Very Bad Wizards

Dave and Tamler celebrate their 75th episode by welcoming six BFFs of the podcast and asking them to share the biggest thing they've changed their minds about in their professional careers. You'll hear Dan Ariely on our moral duty to take science into the real world, Laurie Santos on the the role of neuroscience in explaining psychological findings, Yoel Inbar on what it means to do good science as a psychologist, Eric Schwitzgebel on his metaphysical epiphany about materialism, Nina Strohminger on breaking-up with priming research, and Sam Harris on Artificial Intelligence and its perils, and his recently changed views about vegetarianism. (Sadly, we had a technical glitch with the audio when we recorded our most-frequent guest Paul Bloom, but we'll bring him on again soon.) Plus we play some hilarious mash-ups, raps, and voicemails sent in from listeners. Links to info about our Guests Dan Ariely Laurie Santos Yoel Inbar Nina Strohminger Eric Schwitzgebel Sam Harris   Listener-Created Music in this Episo

David and Tamler return after an end of summer hiatus to finally talk about the ethics of deception….eventually. But first they break down a recent article in the journal Science documenting an attempt to replicate 100 recent psychology experiments. What does it mean that just over 1/3 of the studies were successfully replicated? Is social psychology in crisis or is this just how science works? Will David somehow try to pin the blame on philosophers? Plus--a brief and almost certainly regrettable foray into the Ashley Madison hack, the neuroscience of lying to your kids about Santa, and we announce a new way to contact us to help celebrate our 75th anniversary. Links Authors, Shitload of (2015) Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science, Science, 39.  The Bayesian Reproducibility Project  post by Alexander Etz [alexanderetz.com] Harris, S. (2013). Lying. Four Elephants Press. Buy on Amazon Bok, S. (2011) Lying: Moral choice in public and private life. Vintage, 2011. Buy on Amazon Santa on th

In what is possibly our most repugnant first segment ever, David and Tamler break down the ethics of zoophilia and investigate the true nature of consent. In the second segment we answer some listener emails and address our first question in our new capacity as International Ethics Experts.™  If your family is religious, how honest should you be with your children about your non-belief? Do the comforting aspects of religious belief outweigh the fears and anxieties? What’s the deal  with Christians and hell? Plus, sex-ed from a female perspective, a brief nostalgic trip to The Electric Company, and David overcomes his horror of self-promotion to thank some people for praising the podcast.  Links Top 25 Podcasts for Men [hiconsumption.com] People Behind the Science podcast episode featuring David [peoplebehindthescience.com] Radio Tatas! Episode 37: "In a Row?!?" (their review of VBW starts at around the 30:00 mark) [radiotatas.libsyn.com] Cecil the Lion [wikipedia.org] New York Court: Chimps Are Still Proper

It finally happened: David and Tamler welcome special guest Joshua Weisberg to the podcast to talk about Turing machines, Chinese Rooms, and AI. What does it mean for a machine to acquire intelligence? What is the proper test? How much processing power would it take? Do computers shed light on how human beings think? Why is John Searle trapped in a Chinese room, anyway? Plus, a spoiler-filled discussion (beginning at 58:20) of the recent movie Ex Machina. David tries to assert his feminist bonafides but Tamler takes Eva's side, proving once again that he is the real feminist. And we have a quick 5-minute discussion of Mr. Robot Episode 4 (beginning at 1:24) and respond to a couple of emails from the authors of the Inside Out article we discussed in our previous episode.  Links Turing Test [wikipedia.org] Chinese Room thought experiment [wikipedia.org] Artificial Intelligence [wikipedia.org] Weisberg, J. (2009). It stands to reason: Skynet and self-preservation. In Irwin, W., Brown, R., & Decker, K. S. (

David and Tamler go deep into the best TV show of the summer, "Mr. Robot. They talk about the moral ambiguity of its central character, the distorted vision of reality it portrays, and play a round of "Real or Not Real" with all the main characters. Plus, what the swooning critics ignore about Pixar's "Inside Out"--its irresponsible failure to reference the relevant literature in cognitive science and philosophy of mind.      Links Two philosophers explain what Inside Out gets wrong about the mind [vox.com] The James/Lange theory of emotion [wikipedia.org] Mr. Robot [IMDB] Unreliable Narrator [wikipedia.org] Shoot the Dog Trope [tvtropes.org]     Support Very Bad Wizards

Raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens, papers by Williams and movies from Sweden. Long graphic novels that celebrate being. These are a few of our favorite things. Dave and Tamler offer some moral psych-themed recommendations to help you get your summer off to a good start. Plus, is porn bad for you now that it doesn't come in brown paper packages tied up in string? Links Pornucopia by Maria Konnikova [aeon.com] Maria Konnikova on Twitter [twitter.com] Zhana Vrangolova [zhanavrangolova.com] Books Daytripper by Fabio Bá and Gabriel Moon [amazon.com affiliate link] [comixology link] Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro [amazon.com affiliate link] Movies Force Majeure [imdb.com] Kumiko, the Treasure Hunter [imdb.com] Academic Papers Kahane, G., Everett, J. A., Earp, B. D., Farias, M., & Savulescu, J. (2015). ‘Utilitarian’ judgments in sacrificial moral dilemmas do not reflect impartial concern for the greater good. Cognition, 134, 193-209. Williams, B. A. O., & Moore, A. W. (2006). Philosop

Dave and Tamler try to figure out what we talk about when we talk about objectivity. In past episodes we’ve claimed that logic and science (when it isn't fraudulent) are objective. Tamler has claimed repeatedly that "Louie" is an objectively better TV show than "Jessie." Dave is constantly claiming that Kant is objectively the best philosopher. But to be honest, we say these things without being exactly sure what we’re saying.  Today we try to be sure--only to get more confused.  Plus, we get into a big fight over trigger warnings, the Kipnis affair at Northwestern, and other related issues. (The infamous Episode 45 was an ecstasy-fueled love fest in comparison.) However, we have spared our listeners the drama, and have only included a few lowlights. If you listen closely, you can even hear Tamler apologize.  Links Sexual Paranoia Strikes Academe by Laura Kipnis [chronicle.com] Laura Kipnis Is Cleared of Wrongdoing in Title IX Complaints [chronicle.com] Title IX [wikipedia.org] For Tamler's views on the cam

Dave drags Tamler into the nerd abyss by making him watch an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation (“Tapestry,” from the 6th season. It's available on Netflix instant in the US, and likely worldwide on many sites of varying legality). We talk about the themes of the episode: regret, risk aversion, the arrogance of hindsight, and the dream of living your past “knowing what you know now.” What are the things that shape our character? Should we embrace our mistakes or would we change something if we could? How should we think of our lives--as one long continually unfolding story or as a series of unrelated episodes? And speaking of regret, we reflect on our comedy episode and some listener dissatisfaction (we agree with much of it) and talk about yet another fraudulent study with sexy results.  Plus, Dave finally learns what ‘chuchma’ means.     "Science Retracts Troubled Gay Marriage Study." [retractionwatch.com] "Michael Lacour Responds to Critics." [latimes.com] "The Strangest Thing about Lacour's Res

Dave and Tamler break the cardinal rule of comedy by trying to analyze it. What are the origins and functions of humor? Can a theory explain what makes us laugh? Is humor entirely subjective? Why would anyone find Mr. Bean funny? Plus, we lose some geek cred by confessing some iconic comedians that we never liked, and ask why the American Psychologist Association loves to torture people. Links Report Claims American Psychological Association Secretly Supported Torture Policy [time.com] The philosophy of humor [iep.utm.edu] Key and Peele: Gay Wedding [youtube.com] Key and Peele: Awesome Hitler Story [youtube.com] Goodfellas: How the Fuck Am I Funny? [youtube.com] Steven Wright: Birthday Present [youtube.com] Hannibal Burress: Pickle Juice [youtube.com] George Carlin on Fat People [youtube.com] Jerry Seinfeld on Airport Security [youtube.com] Louis CK: Pig Newtons [youtube.com] Curb Your Enthusiasm: Rash [youtube.com] Eddie Murphy: Barbecue [youtube.com] Bill Burr on Trying to Buy a Pumpkin [youtube.com]   S

Special guest Yoel Inbar (author of Hitchcock’s Women: From Margaret Sullivan to Tippi Hedren) joins us to talk about Hitchcock’s long take masterpiece/gimmick Rope. Based loosely on the case of Leopold and Loeb, Rope tells the story of two young men who have read Nietzsche and decide to murder a schoolmate in order to cement their Übermensch status. Did they read Nietzsche correctly? Is conventional morality nothing but a construct to keep the inferior masses in line? Are professors accountable for what they teach? (Please God, no.) Plus, we delve deeper into Julie and Mark’s motivation, and Yoel plays a round of “Does the government deem this trademark scandalous?”   Links Yoel Inbar [yoelinbar.net] Very Bad Wizards Episode 22: An Enquiry Concerning Slurs and Offensiveness [verybadwizards.com] Rope [IMDB.com] Leopold and Loeb [wikipedia.org] Leopold and Loeb's Criminal Minds (Smithsonian Magazine) The Leopold and Loeb Trial Page (UMKC Law) Paul Gauguin [wikipedia.org] The Moon and Sixpence by W. Somerse

Holy crap, it's the apocalypse!!!!   ...for philosophy. Maybe. Has this 2500 year old discipline become too technical, too disconnected from the real world? Is it just a handmaiden to the sciences? (Which would make Tamler Dave's handmaiden.) And what the hell is conceptual analysis? Plus, a short excerpt of Tamler's interview with Simon Blackburn, and definitive proof that worms have free will (sorry Sam). And only one more week to buy our t-shirt! Links Free Will? Analysis of worm neurons suggest how a single stimulus can trigger different responses [sciencedaily.com] Strawson, P. F. (1962). Freedom and resentment. [princeton.edu] Doomen, J. (2015). The end of philosophy. Think, 14(39), 99-109. [verybadwizards.com] For a Non-Ideal Metaphysics by Justin Smith [jehsmith.com]  Concepts [plato.stanford.edu] Harry Frankfurt says Philosophy is in the Doldrums [http://leiterreports.typepad.com] Simon Blackburn's Website [phil.cam.ac.uk] Support Very Bad Wizards

Dave and Tamler talk about the human tendency to believe in a just world. Why do we have the belief? Does it make us less motivated to fight injustice? How does it connect to our beliefs about free will and punishment? Plus, the SAE incident—a case where the twitter mob did some good? And Tamler changes his mind about Harmony the Hamster.       Links As Two Oklahoma Students Are Expelled for Racist Chant, Sigma Alpha Epsilon Vows Wider Inquiry [nytimes.com] Just World Hypothesis [wikipedia.org] System Justification [wikipedia.org] The Future of The Culture Wars is Here, and it's Gamergate [deadspin.com] Lerner, M. J., & Simmons, C. H. (1966). Observer’s reaction to the “innocent victim”: Compassion or rejection? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(2), 203–210. [MIT.edu] Clark, C. J., Luguri, J. B., Ditto, P. H., Knobe, J., Shariff, A. F., & Baumeister, R. F. (2014). Free to punish: A motivated account of free will belief. Journal of personality and social psychology, 106(4), 501. [sha

Sam Harris gets back in the VBW ring for another round on moral responsibility, ethical theories, and the grounds for our obligations to other people. Are we at a genuine stalemate when it comes to blame and desert? Is Tamler a closet consequentialist? Is Sam a closet pluralist? Why is Dave such a big Wagner fan? Plus, Twitter shaming: what is it good for? Settle in, get comfortable, pour yourself a drink, you’re in for the long haul on this one. Links How One Stupid Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco's Life [nytimes.co] The Moral Landscape by Sam Harris [samharris.org] Value Pluralism [plato.stanford.edu] Bill Burr vs. Philly [youtube.com] Special Guest: Sam Harris. Support Very Bad Wizards

Dave and Tamler discuss a new study that, according to Tamler, offers decisive support for restorative approaches to criminal punishment (the only problem is he didn't read past the introduction). And speaking of justice, we talk about "White Bear"--the most disturbing episode of the UK series Black Mirror that doesn’t involve sex with a non-kosher animal.  (Note: Massive spoilers for this episode of BM--watch before listening.  Available on netflix, amazon prime.) Links Black Mirror, "White Bear" episode [imdb.com] Ultimatum Game [wikipedia.org] Justice Porn [reddit.com] Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415(6868), 137-140. FeldmanHall, O., Sokol-Hessner, P., Van Bavel, J. J., & Phelps, E. A. (2014). Fairness violations elicit greater punishment on behalf of another than for oneself. Nature Communications, 5. Support Very Bad Wizards

Dave and Tamler take a break from blame and responsibility to tackle a much easier subject: meaning in life. We discuss Susan Wolf's new book "Meaning in Life and Why it Matters," and play some excerpts from Tamler's recent discussion with her. Plus, we list some of our favorite listener-suggested drinking game ideas so far. (The contest for the free T-shirt is still open--send in your ideas before the next episode!)   Links Meaning in Life and Why it Matters by Susan Wolf [amazon.com affiliate link] Billie Pritchett on the Sam Harris and Free Will discussion. [bpritchett.blogspot.com] (Highly recommended!)  The Heaven's Gate Cult [wikipedia.org] Special Guest: Susan Wolf. Support Very Bad Wizards

Dave and Tamler argue some more about the role of emotion and intuition in blame judgments, and then offer some moral psychology-related recommendations for your New Year’s viewing and reading pleasure. Plus, can you turn listening to VBW into a good drinking game? Offer some suggestions and win a free Very Bad Wizards T-shirt!  Links Tamler's early defense of free will skepticism: "Darrow and Determinism" [naturalism.org] "No Soul? I Can Live with That. No Free Will? AHHHHH!!!" [psychologytoday.org] "Free Will Skepticism in Action" [naturalism.org] Tamler's interview with Galen Strawson [believermag.org] The Objective Attitude [philpapers.org] Daniel Miessler on Sam Harris vs. Very Bad Wizards [danielmiessler.com] The Sceptic by David Hume [econlib.org] Paul Russell’s Free Will, Art, Morality [verybadwizards.com] Locke [imdb.com] The Subjective Effects of Nitrous Oxide by William James [erowid.org] Kahan, D. M., Peters, E., Dawson, E. C., & Slovic, P. (2013). Motivated numeracy and enlightened s

Bestselling author and friend of the podcast Sam Harris joins Tamler and Dave for a marathon podcast. (Seriously, pack two pairs of astronaut diapers for this one). We  talk about the costs and benefits of religion, dropping acid in India, and the illusory nature of (a certain kind of) free will. Then we go at it on blame, moral responsibility, hatred, guilt, retribution, and vengeance. Sam thinks these are antiquated responses based on a belief in spooky metaphysics, Tamler thinks they are important components of human morality, and Dave just wants everyone to get along and be reasonable (like that nice Kant fellow).  Time markers (roughly) 0:00-47:00 Intro and costs and benefits of religion 47:00-77:30 Drugs, the self, free will 77:30-- Blame, guilt, vengeance, moral responsibility, desert.  Links Sam Harris [samharris.org] Waking Up: A guide to spirituality without religion by Sam Harris [amazon.com affiliate link] Daniel Dennett reviews "Free Will" by Sam Harris [naturalism.org] Sam Harris responds to

Film critic, VBW regular, and social psychologist Yoel Inbar joins David and Tamler to talk about Spike Lee's controversial 1989 film, Do the Right Thing, a movie about a day in the life of a small Brooklyn community on the hottest day of summer, and how the day's events lead to a race riot. Which characters in the film deserve our sympathy? (Maybe all of them?) Who was Spike Lee criticizing with his depiction of the characters in this community? Why did Mookie start the riot at Sal's? Was his action justified? Was starting the riot the "Right Thing" that Spike Lee was referring to in the title? Twenty five years after its release, how much have things changed? [Please note: we recorded this episode before the Ferguson verdict, which is why--despite some parallels--we don't refer to the verdict or the aftermath.] Links Do the Right Thing [imdb.com] Do the Right Thing Scene: Insults [youtube.com] Do the Right Thing Scene: RIP Boom Box [youtube.com] Do the Right Thing Scene: Just Off the Boat [youtube.com] Wh

David and Tamler talk about a new study that links your belief in free will to the fullness of your bladder. How do our bodily states influence our metaphysical commitments? What's the best way to measure beliefs about free will? Can you get your prostate checked without having someone stick something in your private areas? Plus, an exclusive look at the shocking truth about social psychology experiments.   Links The Philosophical Implications of the Urge to Urinate by Dan Ladkin, Scientific American  Ent, M. R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2014). Embodied free will beliefs: Some effects of physical states on metaphysical opinions. Consciousness and Cognition, 27, 147-154. Free Will and Determinism Scale (Rakos, Laurene, Skala, & Slane, 2008, Behavior and Social Issues).    Support Very Bad Wizards

Following up their discussion of moral villains, Dave and Tamler argue about what makes a moral hero. Tamler defends Sharon Krause’s view that honor values can motivate heroic behavior. Dave accuses Tamler of being inconsistent (nothing wrong with that) and slightly Kantian (NOOOOOO!!!). In the final segment, we’re back on the same page fawning over Susan Wolf’s paper “Moral Saints.” Plus, are drunks more likely to be utilitarians? And why does Dave hate Temple Grandin? Links The Cold Logic of Drunk People by Emma Green [theatlantic.com] Duke, A. A., & Bègue, L. (2015). The drunk utilitarian: Blood alcohol concentration predicts utilitarian responses in moral dilemmas. Cognition, 134, 121-127. [sciencedirect.com] Wolf, S. (1982). Moral saints. The Journal of Philosophy, 419-439. [verybadwizards.com] Krause, S. R. (2002).  Honor and democratic reform (Ch. 5) [verybadwizards.com]. In Liberalism with honor [amazon.com affiliate link]. Harvard University Press.   Support Very Bad Wizards