Very Bad Wizards

In this Very Special Boxing Day edition of the podcast, Tamler and David welcome back honorary Third Wizard Paul Bloom to discuss his latest article in the New Yorker about dehumanization and cruelty. Is it really the case that we dehumanize in order to harm others? Or does most violence actually require us to view others as fundamentally human, agentic, and capable of true suffering? But first, we discuss the stages of Star Trek transporter cognition, whether Paul and David are closet-dualists, and whether the process of choosing a Dalai Lama suffers from p-hacking concerns. (And between segments we give our brief, spoiler-free thoughts on Season 3 of Mr. Robot). Happy Chanukah, Kwanzaa, New Year, and Merry Christmas to all!Special Guest: Paul Bloom.Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: Join the Very Bad Wizards discussion on Reddit Paul Bloom | Department of Psychology The Root of All Cruelty? | The New Yorker Klaus J. Jacobs Awards - Jacobs Foundation War Child Our enemies are human: that’s why we want to kill them | Aeon Ideas On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society - Kindle edition by Dave Grossman. Professional & Technical Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com. Virtuous Violence: Hurting and Killing to Create, Sustain, End, and Honor Social Relationships by Alan Fiske and Tage Rai Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny by Kate Manne

David and Tamler assert their autonomy as individuals by discussing their favorite dystopian works of art. Rebelling against a repressive regime, they refuse to sacrifice their privacy, uniqueness, and reproductive freedom. Through sheer force of will - the human spirit - they triumph over the pressures to ... wait what? You want me to take that pill? Okay, can't hurt. Aaahhhhh. So happy... So content... Must keep order. When the individual feels, the community reels. I am you, and you are I. I am you, and you are I. Plus, a real-life trolley problem! (Or is it?)Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: Very Bad Wizards subreddit — Contribute to our Reddit discussions! Letters of Note: 1984 v. Brave New World Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut [wordfight.org] The Lobster (2015) - IMDb Gattaca (1997) - IMDb Never Let Me Go (novel) - Wikipedia Children of Men (2006) - IMDb The Trial (1962) - IMDb The Trial - Wikipedia It's a Good Life (The Twilight Zone) - Wikipedia Snowpiercer (2013) - IMDb Idiocracy (2006) - IMDb A Clockwork Orange (1971) - IMDb

David and Tamler keep their Nagel streak alive, discussing the essay "The Fragmention of Value" from his collection "Mortal Questions." How should we address our fragmented moral landscape, with multiple sources of value that can't be reduced or systematically ordered? Does this make all of our moral decisions arbitrary? Plus, we talk about Louis CK and in a Thanksgiving tradition special guest Christina Hoff Sommers rejoins the podcast in a moderately drunken debate with Tamler about a possible sex panic. Special Guest: Christina Hoff Sommers.Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: Christina Hoff Sommers - Wikipedia We’re at risk of turning #metoo into rush to blame all men - NY Daily News Nagel, T. (2012). Mortal questions. Cambridge University Press. [amazon.com affiliate link] Documentary Film Finding Vivian Maier | Vivian Maier Photographer

David and Tamler dip back into the Thomas Nagel well, and discuss the problem of "moral luck." Why do we blame drunk drivers who hit someone more than drunk drivers who make it home OK? Why do we judge people for things that are beyond their control (when we have strong intuitions that uncontrollable acts don't deserve blame)? Does moral luck ultimately swallow all of our behavior? Can we truly embrace the view that "actions are events and people are things" or are we stuck with another unsolvable clash of competing perspectives (just like the problem of absurdity)? Plus, Dave exposes himself on the Partially Examined Life, Tamler self-censors, and somehow we discuss Hollywood harassment and stand-up comedy without mentioning Louis CK. (But only because we recorded this episode about five hours before the NY Times story broke.)Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: Nagel, T. (2012). Mortal questions. Cambridge University Press. [amazon.com affiliate link] Nagel, T. Moral Luck. Moral Luck (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Intentional stance [wikipedia.org] The Partially Examined Life Episode 176 Situationism in Psych: Milgram & Stanford Prison Experiments (Part One) — Part one of the PEL episode with David The Partially Examined Life Episode 176 Situationism in Psych: Milgram & Stanford Prison Experiments (Part Two) The Partially Examined Life Episode 93: Freedom and Responsibility (Strawson vs Strawson) — Tamler's appearance on PEL

Is life meaningless? Are humans just glorified dung beetles, pushing around our piles of poop with no greater purpose? What would it take for life to actually be meaningful? In this episode, Tamler and David discuss Thomas Nagel’s essay on the sense of meaninglessness and absurdity that can so easily creep into human existence (with a special emphasis on the work of Camus and the philosophy of Rick and Morty). But first we tackle even more important questions about the human condition such as, why is it easier to detect the size of a hole with your tongue than with your little finger? And which moral "dilemmas" are actually moral no-brainers? (In the process, we even solve the problem of free speech on campus. You’re welcome.) Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: The Extent of Skin Bending Rather Than Action Possibilities Explains Why Holes Feel Larger With the Tongue Than With the Finger. - PubMed - NCBI Pure joy: a colorblind man sees color for the first time Dan Harmon Reveals the Meaning of Life in RICK AND MORTY | Nerdist Microcosmos - Dung beetle rolls ball and gets stuck. - YouTube Nagel, T. (1971). The absurd. The Journal of Philosophy, 68(20), 716-727. Camus, A. (1955). The myth of Sisyphus, and other essays. Vintage.

What do we mean when we say someone is angry? Can we identify anger (or any other emotion) via facial expressions, physiological changes, or neural markers? Is anger simply a feeling, something that happens to us, or does it involve a judgment? How much control do we have over our emotions, and can we be responsible for them? We talk about the work of Lisa Feldman Barrett and Bob Solomon. Plus, Tamler engages in conceptual analysis on Star Trek transporter beliefs (yes you read that right) and David is too stunned to argue. Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: Yale’s Paul Bloom to receive $1 million Klaus Jacobs Prize | YaleNews Solomon, R. C. (1973). Emotions and choice. The Review of Metaphysics, 20-41. What Emotions Are (and Aren’t) - The New York Times Are Emotions Natural Kinds? Perspectives on Psychological Science - Lisa Feldman Barrett, 2006

Do you think of your life as a story? Does your life have a narrative structure or form? Do you identify with your past selves and your future selves? If not, can you live a good life, a moral life, an authentic life? Can you feel guilt, regret, and resentment? Plus, speaking of stories, we talk about a new study suggesting that books with anthropomorphic animals can't teach moral lessons to kids. Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: Larsen, N. E., Lee, K., & Ganea, P. A. (2017). Do storybooks with anthropomorphized animal characters promote prosocial behaviors in young children?. Developmental Science. Children's books with humans have greater moral impact than animals, study finds | Books | The Guardian Strawson, G. (2004). Against narrativity. Ratio, 17(4), 428-452. Strawson, G. (2007). Episodic ethics. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements, 60, 85-115. Parfit, D. (1995). The unimportance of identity. I am Not a Story

It’s Part 2 of the Patreon listener selected episode! David and Tamler continue their discussion on intelligence from our last episode by tackling the radioactive topic of group differences and IQ. Are there reliable differences in IQ across races? Given that IQ is strongly heritable, and that racial categories are based (in part) on biological differences, does it follow that group differences in IQ are due to biological differences across racial groups? (Could only a politically motivated science-denier conclude otherwise?) David argues that biological explanations for racial differences in IQ are based on a fundamental misunderstanding of genetics and race. It’s a complex argument, so if you start listening, please finish! (Oh and @VBW_No_Context on Twitter, take a vacation, you’ve earned it!). Plus, more on neuroscientific explanations, and Tamler relates his experience of Hurricane Harvey. Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: Race & IQ: Debate Serves No Purpose | National Review Returning to the race and IQ debate | Glenn Loury & John McWhorter [The Glenn Show] - YouTube Race & IQ: Don’t Obsess Over It, but Do Discuss It | National Review Templeton, A. R. (1998). Human races: a genetic and evolutionary perspective. American Anthropologist, 100(3), 632-650. Chicago Study Finds Africans More Genetically Diverse Than Other Populations Human penis size - Wikipedia

David and Tamler do their best to talk frankly about intelligence and IQ research. (It's our Patreon listener-selected topic! We probably would never have chosen this one on our own...). Is intelligence a meaningful, definable concept? Can we reliably test for it? How much of the variability in IQ across individuals is due to heritable factors? Are people with higher IQ happier, wealthier, or healthier than people with lower IQ? And why is this topic so controversial anyhow? Plus in the intro segment Tamler and David discuss why you probably don't need fMRI to know what your dog wants, and why cognitive neuroscience seems to confuse otherwise intelligent folks. (Note: This is Part 1 of our discussion on intelligence. In Part 2 will delve into the slightly more controversial topics of IQ, race, and gender). Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: What Does Your Dog Really Want? - Scientific American Blog Network A Very Bad Wizard: Morality behind the curtain by Tamler Sommers [amazon.com affiliate link] — David does the links, so it's him telling you to support Tamler and buy his book! The Simpsons - Crayon in Homer's brain - YouTube Ritchie, S. (2015). Intelligence: All that matters. Hodder & Stoughton. [amazon.com affiliate link] — Stuart Ritchie's very well-written primer on intelligence. Accessible to a wide audience, but with all the nuance you'd expect from a clear-thinking academic. It's also a very quick read. Stuart Ritchie (@StuartJRitchie) | Twitter Stuart Ritchie | The University of Edinburgh

Guest Yoel Inbar joins David and Tamler to break down David Lynch’s dreamy masterpiece Mulholland Drive. (FULL SPOILERS – watch before you listen!) What’s real and what’s illusion? What happens when our illusions unravel? How do expectations affect our experience? How can artists use our expectations to manipulate our emotions? Come for the questions, stay for the answers – or at least for more questions. Special Guest: Yoel Inbar.Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: Mulholland Drive (2001) - IMDb Everything you were afraid to ask about “Mulholland Drive” - Salon.com Film Crit Hulk Smash: HULK VS. THE GENIUS OF MULHOLLAND DRIVE | Birth.Movies.Death. David Lynch Signature Cup Organic Coffee | Organic Coffee | JavaDistribution.com Urban Dictionary: fuck tab

Special guest Robert Wright joins the podcast to discuss his latest book "Why Buddhism is True." What is the Buddhist conception of not-self? When we become aware that the boundaries between us and the world are fluid, what is the “we” that arrives at this insight? Can daily meditation make you less of a dick? How does evolutionary psychology bear on these questions? Plus, Dave horrifies Tamler with his new hipster habit.Special Guest: Robert Wright.Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: One-Hand Clapping Kōan [wikipedia.org] Robert Wright (journalist) - Wikipedia Robert Wright's Website Pre-order "Why Buddhism Is True" by Robert Wright [amazon.com affiliate link] Break music: Try Harder by peez | Free Listening on SoundCloud

What happens when we discover why we believe the things we believe? What if we discover that our values are the product of our cultural tradition, or personal experience, or natural selection? Should we be more skeptical of our values once we learn their history? Plus, data on Google porn searches reveal that you're all a bunch of sick fucks. Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: Proof that Americans are lying about their sexual desires - Vox Doris, J. M. (2009). Genealogy and Evidence: Prinz on the History of Morals. Kahane, G. (2011). Evolutionary debunking arguments. Noûs, 45(1), 103-125. The Splintered Mind: Tamler Sommers Break Music: Everything Is Wrong by peez

David and Tamler try to put the topic of campus politics to bed once and for all – with limited success. First, we get into a big fight about the prevalence and danger of political correctness in American universities. We junked that recording, and tried to distill our best points into a new one. (Trust us – it was for the best.) We also narrow down all the topic recommendations from our beloved Patreon supporters to five finalists. In the second segment, James Lindsay (co-author of the "Conceptual Penis" hoax) joins us to talk about why he thinks the hoax was more successful in exposing gender studies than some of their critics (including us) have suggested.Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: James Lindsay (@GodDoesnt) | Twitter James Lindsay's Website (God Doesn't; We Do) Skeptic » Reading Room » The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct: A Sokal-Style Hoax on Gender Studies Alan Sokal: Some Thoughts on “The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct” Hoax Break Music: Dusted by peez [soundcloud.com]

David and Tamler break down a recent classic in the philosophy of mind: "The Extended Mind" by Andy Clark and David Chalmers. What is boundary of your mind? Is it contained with your body, or does it extend to the external environment--to your laptop, notebook, smartphone and more? Is this a purely terminological question, or one with practical and moral significance? And what is the role of intuition in providing an answer? Plus, Dave shares an email alerting him to the psychological trauma of male circumcision along with an exciting all-natural method for restoring the foreskin (that was stolen from us as infants).Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: Gay man, who suffered from depression over his circumcision, kills himself Circumcision’s Psychological Damage | Psychology Today Foreskin restoration for circumcised males — "Non-surgical foreskin restoration was reinvented in the late 1970s by a movement of circumcised men, mostly from the United States, who were upset at having been mutilated against their will." Break Music- In Effect by peez "The Extended Mind" by Andy Clark and David Chalmers Distributed cognition - Wikipedia

David and Tamler break down the latest small-stakes academic controversy--yes the one about conceptual penises. Does the recent "Sokal-like" hoax expose the ideological extremism of gender studies? Or does it show that certain portions of the "skeptic" community are susceptible to the same biases as their opponents? In the main segment they discuss the problems with measuring pain, pleasure, and happiness. When your doctor asks you to rate your pain between 1 and 10 and you say a 7, does your '7' reflect the same subjective experience as another person's '7'? (That depends--have you experienced childbirth?) How can we get more accurate readings of pain and pleasure across different people with different experiences? Most importantly, which number gets you the Vicodin?Support Very Bad WizardsLinks: Skeptic » Reading Room » The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct: A Sokal-Style Hoax on Gender Studies Sokal affair - Wikipedia Why the "Conceptual Penis" Hoax is Just a Big Cock Up. - Bleeding Heart Libertarians The engine of irrationality inside the rationalists – Ketan Joshi An embarrassing moment for the skeptical movement – Footnotes to Plato Bartoshuk, L. (2014). The measurement of pleasure and pain. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 91-93. Krueger, A. B., & Stone, A. A. (2014). Progress in measuring subjective well-being. Science, 346(6205), 42-43.