Suggested readings, 20 December 2020

Here are some interesting articles I've read over the past week I think are worth checking out.

Robert Allison, “Sorry, Time magazine, but 2020 is not ‘The Worst Year Ever’” 10 Dec, The Post and Courier.

"I will take this year over any year before penicillin, indoor plumbing, electricity and regular trash collection."

Kenan Malik, “Ideas can be tolerated without being respected. The distinction is key.” 13 Dec, The Observer.

"Drawing a distinction between people and ideas is essential both for the equal treatment of people and for the capacity to challenge and change ideas."

John E. Hayes and Cara Exten, “Daily DIY sniff checks could catch many cases of COVID-19.” 9 Dec, The Conversation.

"[R]ecent analyses suggest that if you had to pick just one symptom, sudden smell loss may be the single best predictor of a COVID-19 diagnosis."

Ed Yong, “How Science Beat the Virus.” 14 Dec, The Atlantic.

"[W]hen people look back on this period, decades from now, they will also tell stories, both good and bad, about this extraordinary moment for science. At its best, science is a self-correcting march toward greater knowledge for the betterment of humanity. At its worst, it is a self-interested pursuit of greater prestige at the cost of truth and rigor. The pandemic brought both aspects to the fore."

Thomas Sinclair, “Why should we care if humans die out?” 15 Dec, New Statesman.

Climate activists often claim that future generations have the right to inherit a sustainable world, but it is surprisingly difficult to explain why.

Lucius Caviola and Joshua Greene, “Giving with the Heart and the Head.” 17 Dec, Los Angeles Times.

"Human goodness comes from the heart. We shouldn’t deny that. But by making charitable giving a bit more evidence-based, we can multiply our impact and benefit even more people."

Tom Chivers, “Unconscious Bias Training is an empty PR drill.” 16 Dec, UnHerd.

"Stopping UBT [unconscious bias training] at the civil service is good, because UBT doesn’t work. The next step, if I was in charge, would be finding out what measures actually do work, and introducing them."

Comments

Should We Use Neuroenhancement Drugs to Improve Relationships?

A version of this article was printed in Humanism Ireland , July-August, Vol. 147 (2014) L ove, it is fair to say, is probably the strongest emotion we can experience. It can come in many different forms: love of one’s parent, sibling, or child. Though most people consider romantic relationships—which include companionship, sexual passion, intimacy, warmth, procreation and child-rearing—as the most significant component of one’s life; and it is probably the thing we find discussed more than anything else in novels, films and music. Committed romantic relationships tend to occur within the institution of marriage—something that is ubiquitous to most, if not all, cultures. Indeed, relationships today, which are primarily love-driven, are not just confined to marriages, as many couples sustain relationships outside of wedlock. Being in a love-driven relationship is considered important for most people, as it contributes to happiness—something we a...

Intuitions and Ethics

A version of this article was printed in Humanism Ireland , May-June, Vol. 146 (2014) The notion that our moral intuitions possess epistemic authority has been associated with a number of philosophers within the canon of Western thought. Roughly speaking, these thinkers have argued that our intuitions have recourse to a unique authority of perception that yields special access to a sphere of moral legitimacy. Others, however, have claimed that our intuitions are incredibly diverse and often conflict with each other—for example, your intuition says assisted suicide is morally permissible and my intuition says it’s wrong. But it seems the two contrasting intuitions cannot both be right. At the same time, most of us think our own moral intuitions are right : they do not seem inconsistent to us, and we have a strong sense to believe them. Accordingly, they strike us as correct. Undoubtedly, moral intuitions can be shaped by our particular culture, environment or co...

The ethics of high-tech “conversion” therapy

An edited version of this article was printed in Humanism Ireland , September-October, Vol. 148 (2014) I n an earlier post I discussed the imminent prospect of biological manipulating our different love systems and some of the ethical implications that might follow from it. This topic originally appeared in an article published in 2008 by Oxford ethicists Julian Savulescu and Anders Sandberg, who argue that it might be possible, in the next number of decades or so, to biologically manipulate and enhance our quality of love. They propose that we could supplement our relationship counselling sessions with prescription ‘love drugs’—ones with the purpose of improving intimacy and commitment between partners. With emerging biotechnologies like this, which includes recent work in neuroscience, psychopharmacology and other related areas, it will also be possible to consider the prospect of using them to manipulate brain systems to diminish and alter the capacity fr...

Nothing as It Seems

Search This Blog