Experimental Philosophy

XPS at the APA

I just wanted to let everyone know that Jen Wright and Josh Knobe have put together three very exciting APA sessions for the Experimental Philosophy Society.  So, I think I speak for everyone when I thank them both for their hard work on this front.  Indeed, it is truly amazing how far the field of experimental philosophy has come in such a short amount of time.  To think that when we started this blog back in 2004, there were only fifteen contributors.  Now, the blog has over 120 contributors from around the world, more philosophers are working hand in hand with psychologists than ever before, and the field itself has not only garnered more attention from mainstream philosophy but also more respect.  Having interesting sessions like this at the APA can only help further legitimize our work and attract more philosophers into the experimental fold! That being said, here are the respective line-ups:

The Eastern APA:

Tuesday December 28th from 7:30-10:30 p.m.

Chair: TBA

Speakers:

Joshua May and Richard Holton “What in the World is Weakness of Will?”

James Beebe and David Sackris  “Moral Objectivism Across the Lifespan” 

Christine Weigel  “Far from Certain: Distance Produces Variance”

Angel Pinillos  “Experiments on Knowledge and Stakes”

Justin Fisher  “Pragmatic Experimental Philosophy”

Joshua Greene  “Integrative Moral Cognition”

The Central APA:

Date and Time: TBA 

Chair: TBA

Speakers:

Stephanie Samayoa and Adam Feltz, "Heuristics, Life Sustaining Treatments, and Paternalism"

Chad Gonnerman, Shane Reuter, and Jonathan Weinberg, "More Oversensitive Intuitions: Print Fonts and Could Choose Otherwise."

Joe Paxton, "Overriding Moral Intuitions."

Mark Phelan, "Who's Thinking Boeing's Thoughts?"

Chandra Sripada, "Being the Source of Yourself: Folk Intuitions about Free Will and  'Ultimate Control'."

Julio Bermudez, "The Empirical Profile of Beauty."

Brian Robinson, "The Danger of Data-Driven Theories."

The Pacific APA:

Date and Time: TBA

Chair:  TBA

Speakers:

Jonathan Weinberg and Joshua Alexander, "Thin vs. Substantial Conceptions  of Intuition:  You Can Run but You Cannot Hide."

Gunnary Bjornsson, "The Explanation Explanation of Knobe Effects"

Tania Lombrozo, "Evidence for Two Concepts of Causation."

Mark Alfano, "An Empirical Investigation of Social Distance Heuristics."

David Rose, David Danks, and Eduoard Machery, " When is a Raven (Reason) Like a Writing Desk (a Causal Explanation)?"

Felipe de Brigard and William Brady, "Responsibility and the principle of alternative future possibilities."

 

CFP CO3

I am pleased to announce the call for papers for the third online consciousness conference. There has been a strong experimental philosophy presence the first two years of the conference and it would be great to see that continue.

Invited speakers include,

Kathleen Akins, Simon Fraser University

Paul Churchland, University of California San Diego

Steven Harnad, University of Southampton & University of Montreal, Quebec

Jesse Prinz, The Graduate Center, CUNY

Papers in any area of consciousness studies are welcome, though the conference has as its theme this year ‘Neurophilosophy and the Philosophy of Neuroscience’. Selected papers from the conference relating to this theme, pending outside review, will be published in the annual special issue of Synthese “Neuroscience and its Philosophy”. Because of this contributions that are unpublished elsewhere and related to the theme are preferred, though exceptions can be made.

Papers should be roughly 3,000-4,000 words and subsequent presentations, should the presenter choose to make one, should be about 20 minutes (though longer papers/presentations are acceptable). Submissions, suitable for blind review, should be sent to consciousnessonline@gmail.com by January 5th 2011. Those interested in being referees or commentators should also contact me. Authors of accepted papers are urged to make, or have made, some kind of audio/visual presentation (e.g. narrated powerpoint or video of talk) though this is not required to present.

For more information visit the conference website: http://consciousnessonline.wordpress.com

Implications of the Experimental Approach to Ethics

"Ethics and Contemporary Life: Implications of the Experimental Approach to Ethics"

The Applied Ethics Centre (ERA), and The Law and Philosophy Departments at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro will be hosting the event "Ethics and Contemporary Life: Implications of the Experimental Approach to Ethics"

Organizers: Danilo Marcondes de Souza Filho and Noel Struchiner

Funded by: CAPES FINEP U.S. Consulate General Rio de Janeiro

Participants:

Fiery Cushman (Harvard University)
Edouard Machery (University of Pittsburgh)
Thomas Nadelhoffer (Dickinson College/ The Kenan Institute for Ethics at Duke University)
David Pizarro (Cornell University)
Jesse Prinz (City University of New York)

Main Event Date: December 9th, 2010

We will have three sessions: the first will run from 10am to 12pm, the second from 1:30pm to 3:30pm, and the third from 4pm to 6pm.  Other Activities Open to the General Public:

December 7th, 2010 (2pm-5pm): Informal discussion with participants day one

December 8th, 2010 (2pm-5pm): Informal discussion with participants day two

All talks will happen here: Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro – Auditório B8 Rua Marquês de São Vicente, 225, Ala Frings, 8º andar - Gávea - Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil Contact in case you need further instructions: noel@puc-rio.br

All events will be free of charge! Thanks, Noel Struchiner

 

Experimental Philosophy Lab Meetings in New York

This Friday, November 5th, at 3:30 at the CUNY Graduate Center, Room 5414, join the Metro Experimental Research Group for presentations by Andy Egan and Philipp Koralus. Come for the informal talks and Q&A and stay for discussion afterwards. Please note: This time talks will be held at CUNY, not NYU.

Titles and abstracts follow. More details (including our calendar) are available at: http://www.yale.edu/cogsci/mergcalendar.htm

 

Andy Egan
Rutgers University, Philosophy

Title: Why Ethics is All About Me 

Abstract: Moral relativism has been a pretty unpopular view, at least in philosophical circles.  There are good reasons for this – there are a lot of legitimate grounds for concern and skepticism about the prospects for a relativist metaethics. Part of the reason why the problems for moral relativism have seemed so bad, I think, is that we haven’t had the best version of the view on the table.  I present the version of moral relativism that I think has the best prospects, and argue that its prospects are pretty good – good enough to deserve a spot among the views that we take seriously in our metaethical theorizing.

Philipp Koralus 
Princeton University, Philosophy

Title: Against the alleged de re/de dicto ambiguity of descriptions: Comparative acceptability measures applied to semantics

Abstract: Descriptions occurring in attitude report contexts can admit of de re, de dicto (and sometimes additional “intermediate”) interpretations. Standard views trace those interpretations to an ambiguity in sentences like “John wants a sloop”. I show how a classical ambiguity test can be operationalized as a comparative acceptability judgment task and present data that suggest that descriptions in attitude contexts are not ambiguous as traditionally thought.

 

Effective Intentions + Free Will and Consciousness

I thought some of you might be interested to know that Al Mele's recent book Effective Intentions is now out in paperback for less than $20.  Relatedly, you might also be interested in the volume Mele co-edited with Roy Baumeister and Kathleen Vohs entitled Free Will and Consciousness:  How Might They Work?  As always, happy reading!

XPhi Exam Question

To help make your Monday morning more productive, I thought I would mention that when I taught a graduate course on experimental philosophy a year ago, the final question on the take-home exam for the course was the following:

 
The best answer in the class was from Mark Phillips: "I choose the second picture. It is important in both pictures that the armchair was set aflame. Experimental philosophy has many good perspectives to add to many philosophical arguments. However, the first picture leaves the armchair to be consumed. I believe this is too strong a conclusion. Armchair philosophy will not cease to exist because of the influence of experimental philosophy. The armchair has been singed, and the marks of experimental philosophy will (hopefully) continue to show for a very long time. But non-partisan, level headed philosophers will pee out the proverbial fire and continue to work from the (now wet and stinky) armchair."