Very Bad Wizards

Dave and Tamler talk about the influence of character judgments on attributions of blame. What is the function of the blame--to assign responsibility or to judge a person's character? Is it fair that we blame douchebags more than good people who commit exactly the same act, or is it yet another cognitive bias that should be avoided? Plus we delve into the Richie Incognito hazing story (maybe a little early since the story has developed) and Tamler tries to figure out how to teach the Gospels to students who know roughly 100 times as much about them than he does.  Links "The Miami Dolphins and Everything that Will Never Make Sense." by Andrew Sharp.  (grantland.com) Interview with Richie Incognito (youtube.com)  Gospel of Matthew [wikipedia.org] Synoptic Gospels [wikipedia.org] Pizarro, D.A. & Tannenbaum, D. (2011). Bringing character back: How the motivation to evaluate character influences judgments of moral blame. In M. Mikulincer & Shaver, P. (Eds) The Social psychology of morality: Exploring the

Special guest Will Wilkinson joins the podcast to talk about whether fiction makes us better people, and to discuss his recent Daily Beast article that trashed Dave's profession and livelihood. Also, Dave and Tamler try to make sense of Ancient Greek justice in a myth about incest, adultery, daughter-killing, husband-killing, matricide, cannibalism, and trash talking to disembodied heads.     Links Agamemnon [wikipedia.org] Will Wilkinson [wikipedia.org]  The Will Wilkinson article that hurt David's feelings [thedailybeast.com] Hurt Feelings by Flight of the Concords [youtube.com]  Does great literature make us better? by Gregory Currie [nytimes.com]  Reading literature makes us smarter and nicer by Annie Murphy Paul [time.com] Want to learn how to think? Read fiction by Tom Jacobs [psmag.com] In Pursuit of Happiness Research [pdf] by Will Wilkinson     Special Guest: Will Wilkinson. Support Very Bad Wizards

Special guest Laurie Santos (Psychology, Yale) joins us to talk about what animal cognition can tell us about human nature. Why are other primates better at resisting the misleading influence of others than humans? Is conformity a byproduct of our sophisticated cultural learning capacities? Are we more like Chimpanzees or Bonobos? Why does Dave spend so much time writing Smurf fan fiction? [Smurf you, Tamler. -dap]. Also, Dave and Tamler talk about a scathing review of Malcolm Gladwell's new book, and Eliza Sommers poses the question of the day. This was a fun one.  Links Comparative Cognition Laboratory [yale.edu] Laurie Santos and Jesse Bering on The Mind Report [bloggingheads.tv]  Buy Jesse Bering's latest book "Perv: The Sexual Deviant in All of Us" [amazon.com affiliate link] Philospher's Pipe (a directory of podcasts related to philosophy) [philosopherspipe.com] Smurfette [wikipedia.org] Horner, V., & Whiten, A. (2005). Causal knowledge and imitation/emulation switching in chimpanzees (Pan troglod

Part II of our discussion on Rai and Fiske (sort of):  We answer a listener's email and in the process get into an episode long argument about moral intuitions, psychological facts, the implications of moral disagreement. Before that, we talk about the recent study about testicles and parenting.  We don't play small ball on this one. Links Testicular volume is inversely correlated with nurturing-related brain activity in human fathers [pnas.org] "Study: You May be a Terrible Dad Because You Have Enormous Testicles"  "Aw Nuts!  Nurturing Dads Have Smaller Testicles, Study Shows" "Want to Know if Your Partner Will Be a Good Dad?  Measure His Testicles."  Frances Kamm [wikipedia.org] Reflective Equilibrium [plato.stanford.edu] Doris, J. M., and Plakias, A. (2008). “How to Argue about Disagreement: Evaluative Diversity and Moral Realism.” In Walter Sinnott-Armstrong (ed.), Moral Psychology, Volume 2: The Cognitive Science of Morality. Cambridge: MIT Press   Support Very Bad Wizards

In the first of a two-part episode, we discuss one of our favorite recent papers--Tage Rai and Alan Page Fiske's 2011 paper on how social relationships shape and motivate our moral emotions and judgments.  We also talk about Sam Harris' $20,000 Moral Landscape  Challenge, and whether there's any real chance of convincing him that the arguments he made in The Moral Landscape (first published in English in 2011) are wrong.  Links Sam Harris' Moral Landscape Challenge [samharris.org] Alan Fiske's overview of Relational Models Theory [sscnet.ucla.edu] Tage Rai's research [kellogg.northwestern.edu] Rai, T. S., & Fiske, A. P. (2011). Moral psychology is relationship regulation: moral motives for unity, hierarchy, equality, and proportionality. Psychological review, 118, 57-75. [irsp.ucla.edu]   Support Very Bad Wizards

Dave and Tamler celebrate their one year anniversary and 30th episode with one of their least cynical episodes yet.  They talk about 5 philosophy/psychology(-ish) books that influenced and inspired them throughout the years.  They also respond to a listener email that accuses them (mostly Tamler) of being "reckless and irresponsible" in their discussion of responding to insults.   Episode Links  (Please note that the Top 5 links below are to purchase books through amazon.com via the Very Bad Wizards amazon affiliate account)  Tamler's Top 5 5. The Razor's Edge 4. Culture Of Honor: The Psychology Of Violence In The South (New Directions in Social Psychology)/Humiliation: And Other Essays on Honor, Social Discomfort, and Violence 3. The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene (Popular Science) 2. Passions Within Reason: The Strategic Role of the Emotions 1. Jacques the Fatalist and His Master (Penguin Classics) David's Top 5 5. Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman 4. Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Go

Dave and Tamler try to artificially bulk up their expertise on the ethics of performance enhancing drugs and end up raising a lot more questions than they answer.  Why do we condemn certain methods for boosting performance on the playing field and praise others?  Why is it OK to train at high altitudes but not in hyperbaric chambers that simulate high altitudes?  Why is Lance Armstrong a villain and Graham Greene (who wrote many of his most famous novels on benzedrine) a hero?   Is there genetic therapy to cure haunted child haircuts, and if there is, how can Tamler get access to it?  Of course, no discussion on PEDs would be complete without clips from South Park and Sanford and Son.  Also, David misremembers Lyle Alzado as a regular on an 80's sitcom because of a single appearance on "Small Wonder."  We probably should have taken some podcast enhancing drugs for this one.   Links Performance-enhancing drugs [wikipedia.org] Benzedrine [wikipedia.org]  What do Auden, Sartre, and Ayn Rand have in common? Amp

Dave and Tamler try their best to do a show without guests--we talk about moral persuasion, motivated reasoning, and whether it's legitimate to use emotionally charged rhetoric in a philosophical argument. Plus, we describe how students proceed through the "Stages-of-Singer," and Tamler finally defends himself against Dave's slanderous accusation of hypocrisy about animal welfare.   Links Thomson, J. J. (1971). A defense of abortion.  Philosophy & Public Affairs,1, 47-66. Marquis, D. (1989). Why abortion is immoral.  The Journal of Philosophy, 86(4), 183-202. Ditto, P. H., & Lopez, D. F. (1992). Motivated skepticism: Use of differential decision criteria for preferred and nonpreferred conclusions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63 (4), 568. Ditto, P.H., Pizarro, D.A., & Tannenbaum, D. (2009). Motivated Moral Reasoning. In B. H. Ross (Series Ed.) & D. M. Bartels, C. W. Bauman, L. J. Skitka, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 50: Moral Judgment

Our streak of very special guests continues!  Philosopher Eddy Nahmias joins the podcast to us why people mistakenly think they're not morally responsible, and how his new study casts doubt on Sam Harris's "pamphlet" on free will.  Eddy also describes his new project (with Toni Adleberg and Morgan Thompson) on why women leave philosophy.  Plus Dave and I discuss some reasons for having children, and eat a little Partially Examined Life crow.  Links "Name five women in philosophy.  Bet you can't." Tania Lombrozo, [npr.og]  "Do Women Have Different Philosophical Intuitions than Men?" Eddy Nahmias (philosophyofbrains.com) "Is Neuroscience the Death of Free Will?' Eddy Nahmias.  [nytimes.com] Eddy on Bypassing [agencyandresponsbility.typepad.com] Edd trashing Tamler's Book [agencyandresponsbility.typepad.com]         Special Guest: Eddy Nahmias. Support Very Bad Wizards

Psychologist and author Jesse Bering joins us to talk about evolutionary psychology and his forthcoming book Perv.   In the relatively uncontroversial part of the episode, we ask if homophobia is an adaptation and if women have evolved rape defenses.  After that, sex with animals, sex with bookshelves, foot fetishes, amputee fetishes, falling down the stairs fetishes... I don't know, just listen.  Or maybe don't.  Jesse Bering [jessebering.com]   Perv (pre-order)  by Jesse Bering [amazon.com] "Darwin's Rape Whistle," by Jesse Bering [slate.com]  "Natural Homophobes?" by Jesse Bering [scientificamerican.com]  The Belief Instinct by Jesse Bering [amazon.com] Why is the Penis Shaped Like That?  by Jesse Bering [amazon.com] "I think you're some kind of deviated prevert."  [youtube.com]  Special Guest: Jesse Bering. Support Very Bad Wizards

Josh Knobe, the Michael Corleone of experimental philosophy, joins us to talk about taking philosophy into the lab and the streets.   We discuss how people moralize everyday concepts like intention, causation, and innateness.  Dave wonders if X-phi people are just doing social psychology, and Tamler tries his best to get Josh mad with his critique of Josh's experimental work on free will.  He might have succeeded but that argument had to be cut a little short this time.  We'll have to have Josh back for the rematch!  Links Experimental philosophy Anthem [youtube.com] Experimental Philosophy [fun 3 minute overview, youtube.com]  The Experimental Philosophy webpage.  Josh Knobe's webpage  Person as Scientist, Person as Moralist by Joshua Knobe Philosophy meets the real world  [slate.com]  In Memoriam: The X-Phi Debate by Tamler Sommers [Philosophers Magazine]  Experimental Philosophy and Free Will: An Intervention by Tamler Sommers Experimental Philosophy [wikipedia.org]  Using the Knobe effect as an implici

Paul Bloom joins us in the second segment for a lively discussion about the value of  empathy as a guide our moral decisions.  And in our first scoop, we talk about Paul's new book (coming in November) Just Babies: The Origin of Good and Evil ,  racist babies, and how 80s sitcoms changed the world.  In the first segment, Dave and Tamler face the music and try to respond to a listener's criticisms of their episode on slurs and offensiveness (Episode 22) .   Links The Baby in the Well: The Case Against Empathy by Paul Bloom [newyorker.com]  Descartes' Baby  by Paul Bloom [amazon.com] Jesse Prinz "Is empathy necessary for morality" [subcortex.com]  Pizarro, Bloom, and Detweiler-Bedell on the empathy, disgust, and the moral circle [peezer.net]  Pre-order Just babies: The origins of good and evil by Paul Bloom [amazon.com] Louis CK: My Life is Really Evil.     Special Guest: Paul Bloom. Support Very Bad Wizards

Dave, Tamler, and special guest Yoel Inbar break down Sam Peckinpah's brilliant (at least according  to one of us) 1971 film Straw Dogs.    They talk about the notorious rape scene, the meaning of the final siege, standing up to Cornish townies, and whether the urge to respond to insults is rational in in modern society.  Also: Yoel and Tamler go another round in their debate about statistics and grad school.  Links Straw Dogs [imdb.com]  Yoel Inbar [yoelinbar.net]  "The Power of Straw Dogs" [dailybeast.com]  Edward Copeland on Straw Dogs [eddieonfilm.blogspot.com] "Home Like No Place: Peckinpah's Straw Dogs."  [criterion.com]  Musical interlude courtesy of Monibeatz  [http://monibeatz.bandcamp.com/] Special Guest: Yoel Inbar. Support Very Bad Wizards

In what might very well be the last episode before we're pulled off the air, Tamler outlines his data-free "theory" of what makes something offensive. What makes a joke about race, ethnicity, gender, disability funny sometimes, and deeply hurtful at other times? What makes Louis CK so goddamn funny and Andrew Dice Clay just...an asshole? Is Family Guy racist? Throughout the episode, David defends the victims of hatred and is a voice of empathy and reason, while Tamler drops the c-word multiple times, jumps to racist conclusions, and makes fun of David's partial Arab heritage.  Links Louis CK and his friends discuss the word f@**%t Wikipedia on F**** and C*** [wikipedia.org] Bill Burr on the c-word [youtube.com] Andy Ihnatko's podcast on 5by5.tv, where he discusses why Family Guy is not funny The Troubling Viral Trend of the “Hilarious” Black Neighbor by Aisha Harris [slate.com]   Support Very Bad Wizards

Dave and Tamler shrug off inside baseball concerns and argue whether to go to grad school, what to do when you get there, and share horror stories about the job market.   Also, Tamler explains why the sorority sister who wrote the infamous email is a "civil rights visionary," Dave refuses to say "c*#t punt," and listener contributions from Boomer Trujillo, Yoel Inbar, Rachel Grazioplene, Dave Tucker, and Nina Strohminger.  Links Michael Shannon Reads Sorority Letter [funnyordie.com] David Ortiz Pregame Speech [youtube.com]  Twitter beef "Thesis Hatement" by Rebecca Schuman [slate.com] "Thesis Defense" by Katie Roiphie [slate.com]  The Impossible Decision by Joshua Rothman [newyorker.com]  VBW Bonus content: Dave and Yoel inbar on the "replicability crisis." Support Very Bad Wizards

Dave and Tamler begin with a brief, heartfelt discussion about the Boston Bombings.  Tamler talks about why Patriots' Day and the Boston Marathon mean so much to a kid growing up in Boston.  They speculate a bit about the motive behind the attack and ask why the perpetrators didn't come out and claim responsibility.   In the second and third segments, Molly Crockett joins us to challenge Fiery Cushman for the prize of classiest episode ever.  She tells us about her research on the effects of serotonin depletion on retributive behavior, and how it was reported as "Chocolate and Cheese help you make better decisions" in the popular media.  We talk about the responsibility that scientists have to make sure that their studies are reported properly, and how brain research can (despite David's previous claims) help shed light on human nature and behavior.  Also: Tamler mangles the pronunciation of roughly 14 brain regions, Dave yearns for the days when restrictions of human experimentation were non-existent, and bo

Re-recording a not-so-tragically lost episode (it kinda sucked), Dave and Tamler talk about the things they hate most about philosophy and psychology.  But first they discuss a blog post by a Rochester professor that wonders why it's not OK to rape someone who's passed out.  Also: same-sex marriage, telling dirty jokes to your daughter, Meredith Baxter Birney, Lifetime movies, how to eat crawfish, and Dave takes a bold, even heroic, stand by criticizing a Republican senator.     Links In honor of our 19th episode, some Paul Hardcastle for you.. Opening clip: Bridge on the River Kwai [youtube.com]  Economist: Rapists reaping rewards of passed out girls  [gawker.com] Molly Crockett's TEDx Talk on Neuro-Bunk  [TED.com] Friendship and Freedom (blog post, Flickers of Freedom--Tamler and Saul Smilanksy get into it about the "dubiousness" of gratitude in the comments ) The Ikea Effect [hbr.org]  Paul Bloom and David talk about social psychology's dismissal of reason [bloggingheads.tv]  Donate to Oxfam. It will

Joe Henrich joins the podcast to tell us that we know nothing about his work and that how we got to teach a class in anything is absolutely amazing.   We continue our discussion from Episode 17 about his critique of the social and behavioral sciences in "The Weirdest People in the World" and his work in small scale societies on fairness norms.  We also talk about the weird American obsession with happiness, monkeys throwing cucumbers, and why some people reject "hyper-fair" offers of more than the half the pot in the ultimatum games.   Links "I happen to have Marshall Mcluhan right here."   (From Woody Allen's Annie Hall.)  Longer HD version here Joe Henrich UBC.ca | Wikipedia  The Machiguenga [wikipedia.org]  Henrich on Brosnan and DeWaal's capuchin inequity aversion study.  Chicha [wikipedia.org]  How much money would it take for you to kill a puppy? [liveleak.com]  Relevant papers are listed in the notes for Episode 17: Learning About Bushmen from Studying Freshmen?    Special Guest: Joe Henrich. Support

Thousands of studies in psychology rely on data from North American undergraduates. Can we really conclude anything about the "human" mind from such a limited sample-- especially since Westerners are probably more different from the rest of the world's population than any other group?  We talk about Joseph Henrich and colleagues' critique of the behavioral sciences in their paper "The WEIRDEST People in the World."    David offers a defense of psychology, arguing that it's usually not the goal of lab studies to generalize findings to all humans in the first place.  Also, Tamler  gives a brief, heartfelt, completely non-awkward rant about monkey torturer Harry Harlow and David defends the practice of electrocuting baby monkeys for no reason.  Links The Gods Must Be Crazy [IMDB.com] Bushmen [wikipedia.org] Homo Economicus [wikipedia.org] The Ultimatum Game [wikipedia.org] Müller-Lyer illusion [wikipedia.org] We aren't the world [psmag.com] Harlow studies [wikipedia.org] Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenz

For those who thought our most uncomfortable topics were behind us, on this episode we are joined by David's childhood friend Damani McDole [facebook.com] to discuss several potentially offensive topics surrounding race and justice in America, such as slavery, reparations, affirmative action, and the use of the N-word. When Damani mounts an economic and moral defense for reparations for the descendants of slaves, David prefers to point to the difficulties in deciding who gets paid ( someone who's 1/16th descended from slaves? Jamaican-Americans? African immigrants?) and who should be responsible for paying (only people whose descendants benefitted from slavery? all non-slave descended taxpayers?). Tamler proposes (taking a note from Lenny Bruce) that if we use the N-word often enough it will lose its sting, and decides to practice what he preaches. And Damani reveals a surprising theory about race and geography (surprising for a Black man, at least) that leaves Tamler awkwardly speechless.  For those who are