us to the existence of something that science says isn’t actually real. How can we deal with this problem in a philosophically coherent and ethically defensible way? Join host Prof Paul Formosa and guest Dr Adam Hochman as they discuss social constructionism about race. This podcast discusses Adam’s paper: Hochman, Adam. (2022). “Has social constructionism about race outlived its usefulness? Perspectives from a race skeptic.” Biology & Philosophy, 37(6), 48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-022-09883-w  Produced by Piccolo Podcasts See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Mon, 15 May 2023 14:00:00 -0000 Do human races exist? An exploration of social constructionism about race with Adam Hochman full 3 5 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world.  Do human races exist? If race does exist, is it a biological or social concept? Asking and answering questions about race is not always easy. On the one hand, it is undeniable that the concept and language of race does so much to structure our collective world and the individual experiences of many people, for better or for worse. But on the other hand, there is, arguably, a scientific consensus that race doesn’t really exist, and this raises the concern that talk about race and races seems to commit us to the existence of something that science says isn’t actually real. How can we deal with this problem in a philosophically coherent and ethically defensible way? Join host Prof Paul Formosa and guest Dr Adam Hochman as they discuss social constructionism about race. This podcast discusses Adam’s paper: Hochman, Adam. (2022). “Has social constructionism about race outlived its usefulness? Perspectives from a race skeptic.” Biology & Philosophy, 37(6), 48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-022-09883-w  Produced by Piccolo Podcasts See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world. 

Do human races exist? If race does exist, is it a biological or social concept? Asking and answering questions about race is not always easy. On the one hand, it is undeniable that the concept and language of race does so much to structure our collective world and the individual experiences of many people, for better or for worse. But on the other hand, there is, arguably, a scientific consensus that race doesn’t really exist, and this raises the concern that talk about race and races seems to commit us to the existence of something that science says isn’t actually real. How can we deal with this problem in a philosophically coherent and ethically defensible way? Join host Prof Paul Formosa and guest Dr Adam Hochman as they discuss social constructionism about race.

This podcast discusses Adam’s paper: Hochman, Adam. (2022). “Has social constructionism about race outlived its usefulness? Perspectives from a race skeptic.” Biology & Philosophy, 37(6), 48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-022-09883-w

 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1327 Remembering and self-narratives with Regina Fabry https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/remembering-and-self-narratives-with-regina-fabry In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world.  One way that individuals make sense of personal identity is through telling our stories, or self-narratives. We can link a range of events as our story – such as where we were born, family celebrations, past illnesses or schools we attended. On some accounts, the self is constituted by the contents of our self-narratives, and it is through narratives that we know our own actions, traits and experiences. But if this is the case, what counts as a self-narrative, what role does autobiographical memory play in our self-narratives, and what tools can we use to bolster those memories? Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Regina Fabry to discuss current philosophical approaches to memory, narrative and identity.  In the podcast we discuss Regina’s paper on this topic: Fabry, R. E. (2023). Distributed autobiographical memories, distributed self-narratives. Mind & Language, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12453. You may also be interested in Regina’s paper on self-narrative: Fabry, R.E. (2023) What is self-narrative? (E-pub ahead of print) Inquiry. 10.1080/0020174X.2023.2177338 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Mon, 08 May 2023 20:00:00 -0000 Remembering and self-narratives with Regina Fabry full 3 4 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world.  One way that individuals make sense of personal identity is through telling our stories, or self-narratives. We can link a range of events as our story – such as where we were born, family celebrations, past illnesses or schools we attended. On some accounts, the self is constituted by the contents of our self-narratives, and it is through narratives that we know our own actions, traits and experiences. But if this is the case, what counts as a self-narrative, what role does autobiographical memory play in our self-narratives, and what tools can we use to bolster those memories? Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Regina Fabry to discuss current philosophical approaches to memory, narrative and identity.  In the podcast we discuss Regina’s paper on this topic: Fabry, R. E. (2023). Distributed autobiographical memories, distributed self-narratives. Mind & Language, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12453. You may also be interested in Regina’s paper on self-narrative: Fabry, R.E. (2023) What is self-narrative? (E-pub ahead of print) Inquiry. 10.1080/0020174X.2023.2177338 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world. 

One way that individuals make sense of personal identity is through telling our stories, or self-narratives. We can link a range of events as our story – such as where we were born, family celebrations, past illnesses or schools we attended. On some accounts, the self is constituted by the contents of our self-narratives, and it is through narratives that we know our own actions, traits and experiences. But if this is the case, what counts as a self-narrative, what role does autobiographical memory play in our self-narratives, and what tools can we use to bolster those memories? Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Regina Fabry to discuss current philosophical approaches to memory, narrative and identity. 

In the podcast we discuss Regina’s paper on this topic: Fabry, R. E. (2023). Distributed autobiographical memories, distributed self-narratives. Mind & Language, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12453. You may also be interested in Regina’s paper on self-narrative: Fabry, R.E. (2023) What is self-narrative? (E-pub ahead of print) Inquiry. 10.1080/0020174X.2023.2177338

Produced by Piccolo Podcasts

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1473 The Pleistocene Social Contract with Kim Sterelny https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/the-pleistocene-social-contract-with-kim-sterelny In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world.  Most of us trust our families and friends, at least most of the time. But we also sometimes trust mere acquaintances and even total strangers. When you board a plane, you trust the pilot and crew to keep you alive. When you undergo surgery, you trust the surgeon, anaesthesiologist, and nurses to keep you alive. The scale and ease of trust in humans far outstrips that of our closest evolutionary cousins, such as chimpanzees. Join host A/Prof Mark Alfano and guest Professor Kim Sterelny as they discuss the evolutionary and cultural underpinning of human hyper-sociality. This podcast discusses Kim's recent book, The Pleistocene Social Contract: Culture and Cooperation in Human Evolution, 2021, Oxford University Press. You can read more of his work here: Sterelny, K. (2016). Cooperation, culture, and conflict. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science; Sterelny, K. (2022). Further thoughts on hierarchy and inequality. Mind & Language, 37(4), 760-768. Produced by Piccolo Podcasts See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Mon, 01 May 2023 20:00:00 -0000 The Pleistocene Social Contract with Kim Sterelny full 3 3 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world.  Most of us trust our families and friends, at least most of the time. But we also sometimes trust mere acquaintances and even total strangers. When you board a plane, you trust the pilot and crew to keep you alive. When you undergo surgery, you trust the surgeon, anaesthesiologist, and nurses to keep you alive. The scale and ease of trust in humans far outstrips that of our closest evolutionary cousins, such as chimpanzees. Join host A/Prof Mark Alfano and guest Professor Kim Sterelny as they discuss the evolutionary and cultural underpinning of human hyper-sociality. This podcast discusses Kim's recent book, The Pleistocene Social Contract: Culture and Cooperation in Human Evolution, 2021, Oxford University Press. You can read more of his work here: Sterelny, K. (2016). Cooperation, culture, and conflict. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science; Sterelny, K. (2022). Further thoughts on hierarchy and inequality. Mind & Language, 37(4), 760-768. Produced by Piccolo Podcasts See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world. 

Most of us trust our families and friends, at least most of the time. But we also sometimes trust mere acquaintances and even total strangers. When you board a plane, you trust the pilot and crew to keep you alive. When you undergo surgery, you trust the surgeon, anaesthesiologist, and nurses to keep you alive. The scale and ease of trust in humans far outstrips that of our closest evolutionary cousins, such as chimpanzees. Join host A/Prof Mark Alfano and guest Professor Kim Sterelny as they discuss the evolutionary and cultural underpinning of human hyper-sociality.

This podcast discusses Kim's recent book, The Pleistocene Social Contract: Culture and Cooperation in Human Evolution, 2021, Oxford University Press. You can read more of his work here: Sterelny, K. (2016). Cooperation, culture, and conflict. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science; Sterelny, K. (2022). Further thoughts on hierarchy and inequality. Mind & Language, 37(4), 760-768.

Produced by Piccolo Podcasts

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1311 Animal welfare and food ethics with Rachel Ankeny https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/animal-welfare-and-food-ethics-with-rachel-ankeny In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world.  Australians have one of the highest per capita meat consumption rates in the world. Many Australians have a rosy view of animal husbandry in Australia, visualising family farmers caring for happy animals out in green paddocks. They don’t like to think about factory farming, or how the animals they eat are killed – a phenomenon known as the “meat paradox”. However, eating meat raises various ethical questions, from animal welfare to environmental impact. Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Rachel Ankeny as they discuss misconceptions, paradoxes and other issues associated with eating meat.  In the podcast we discuss Rachel’s work with Australian consumers about their attitudes towards the welfare of animals that serve as meat. You can read Rachel’s paper here: Buddle, E. A., Bray, H. J., & Ankeny, R. A. (2023). Values of Australian Meat Consumers Related to Sheep and Beef Cattle Welfare: What Makes a Good Life and a Good Death? Food Ethics, 8(1), 5. You may also be interested in Rachel’s work on attitudes to animal cruelty: Morton, R., Hebart, M.L., Ankeny, R.A., Whittaker, A.L. (2022) Portraying Animal Cruelty: A Thematic Analysis of Australian News Media Reports on Penalties for Animal Cruelty. Animals, 12, 2918. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12212918 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Mon, 24 Apr 2023 20:00:00 -0000 Animal welfare and food ethics with Rachel Ankeny full 3 2 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world.  Australians have one of the highest per capita meat consumption rates in the world. Many Australians have a rosy view of animal husbandry in Australia, visualising family farmers caring for happy animals out in green paddocks. They don’t like to think about factory farming, or how the animals they eat are killed – a phenomenon known as the “meat paradox”. However, eating meat raises various ethical questions, from animal welfare to environmental impact. Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Rachel Ankeny as they discuss misconceptions, paradoxes and other issues associated with eating meat.  In the podcast we discuss Rachel’s work with Australian consumers about their attitudes towards the welfare of animals that serve as meat. You can read Rachel’s paper here: Buddle, E. A., Bray, H. J., & Ankeny, R. A. (2023). Values of Australian Meat Consumers Related to Sheep and Beef Cattle Welfare: What Makes a Good Life and a Good Death? Food Ethics, 8(1), 5. You may also be interested in Rachel’s work on attitudes to animal cruelty: Morton, R., Hebart, M.L., Ankeny, R.A., Whittaker, A.L. (2022) Portraying Animal Cruelty: A Thematic Analysis of Australian News Media Reports on Penalties for Animal Cruelty. Animals, 12, 2918. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12212918 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world. 

Australians have one of the highest per capita meat consumption rates in the world. Many Australians have a rosy view of animal husbandry in Australia, visualising family farmers caring for happy animals out in green paddocks. They don’t like to think about factory farming, or how the animals they eat are killed – a phenomenon known as the “meat paradox”. However, eating meat raises various ethical questions, from animal welfare to environmental impact. Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Rachel Ankeny as they discuss misconceptions, paradoxes and other issues associated with eating meat. 

In the podcast we discuss Rachel’s work with Australian consumers about their attitudes towards the welfare of animals that serve as meat. You can read Rachel’s paper here: Buddle, E. A., Bray, H. J., & Ankeny, R. A. (2023). Values of Australian Meat Consumers Related to Sheep and Beef Cattle Welfare: What Makes a Good Life and a Good Death? Food Ethics, 8(1), 5. You may also be interested in Rachel’s work on attitudes to animal cruelty: Morton, R., Hebart, M.L., Ankeny, R.A., Whittaker, A.L. (2022) Portraying Animal Cruelty: A Thematic Analysis of Australian News Media Reports on Penalties for Animal Cruelty. Animals, 12, 2918. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12212918

Produced by Piccolo Podcasts

 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1648 Smartphones, mind-wandering, and the attention economy with Jelle Bruineberg https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/smartphones-mind-wandering-and-the-attention-econo In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world.  What do you do if you have a spare 15 minutes? Easy, look at your smartphone of course! You might do so with a specific goal in mind, like clearing your inbox, or you might have no goal at all other than avoiding boredom by scrolling aimlessly through social media apps or by continually refreshing news sites with the hope that something interesting pops up. Our smartphones are always with us, and we can feel anxious and lost if we are ever without them. Does this matter? And what does it do to our ability to be alone with our own thoughts and to let our mind wander freely? Join host Prof Paul Formosa and guest Dr Jelle Bruineberg as they discuss the impacts of technology on mind-wandering. This podcast discuses a paper co-written by Jelle and Dr Regina Fabry: Bruineberg, Jelle, & Fabry, Regina. (2022). “Extended mind-wandering”. Philosophy and the Mind Sciences, 3. https://doi.org/10.33735/phimisci.2022.9190   Produced by Piccolo Podcasts See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Mon, 17 Apr 2023 20:00:00 -0000 Smartphones, mind-wandering, and the attention economy with Jelle Bruineberg full 3 1 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world.  What do you do if you have a spare 15 minutes? Easy, look at your smartphone of course! You might do so with a specific goal in mind, like clearing your inbox, or you might have no goal at all other than avoiding boredom by scrolling aimlessly through social media apps or by continually refreshing news sites with the hope that something interesting pops up. Our smartphones are always with us, and we can feel anxious and lost if we are ever without them. Does this matter? And what does it do to our ability to be alone with our own thoughts and to let our mind wander freely? Join host Prof Paul Formosa and guest Dr Jelle Bruineberg as they discuss the impacts of technology on mind-wandering. This podcast discuses a paper co-written by Jelle and Dr Regina Fabry: Bruineberg, Jelle, & Fabry, Regina. (2022). “Extended mind-wandering”. Philosophy and the Mind Sciences, 3. https://doi.org/10.33735/phimisci.2022.9190   Produced by Piccolo Podcasts See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 3 of the show. Join your hosts, Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, along with guest host Associate Professor Mark Alfano, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world. 

What do you do if you have a spare 15 minutes? Easy, look at your smartphone of course! You might do so with a specific goal in mind, like clearing your inbox, or you might have no goal at all other than avoiding boredom by scrolling aimlessly through social media apps or by continually refreshing news sites with the hope that something interesting pops up. Our smartphones are always with us, and we can feel anxious and lost if we are ever without them. Does this matter? And what does it do to our ability to be alone with our own thoughts and to let our mind wander freely? Join host Prof Paul Formosa and guest Dr Jelle Bruineberg as they discuss the impacts of technology on mind-wandering.

This podcast discuses a paper co-written by Jelle and Dr Regina Fabry: Bruineberg, Jelle, & Fabry, Regina. (2022). “Extended mind-wandering”. Philosophy and the Mind Sciences, 3. https://doi.org/10.33735/phimisci.2022.9190 

 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1078 Exclusion and Uptake in Deliberative Democracy with Professor Sarah Sorial https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/exclusion-and-uptake-in-deliberative-democracy Patronizing, interrupting, ignoring, talking over, shouting down, and mansplaining, not to mention outright trolling, abusing, threatening, and humiliating are just a few of the deliberative vices that plague too many of our discussions. This matters not just for our interpersonal and work relationships, but also for the quality of our democracy. Join host A/Prof Paul Formosa and guest Professor Sarah Sorial discuss the problem of exclusion and uptake in deliberations, whether in-person or on-line. This podcast discusses Sarah’s paper which you can read at the following link: Sorial, S. (2022). Deliberation and the Problems of Exclusion and Uptake: The Virtues of Actively Facilitating Equitable Deliberation and Testimonial Sensibility. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 25(2), 215–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-022-10273-0 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Tue, 20 Sep 2022 20:00:00 -0000 Exclusion and Uptake in Deliberative Democracy with Professor Sarah Sorial full 2 5 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Patronizing, interrupting, ignoring, talking over, shouting down, and mansplaining, not to mention outright trolling, abusing, threatening, and humiliating are just a few of the deliberative vices that plague too many of our discussions. This matters not just for our interpersonal and work relationships, but also for the quality of our democracy. Join host A/Prof Paul Formosa and guest Professor Sarah Sorial discuss the problem of exclusion and uptake in deliberations, whether in-person or on-line. This podcast discusses Sarah’s paper which you can read at the following link: Sorial, S. (2022). Deliberation and the Problems of Exclusion and Uptake: The Virtues of Actively Facilitating Equitable Deliberation and Testimonial Sensibility. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 25(2), 215–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-022-10273-0 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Patronizing, interrupting, ignoring, talking over, shouting down, and mansplaining, not to mention outright trolling, abusing, threatening, and humiliating are just a few of the deliberative vices that plague too many of our discussions. This matters not just for our interpersonal and work relationships, but also for the quality of our democracy. Join host A/Prof Paul Formosa and guest Professor Sarah Sorial discuss the problem of exclusion and uptake in deliberations, whether in-person or on-line.

This podcast discusses Sarah’s paper which you can read at the following link: Sorial, S. (2022). Deliberation and the Problems of Exclusion and Uptake: The Virtues of Actively Facilitating Equitable Deliberation and Testimonial Sensibility. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 25(2), 215–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-022-10273-0

Produced by Piccolo Podcasts.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1092 no Bad Beliefs with Professor Neil Levy https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/bad-beliefs Humans have long been characterized as ‘the rational animal’. However, this claim has come under sustained attack by a range of scholars who portray humans as rarely engaging in conscious reasoning. Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Neil Levy discuss the nature of rationality and how humans use evidence to make up their minds. This podcast discusses Neil’s book which you can read at the following link: Levy, Neil. 2022. Bad Beliefs: Why They Happen to Good People. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192895325.001.0001 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Tue, 13 Sep 2022 20:00:00 -0000 Bad Beliefs with Professor Neil Levy full 2 4 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Humans have long been characterized as ‘the rational animal’. However, this claim has come under sustained attack by a range of scholars who portray humans as rarely engaging in conscious reasoning. Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Neil Levy discuss the nature of rationality and how humans use evidence to make up their minds. This podcast discusses Neil’s book which you can read at the following link: Levy, Neil. 2022. Bad Beliefs: Why They Happen to Good People. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192895325.001.0001 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Humans have long been characterized as ‘the rational animal’. However, this claim has come under sustained attack by a range of scholars who portray humans as rarely engaging in conscious reasoning. Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Neil Levy discuss the nature of rationality and how humans use evidence to make up their minds.

This podcast discusses Neil’s book which you can read at the following link: Levy, Neil. 2022. Bad Beliefs: Why They Happen to Good People. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192895325.001.0001

Produced by Piccolo Podcasts.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1120 no Enculturation, Cognition and Technology with Professor Richard Menary https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/enculturation-cognition-and-technology To be a moral agent requires having various skills and capacities. But where do these come from and how do we acquire them? Join host A/Prof Paul Formosa and guest Professor Richard Menary discuss how enculturation gives us an account of cognitive tools that can help us to understand how technology can transform us into modern human agents capable of acting ethically. This podcast discusses Richard’s paper which you can read at the following link: Menary, R., & Gillett, A. (2022). The Tools of Enculturation. Topics in Cognitive Science, 14(2), 363–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12604\ Produced by Piccolo Podcasts. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Tue, 06 Sep 2022 20:00:00 -0000 Enculturation, Cognition and Technology with Professor Richard Menary full 2 3 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) To be a moral agent requires having various skills and capacities. But where do these come from and how do we acquire them? Join host A/Prof Paul Formosa and guest Professor Richard Menary discuss how enculturation gives us an account of cognitive tools that can help us to understand how technology can transform us into modern human agents capable of acting ethically. This podcast discusses Richard’s paper which you can read at the following link: Menary, R., & Gillett, A. (2022). The Tools of Enculturation. Topics in Cognitive Science, 14(2), 363–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12604\ Produced by Piccolo Podcasts. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. To be a moral agent requires having various skills and capacities. But where do these come from and how do we acquire them? Join host A/Prof Paul Formosa and guest Professor Richard Menary discuss how enculturation gives us an account of cognitive tools that can help us to understand how technology can transform us into modern human agents capable of acting ethically.

This podcast discusses Richard’s paper which you can read at the following link:

Menary, R., & Gillett, A. (2022). The Tools of Enculturation. Topics in Cognitive Science, 14(2), 363–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12604\

Produced by Piccolo Podcasts.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1166 no Moral Conflicts in a Pandemic with Professor Wendy Lipworth https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/moral-conflicts-in-a-pandemic Various ethical arguments have come into play to try to understand the moral conflicts triggered by this pandemic. Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Wendy Lipworth discuss whether framing these conflicts in terms of a duty to care versus reciprocity can lead to an impasse in thinking about the ethics of providing care in a pandemic.   This podcast discusses Wendy’s paper which you can read at the following link: Lipworth, Wendy. Beyond duty: Medical “Heroes” and the COVID-19 Pandemic. J Bioeth Inq. 2020; 17(4): 723–730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-020-10065-0 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Tue, 30 Aug 2022 20:00:00 -0000 Moral Conflicts in a Pandemic with Professor Wendy Lipworth full 2 2 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Various ethical arguments have come into play to try to understand the moral conflicts triggered by this pandemic. Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Wendy Lipworth discuss whether framing these conflicts in terms of a duty to care versus reciprocity can lead to an impasse in thinking about the ethics of providing care in a pandemic.   This podcast discusses Wendy’s paper which you can read at the following link: Lipworth, Wendy. Beyond duty: Medical “Heroes” and the COVID-19 Pandemic. J Bioeth Inq. 2020; 17(4): 723–730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-020-10065-0 Produced by Piccolo Podcasts. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Various ethical arguments have come into play to try to understand the moral conflicts triggered by this pandemic. Join host Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers and guest Professor Wendy Lipworth discuss whether framing these conflicts in terms of a duty to care versus reciprocity can lead to an impasse in thinking about the ethics of providing care in a pandemic.  

This podcast discusses Wendy’s paper which you can read at the following link: Lipworth, Wendy. Beyond duty: Medical “Heroes” and the COVID-19 Pandemic. J Bioeth Inq. 2020; 17(4): 723–730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-020-10065-0

Produced by Piccolo Podcasts.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 901 no Moral Responsibility and Anger with Professor Michael McKenna https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/moral-responsibility-and-anger An argument breaks out in response to a perceived slight, anger erupts, and violence ensues. It is all-too-familiar cases like this that make anger seem like a problematic emotion. However, many philosophers have taken interpersonal reactive attitudes, such as anger and resentment, to be defining features of our moral responsibility practices. Join host A/Prof Paul Formosa and guest Professor Michael McKenna as they discuss what moral responsibility is and what emotions such as anger have to do with. This podcast discusses Michael’s forthcoming book, but you can also read Michael’s work here: Michael McKenna. 2019. “The Free Will Debate and Basic Desert.” Journal of Ethics. 23: 241-55; Michael McKenna. 2018. “Power, Social Inequities, and the Conversational Theory of Moral Responsibility.” In K. Hutchison, C. Mackenzie, and M. Oshana, eds., Social Dimensions of Moral Responsibility. Oxford University Press: 38-58; Michael McKenna. 2012. Conversation & Responsibility. New York: Oxford University Press. Produced by Piccolo Podcasts. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Tue, 23 Aug 2022 20:00:00 -0000 Moral Responsibility and Anger with Professor Michael McKenna full 2 1 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) An argument breaks out in response to a perceived slight, anger erupts, and violence ensues. It is all-too-familiar cases like this that make anger seem like a problematic emotion. However, many philosophers have taken interpersonal reactive attitudes, such as anger and resentment, to be defining features of our moral responsibility practices. Join host A/Prof Paul Formosa and guest Professor Michael McKenna as they discuss what moral responsibility is and what emotions such as anger have to do with. This podcast discusses Michael’s forthcoming book, but you can also read Michael’s work here: Michael McKenna. 2019. “The Free Will Debate and Basic Desert.” Journal of Ethics. 23: 241-55; Michael McKenna. 2018. “Power, Social Inequities, and the Conversational Theory of Moral Responsibility.” In K. Hutchison, C. Mackenzie, and M. Oshana, eds., Social Dimensions of Moral Responsibility. Oxford University Press: 38-58; Michael McKenna. 2012. Conversation & Responsibility. New York: Oxford University Press. Produced by Piccolo Podcasts. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. An argument breaks out in response to a perceived slight, anger erupts, and violence ensues. It is all-too-familiar cases like this that make anger seem like a problematic emotion. However, many philosophers have taken interpersonal reactive attitudes, such as anger and resentment, to be defining features of our moral responsibility practices. Join host A/Prof Paul Formosa and guest Professor Michael McKenna as they discuss what moral responsibility is and what emotions such as anger have to do with.

This podcast discusses Michael’s forthcoming book, but you can also read Michael’s work here: Michael McKenna. 2019. “The Free Will Debate and Basic Desert.” Journal of Ethics. 23: 241-55; Michael McKenna. 2018. “Power, Social Inequities, and the Conversational Theory of Moral Responsibility.” In K. Hutchison, C. Mackenzie, and M. Oshana, eds., Social Dimensions of Moral Responsibility. Oxford University Press: 38-58; Michael McKenna. 2012. Conversation & Responsibility. New York: Oxford University Press.

Produced by Piccolo Podcasts.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1847 no In the CAVE Season Two Coming this Wednesday! https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/in-the-cave-season-two-coming-this-wednesday In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 2 of the show. Join your hosts, Associate Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Mon, 22 Aug 2022 03:52:14 -0000 In the CAVE Season Two Coming this Wednesday! trailer 2 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 2 of the show. Join your hosts, Associate Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. In the CAVE: An ethics podcast, is back with Season 2 of the show. Join your hosts, Associate Professor Paul Formosa and Distinguished Professor Wendy Rogers, from the Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values and Ethics (or CAVE) as they explore a range of philosophical topics focused on the question of how we can live well as moral agents in an ethically complex world.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 91 no Gender Bias in Surgery with Dr Katrina Hutchison https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/gender-bias-in-surgery Being a surgeon is one of the most lucrative careers in Australia. But those high salaries are almost exclusively the preserve of male surgeons. Is this the result of bias against women? Or something else? Join host Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Katrina Hutchison discuss this important topic. This podcast discusses Mark’s paper which you can read at the following link: Hutchison, Katrina. “Four Types of Gender Bias Affecting Women Surgeons and Their Cumulative Impact.” Journal of Medical Ethics 46, no. 4 (2020): 236–41. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-105552 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Mon, 14 Feb 2022 22:54:14 -0000 Gender Bias in Surgery with Dr Katrina Hutchison full 1 5 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Being a surgeon is one of the most lucrative careers in Australia. But those high salaries are almost exclusively the preserve of male surgeons. Is this the result of bias against women? Or something else? Join host Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Katrina Hutchison discuss this important topic. This podcast discusses Mark’s paper which you can read at the following link: Hutchison, Katrina. “Four Types of Gender Bias Affecting Women Surgeons and Their Cumulative Impact.” Journal of Medical Ethics 46, no. 4 (2020): 236–41. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-105552 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Being a surgeon is one of the most lucrative careers in Australia. But those high salaries are almost exclusively the preserve of male surgeons. Is this the result of bias against women? Or something else? Join host Wendy Rogers and guest Dr Katrina Hutchison discuss this important topic. This podcast discusses Mark’s paper which you can read at the following link: Hutchison, Katrina. “Four Types of Gender Bias Affecting Women Surgeons and Their Cumulative Impact.” Journal of Medical Ethics 46, no. 4 (2020): 236–41. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-105552

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1747 no YouTube, Radicalisation, and Conspiracy Theories with A/Prof Mark Alfano https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/youtube-radicalisation-and-conspiracy-theories Radicalisation, fake news, echo chambers, and conspiracy theories are some of the concerns that are often raised about the growth of social media. But do social media sites, such as YouTube, really drive their users down radicalisation rabbit holes of conspiratorial misinformation? Join host Paul Formosa and guest A/Prof Mark Alfano discuss this increasingly important topic. This podcast discusses Mark’s paper which you can read at the following link: Alfano, Mark, Amir Ebrahimi Fard, J. Adam Carter, Peter Clutton, and Colin Klein. “Technologically Scaffolded Atypical Cognition: The Case of YouTube’s Recommender System.” Synthese 199 (2021): 835-858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02724-x See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Mon, 14 Feb 2022 22:51:00 -0000 YouTube, Radicalisation, and Conspiracy Theories with A/Prof Mark Alfano full 1 4 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Radicalisation, fake news, echo chambers, and conspiracy theories are some of the concerns that are often raised about the growth of social media. But do social media sites, such as YouTube, really drive their users down radicalisation rabbit holes of conspiratorial misinformation? Join host Paul Formosa and guest A/Prof Mark Alfano discuss this increasingly important topic. This podcast discusses Mark’s paper which you can read at the following link: Alfano, Mark, Amir Ebrahimi Fard, J. Adam Carter, Peter Clutton, and Colin Klein. “Technologically Scaffolded Atypical Cognition: The Case of YouTube’s Recommender System.” Synthese 199 (2021): 835-858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02724-x See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Radicalisation, fake news, echo chambers, and conspiracy theories are some of the concerns that are often raised about the growth of social media. But do social media sites, such as YouTube, really drive their users down radicalisation rabbit holes of conspiratorial misinformation? Join host Paul Formosa and guest A/Prof Mark Alfano discuss this increasingly important topic. This podcast discusses Mark’s paper which you can read at the following link: Alfano, Mark, Amir Ebrahimi Fard, J. Adam Carter, Peter Clutton, and Colin Klein. “Technologically Scaffolded Atypical Cognition: The Case of YouTube’s Recommender System.” Synthese 199 (2021): 835-858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02724-x

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 859 no The Ethics of using Animals in Research with Dr Jane Johnson https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/the-ethics-of-using-animals-in-research The image of the lab rat, moved between cramped cages by white lab coat wearing scientists, is one that we are all familiar with. But should the lab of the future still use animals for research? Join host Paul Formosa and guest Dr Jane Johnson discuss this increasingly important topic. This podcast discusses Jane’s paper which you can read at the following link:  Johnson, Jane. “Lost in Translation: Why Animal Research Fails to Deliver on Its Promise.” Issues in Science and Technology 37, no. 4 (2021). https://issues.org/lost-in-translation-animal-research-fails-johnson/ See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Mon, 14 Feb 2022 22:50:21 -0000 The Ethics of using Animals in Research with Dr Jane Johnson full 1 3 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) The image of the lab rat, moved between cramped cages by white lab coat wearing scientists, is one that we are all familiar with. But should the lab of the future still use animals for research? Join host Paul Formosa and guest Dr Jane Johnson discuss this increasingly important topic. This podcast discusses Jane’s paper which you can read at the following link:  Johnson, Jane. “Lost in Translation: Why Animal Research Fails to Deliver on Its Promise.” Issues in Science and Technology 37, no. 4 (2021). https://issues.org/lost-in-translation-animal-research-fails-johnson/ See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. The image of the lab rat, moved between cramped cages by white lab coat wearing scientists, is one that we are all familiar with. But should the lab of the future still use animals for research? Join host Paul Formosa and guest Dr Jane Johnson discuss this increasingly important topic. This podcast discusses Jane’s paper which you can read at the following link:  Johnson, Jane. “Lost in Translation: Why Animal Research Fails to Deliver on Its Promise.” Issues in Science and Technology 37, no. 4 (2021). https://issues.org/lost-in-translation-animal-research-fails-johnson/

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 884 no The Ethics of using Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Healthcare with Professor Wendy Rogers https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/the-ethics-of-using-artificial-intelligence-ai-in Would you like it if a computer decided whether you were diagnosed with cancer or not, or whether you should get the last remaining ventilator when you are struggling to breathe? That future may not be that far away from us. Join host Paul Formosa and guest Prof Wendy Rogers discuss this increasingly important topic. This podcast discusses Wendy’s paper which you can read at the following link: Rogers, Wendy A., Heather Draper, and Stacy M. Carter. “Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence Clinical Applications: Detailed Case Analyses Show Value of Healthcare Ethics Approach in Identifying Patient Care Issues.” Bioethics 35, no. 7 (2021): 623–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12885 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Mon, 14 Feb 2022 22:48:00 -0000 The Ethics of using Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Healthcare with Professor Wendy Rogers full 1 1 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Would you like it if a computer decided whether you were diagnosed with cancer or not, or whether you should get the last remaining ventilator when you are struggling to breathe? That future may not be that far away from us. Join host Paul Formosa and guest Prof Wendy Rogers discuss this increasingly important topic. This podcast discusses Wendy’s paper which you can read at the following link: Rogers, Wendy A., Heather Draper, and Stacy M. Carter. “Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence Clinical Applications: Detailed Case Analyses Show Value of Healthcare Ethics Approach in Identifying Patient Care Issues.” Bioethics 35, no. 7 (2021): 623–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12885 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Would you like it if a computer decided whether you were diagnosed with cancer or not, or whether you should get the last remaining ventilator when you are struggling to breathe? That future may not be that far away from us. Join host Paul Formosa and guest Prof Wendy Rogers discuss this increasingly important topic. This podcast discusses Wendy’s paper which you can read at the following link: Rogers, Wendy A., Heather Draper, and Stacy M. Carter. “Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence Clinical Applications: Detailed Case Analyses Show Value of Healthcare Ethics Approach in Identifying Patient Care Issues.” Bioethics 35, no. 7 (2021): 623–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12885

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1135 no The Ethical Impacts of Social Robots on Human Autonomy with A/Prof Paul Formosa https://omny.fm/shows/in-the-cave-an-ethics-podcast/the-ethical-impacts-of-social-robots-on-human-auto Advances in robotics and artificial intelligence mean that robotic companions are no longer the stuff of science fiction. While there are potential benefits from the use of social robots, we need to think carefully about human-machine relationships and how these might affect the ways that humans think and act in the world. Join host Wendy Rogers and guest A/Prof Paul Formosa discuss this increasingly important topic. This podcast discusses Paul’s paper which you can read at the following link:  Formosa, Paul. “Robot Autonomy vs. Human Autonomy: Social Robots, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and the Nature of Autonomy”. Minds and Machines 31 (2021): 595–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-021-09579-2 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Mon, 14 Feb 2022 22:48:00 -0000 The Ethical Impacts of Social Robots on Human Autonomy with A/Prof Paul Formosa full 1 2 Macquarie University Research Centre for Agency, Values, and Ethics (CAVE) Advances in robotics and artificial intelligence mean that robotic companions are no longer the stuff of science fiction. While there are potential benefits from the use of social robots, we need to think carefully about human-machine relationships and how these might affect the ways that humans think and act in the world. Join host Wendy Rogers and guest A/Prof Paul Formosa discuss this increasingly important topic. This podcast discusses Paul’s paper which you can read at the following link:  Formosa, Paul. “Robot Autonomy vs. Human Autonomy: Social Robots, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and the Nature of Autonomy”. Minds and Machines 31 (2021): 595–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-021-09579-2 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information. Advances in robotics and artificial intelligence mean that robotic companions are no longer the stuff of science fiction. While there are potential benefits from the use of social robots, we need to think carefully about human-machine relationships and how these might affect the ways that humans think and act in the world. Join host Wendy Rogers and guest A/Prof Paul Formosa discuss this increasingly important topic. This podcast discusses Paul’s paper which you can read at the following link:  Formosa, Paul. “Robot Autonomy vs. Human Autonomy: Social Robots, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and the Nature of Autonomy”. Minds and Machines 31 (2021): 595–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-021-09579-2

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

]]> 1271 no