Go behind the scenes with philosophers and cognitive scientists to get their take on published journal articles, what they like about papers, what they maybe don't anymore, and where inquiry should take us next.
Journal Entries
Claim This Podcastby Wesley Buckwalter
4.5(6 reviews)
14 episodes
Updated Daily
Accepts GuestsHas Sponsors
Podcast Overview
Go behind the scenes with philosophers and cognitive scientists to get their take on published journal articles, what they like about papers, what they maybe don't anymore, and where inquiry should take us next.
Language
🇺🇲
Publishing Since
4/4/2020
1 verified contact email on file for Journal Entries
Pitch yourself as a guest, propose sponsorships, or reach out directly to the host.
Recent Episodes
September 24, 2021
Tracking Hate Speech with Shannon Fyfe
<p>When does hate speech cross the line into incitement of violence? And how does incitement get prosecuted around the world when it leads to violent atrocities like genocide? Are legal categories like incitement to genocide in international law all that effective at preventing or deterring this kind of speech? In her paper, Shannon Fyfe walks us through these complicated legal and philosophical questions as they played out in the trial of three media executives held by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda for incitement during the Rwandan genocide. She also discusses incitement in domestic jurisdictions and the January 6 attacks in Washington DC.</p> <p><strong>Links and Resources</strong></p> <ul> <li><a href="https://philosophy.gmu.edu/people/sfyfe2" rel="nofollow">Shannon Fyfe</a></li> <li><a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/leiden-journal-of-international-law/article/abs/tracking-hate-speech-acts-as-incitement-to-genocide-in-international-criminal-law/671620A70B629DDE9C37E774CDEBAC65" rel="nofollow">The paper</a></li> <li><a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-26875506" rel="nofollow">Rwanda Genocide: 100 days of slaughter</a></li> <li><a href="https://unictr.irmct.org/" rel="nofollow">International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda</a></li> <li><a href="https://philpapers.org/rec/TIRGLG" rel="nofollow">Genocidal Language Games by Lynne Tirrell</a></li> <li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs6O77SkIOo" rel="nofollow">Background in Austin's Speech Act Theory</a></li> <li><a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/speech-acts/" rel="nofollow">Speech Acts by Mitchell Green</a></li> <li><a href="http://auschwitz.org/en/history/holocaust-denial/holocaust-and-genocide-denial-after-the-war" rel="nofollow">Holocaust and genocide denial</a></li> <li><a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Genocide/j_HPwAEACAAJ?hl=en" rel="nofollow">Genocide: A Normative Account by Larry May</a></li> </ul> <p><strong>Paper Quotes</strong><br> The judgements handed down by the ICTR in the Media case established that certain types of speech can constitute or contribute to some of the most harmful crimes under international law. By distinguishing between genocidal hate speech, genocidal incitement speech, and genocidal participation speech, I have shown how speech act theory justifies the international criminal law that places individual criminal responsibility on the perpetrators of these forms of speech. My account responds to two debates that pervade the intersection of hate speech and international criminal law: namely, the balancing of freedom of expression with the prevention of violence, and the challenge in imposing individual criminal liability for the inchoate crime of incitement to genocide. </p><p>Special Guest: Shannon Fyfe.</p>
September 13, 2021
Foul Behavior with Victor Kumar
<p>Disgust is often thought of as a negative emotion, and even moreso when it comes to morality. Many have argued that the feeling we have when we are morally disgusted by others has a questionable evolutionary history, is not always reliably produced, and has inspired acts of great evil in our past. In his paper, Victor Kumar argues that it's not all bad though, and that moral disgust can sometimes be a fitting response to moral wrongs. Specifically, he argues that disgust is fitting when it is evoked by moral wrongs that pollute social relationships by eroding shared expectations of trust. In these cases, moral disgust can help right certain wrongs, serve as a useful tool for social signalling, and enourage political organization.</p> <p><strong>Links and Resources</strong></p> <ul> <li><a href="http://www.victorkumar.org/" rel="nofollow">Victor Kumar</a></li> <li><a href="https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/p/pod/dod-idx/foul-behavior.pdf?c=phimp;idno=3521354.0017.015;format=pdf" rel="nofollow">The paper</a></li> <li><a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31619133/" rel="nofollow">Is Disgust a "Conservative" Emotion?</a></li> <li><a href="https://psyarxiv.com/axhvn/?fbclid=IwAR3aDV5JSa2dxU_lhLVRAHStUSJK953vXL0QxjSop4f8moBMq6d3sEKptEs" rel="nofollow">How Disgust Affects Social Judgments</a></li> <li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWCe_b_8ZlM" rel="nofollow">Martha Nussbaum, "From Disgust to Humanity"</a></li> <li><a href="https://www.canal-u.tv/video/fmsh/debunking_morality_a_hodgepodge_of_multipurpose_kludges.29523" rel="nofollow">Steve Stich on disgust</a></li> <li><a href="https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/yuck" rel="nofollow">Yuck! The Nature and Moral Significance of Disgust By Daniel Kelly</a></li> <li><a href="https://philpapers.org/archive/MAYDDI-3.pdf" rel="nofollow">Does Disgust Influence Moral Judgment? by Joshua May</a></li> </ul> <p><strong>Paper Quotes</strong></p> <p>Many philosophers are skeptical of moral disgust, perhaps because they assume that it is tied exclusively to conservative norms and values. I have shown, to the contrary, that disgust is implicated in important moral norms and values that are shared by liberals and conservatives. Disgust is repurposed in ways that support these norms and values, by motivating an important form of punishment, tracking the spread of moral violations, and expressively coordinating collective action. Disgust accurately reflects the nature of certain wrongs that commonly elicit moral revulsion. Instead of ridding ourselves of disgust, then, we would do better to understand its fittingness and unfittingness, its uses and its hazards, and thus arrive at a richer appreciation of its suitability for moral life.</p><p>Special Guest: Victor Kumar.</p>
September 6, 2021
Alive Inside with Andrew Peterson
<p>As we learn more and more about the brain, researchers are developing new neuroscientific methods that can help diagnose patients with traumatic brain injury. For example, some of these methods might even be able to tell us that patients who otherwise appear unresponsive are actually still "alive inside". That's an amazing idea, but the story doesn't stop there. As such technology develops, it raises a number of ethical questions about how it works and how to use. In this paper, Andrew and his coauthors investigate the benefits, harms, and costs of using neuroimaging to detect human consciousness. </p> <p><strong>Links and Resources</strong></p> <ul> <li><a href="https://philosophy.gmu.edu/people/apeter31" rel="nofollow">Andrew Peterson</a></li> <li><a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/bioe.12678" rel="nofollow">The paper</a></li> <li><a href="https://bmcmedethics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12910-021-00674-8" rel="nofollow">Experiences of family of individuals in a locked in, minimally conscious state, or vegetative state with the health care system</a></li> <li><a href="https://www.charlesweijer.com/neuroimaging-project" rel="nofollow">Ethical issues in neuroimaging after serious brain injury with Charles Weijer</a></li> <li><a href="https://n.neurology.org/content/91/10/450" rel="nofollow">Practice guideline update recommendations summary: Disorders of consciousness</a></li> <li><a href="https://www.med.upenn.edu/apps/faculty/index.php/g275/p7909" rel="nofollow">Jason Karlawish</a></li> <li><a href="https://owenlab.uwo.ca/" rel="nofollow">Adrian Owen</a></li> </ul> <p><strong>Paper Quotes</strong></p> <p>The practice guideline update is a milestone in the history of neurology. Recommendations to use investigational neuroimaging methods are but one aspect of the guideline, and there is a need for further normative analysis of its rich content. We encourage continued debate on these issues. Bringing clarity to the underlying ethics of caring for brain‐injured patients can assist clinicians and health care institutions as they incorporate the guideline in clinical practice.</p> <p>We think that investigational neuroimaging could facilitate access to opportunity for DoC patients. As the guideline highlights, investigational neuroimaging could function as a gatekeeper for continued rehabilitation, and it might also be used as a neural prosthetic, based on future technical improvements. Neuroimaging assessment could also inform clinical decisions that best reflect a patient’s values, even if pursuing those values are inconsistent with standard notions of quality of life. Opportunity‐based frameworks for healthcare justice still require conceptual refinement, and further work needs to be done to thoroughly apply such a framework to the DoC context. However, we believe that this is a promising avenue of future research to explicate the justice claims that DoC patients (or other disabled populations) have to investigational neuroimaging and other novel therapies.</p><p>Special Guest: Andrew Peterson.</p>
14 total episodes available
Deep-dive analytics for Journal Entries
Frequently asked questions
Have a different question and can't find the answer you're looking for? Reach out to our support team by sending us an email and we'll get back to you as soon as we can.
- What is Journal Entries?
- How often does this podcast release new episodes?
This podcast updates daily.
- Where can I listen to this podcast?
This podcast is available on 4 platforms including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and more. You can also use the RSS feed directly.
- Does this podcast accept guests?
Yes, this podcast regularly features guests.
Legal Disclaimer
Pod Engine is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or officially connected with any of the podcasts displayed on this platform. We operate independently as a podcast discovery and analytics service.
All podcast artwork, thumbnails, and content displayed on this page are the property of their respective owners and are protected by applicable copyright laws. This includes, but is not limited to, podcast cover art, episode artwork, show descriptions, episode titles, transcripts, audio snippets, and any other content originating from the podcast creators or their licensors.
We display this content under fair use principles and/or implied license for the purpose of podcast discovery, information, and commentary. We make no claim of ownership over any podcast content, artwork, or related materials shown on this platform. All trademarks, service marks, and trade names are the property of their respective owners.
While we strive to ensure all content usage is properly authorized, if you are a rights holder and believe your content is being used inappropriately or without proper authorization, please contact us immediately at hey@podengine.ai for prompt review and appropriate action, which may include content removal or proper attribution.
By accessing and using this platform, you acknowledge and agree to respect all applicable copyright laws and intellectual property rights of content owners. Any unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or commercial use of the content displayed on this platform is strictly prohibited.