Wireless Philosophy
Wireless Philosophy
  • 223
  • 26 538 491
PHILOSOPHY - BIOETHICS 9: What, If Anything, Is Wrong with “Doping” in Competitive Sports?
In this Wireless Philosophy video, we discuss the ethics of performance-enhancing drug use in competitive sports. To what extent is the opposition to such “doping” really based on safety concerns? Why are athletes who use performance-enhancing drugs thought to be cheaters who don’t deserve to win? If these drugs were safe, legal, and widely accessible, would they still diminish the value of athletic achievements?
View our Bioethics learning module and other videos in this series here: www.wi-phi.com/modules/bioethics/
Переглядів: 4 507

Відео

PHILOSOPHY - BIOETHICS 8: Three Cheers for Enhancement
Переглядів 1,4 тис.Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, we consider the potential effects of the unrestricted development and proliferation of biomedical enhancement technologies. By enabling us to transcend our physical limitations, are these technologies also eroding the very conditions that ground the value and dignity of human life? We celebrate the human capacity for self-improvement, but might certain enhance...
PHILOSOPHY - BIOETHICS 5: Why Do People Disagree About The Ethics Of Euthanasia?
Переглядів 25 тис.Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, we’ll survey the debate over euthanasia. Our exploration will be guided by four core questions that shape persistent disagreement over when, if ever, healthcare providers should be allowed to assist a patient in dying. View our Bioethics learning module and other videos in this series here: www.wi-phi.com/modules/bioethics/
PHILOSOPHY - BIOETHICS 7: What Is Biomedical Enhancement?
Переглядів 790Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, we consider various biomedical tools and techniques for improving our bodies or capacities, asking why certain improvements are welcomed as medical “treatments” while others, usually generating more ethical controversy, are classified as “enhancements.” What grounds this distinction, and does it give us good reason to worry about the growing development and us...
PHILOSOPHY - BIOETHICS 6: Is Lethal Injection Worse Than Pulling the Plug?
Переглядів 1,2 тис.Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, we consider a central disagreement in the euthanasia debate: if a terminally-ill patient asks for help in dying, does it make a real ethical difference whether this request is carried out “actively” or “passively”? View our Bioethics learning module and other videos in this series here: www.wi-phi.com/modules/bioethics/
PHILOSOPHY - BIOETHICS 4: Is It Ethical to Pay Subjects for Their Participation in Research Studies?
Переглядів 1 тис.Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, we’ll consider how scientific progress in medicine depends on subject participation in research studies and ask whether subjects should be monetarily compensated for these essential and risky contributions. View our Bioethics learning module and other videos in this series here: www.wi-phi.com/modules/bioethics/
PHILOSOPHY - BIOETHICS 3: Should Healthcare Providers Have the Right to Conscientious Objection?
Переглядів 1,4 тис.Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, we ask whether doctors and other health care professionals should be allowed to refuse to provide a standard service when providing it would conflict with their moral convictions. View our Bioethics learning module and other videos in this series here: www.wi-phi.com/modules/bioethics/
PHILOSOPHY - BIOETHICS 2: Should Healthcare Decisions Be Up to the Patient
Переглядів 1,4 тис.Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, we’ll investigate why the ultimate decision about a patient’s care should be up to the patient themselves, despite the medical expertise of their healthcare provider. View our Bioethics learning module and other videos in this series here: www.wi-phi.com/modules/bioethics/
PHILOSOPHY - BIOETHICS 1: How to Start Thinking Like an Ethical Doctor
Переглядів 3,1 тис.Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, we’ll reflect on the ethical atrocities committed by Nazi doctors, drawing lessons about several core ethical principles that ought to guide healthcare clinicians when working with their patients. View our Bioethics learning module and other videos in this series here: www.wi-phi.com/modules/bioethics/
PHILOSOPHY - EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 10: What If Robots Did All the Work?
Переглядів 2 тис.Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, Ryan Jenkins (professor of Philosophy at Cal Poly) asks us to reflect on the increasing role of advanced technologies in producing the goods and services we consume as a society. How might it increasingly affect us, particularly as workers? And should we welcome that?
PHILOSOPHY - EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 9: Does Predictive Policing Make Us All Safer?
Переглядів 1,6 тис.Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, Ryan Jenkins (professor of Philosophy at Cal Poly) examines law enforcement’s increased use of artificial intelligence for predictive policing. How should we balance the efficiency and safety benefits of this technology with concerns about its tendency to perpetuate historical biases and place unfair burdens on historically marginalized populations?
PHILOSOPHY - EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 8: Should We Worry about Our Diminishing Sphere of Privacy?
Переглядів 957Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, Ryan Jenkins (professor of Philosophy at Cal Poly) asks whether the proliferation of surveillance technologies such as cameras are a cause for concern. How do we define privacy, and why do we value it? Does a world in which we are being watched all the time have a “chilling effect” on our ability to express ourselves, explore our identities, and grow as people?
PHILOSOPHY - EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 7: Will Autonomous Vehicles Live Up to Their Promise?
Переглядів 636Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, Ryan Jenkins (professor of Philosophy at Cal Poly) discusses some of the ethical considerations regarding the use of autonomous vehicles (AVs), otherwise known as self-driving cars. Who will benefit, and who will be harmed by AVs? Are there ways to enjoy the benefits of AVs fairly, without taking on the burdens they may cause or pushing them onto others who ar...
PHILOSOPHY - EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 6: Do Drones Make Wars Too Easy?
Переглядів 807Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, Ryan Jenkins (professor of Philosophy at Cal Poly) considers how the increased use of military drones might affect not just how wars are fought, but also their frequency. Do drones represent just another advancement in our tools of war, or will they more fundamentally change our relationship to warfare?
PHILOSOPHY - EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 5: Should We Use Killer Robots to Fight Our Wars?
Переглядів 1,1 тис.Рік тому
In this Wireless Philosophy video, Ryan Jenkins (professor of Philosophy at Cal Poly) asks whether the use of lethal autonomous weapons is ethically justifiable. Would the various military advantages of these weapons make them an effective force for good, or would creating rule-following soldiers that entirely lack empathy and moral judgment be a bridge too far?
PHILOSOPHY - EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 4: Are There Hidden Dangers in Robots That Look Like Us?
Переглядів 828Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 4: Are There Hidden Dangers in Robots That Look Like Us?
PHILOSOPHY - EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 3: Should Online Platforms Censor Hate Speech?
Переглядів 1,1 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 3: Should Online Platforms Censor Hate Speech?
PHILOSOPHY-EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 2: Should Online Platforms Prevent the Spread of False Information?
Переглядів 1,6 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY-EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 2: Should Online Platforms Prevent the Spread of False Information?
PHILOSOPHY - EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 1: Is Technology as “Neutral” as We Think It Is?
Переглядів 3,5 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 1: Is Technology as “Neutral” as We Think It Is?
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 7: Eliminative Materialism
Переглядів 4,6 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 7: Eliminative Materialism
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 6: Folk Psychology
Переглядів 2,8 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 6: Folk Psychology
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 5: The Basis of Fear
Переглядів 1,4 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 5: The Basis of Fear
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 4: Basic Emotions
Переглядів 2,6 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 4: Basic Emotions
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 2: The Hard Problem of Consciousness
Переглядів 7 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 2: The Hard Problem of Consciousness
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 3: Animal Minds
Переглядів 1,6 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 3: Animal Minds
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 1: The Neural Correlates of Consciousness
Переглядів 4,2 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - NEUROSCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY 1: The Neural Correlates of Consciousness
PHILOSOPHY - DEMOCRACY 14: Deliberative Democracy
Переглядів 7 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - DEMOCRACY 14: Deliberative Democracy
PHILOSOPHY - DEMOCRACY 13: Public Reason
Переглядів 1,9 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - DEMOCRACY 13: Public Reason
PHILOSOPHY - DEMOCRACY 11: The Jury Theorem
Переглядів 2,8 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - DEMOCRACY 11: The Jury Theorem
PHILOSOPHY - DEMOCRACY 12: Do You Have a Duty to Vote?
Переглядів 1,1 тис.Рік тому
PHILOSOPHY - DEMOCRACY 12: Do You Have a Duty to Vote?

КОМЕНТАРІ

  • @SatoriSandwich
    @SatoriSandwich 7 годин тому

    Subjective experience is what it feels like to be a brain processing external or internal stimuli. You are quite literally your physical brain processes. And once these processes stop, your conscious experience stops too.

  • @ArtsyMold
    @ArtsyMold 22 години тому

    Rich People: "No, I rather have my meat artificially made and expensive. I want it to be... RRRICH." Average People: "Well yes... But, you have to do it in a humane way... Animals have feelings too..." Poor People: "YES! 😭"

  • @SneakySteevy
    @SneakySteevy День тому

    Spinoza advocates about the separation of the church and the state 100 years earlier than that.

  • @Jaggerbush
    @Jaggerbush День тому

    If I could afford to not eat creatures I wouldn't eat them.

  • @mithilbhoras5951
    @mithilbhoras5951 2 дні тому

    Is this also a non sequiter argument?

  • @kennyd6378
    @kennyd6378 3 дні тому

    There is no ship. Stick and Eagle theory. The ship of Theseus is made up of sticks, ordinary, everyday, sticks. If an eagle saw one of those sticks it might think 'stick' (or whatever eagles think) and try to build its nest with it. If we saw a stick we might think 'stick' and if we arrange many sticks we might and try to build a ...oh, I don't know...a ship of Theseus maybe? After we build the ship the eagle comes and steals a stick (or many or all) to build its nest. We go to the nest and take the stick/s back to rebuild the ship...etc. At this scale there are fundamentally only sticks that exist. The ship is only in our human minds after we are taught what a ship is (sticks + stick = float and carry stuff). A ship is not a ship. There is no fundamental 'ship'. There are only sticks. The eagle will only ever see sticks, with which to build its nest. Does the eagle see 'nest'. Maybe, I'll ask an eagle the next chance I get.

  • @anamariatiradogonzalez
    @anamariatiradogonzalez 3 дні тому

    Mi padre be decía entre varios mires: abducida

  • @ildebrandon6553
    @ildebrandon6553 4 дні тому

    So they postulated the principles of bioethics and then retroactively condemned doctors who didnt follow them? 😂😂

  • @stevesmith4901
    @stevesmith4901 5 днів тому

    Problem 2 can be stated in a more interesting way I believe. Tell me what you think of this. Imagine if some Event A were the cause of some Event B in the future, and Event A were to be defined as you acquiring the foreknowledge of Event B, then did you predict the future or did you cause the future? I would argue that you actually caused the future. It would be physically and logically impossible for you to predict the future if your knowledge of the future resulted in that future occurring. And here is my extrapolation from this: Since all past events collectively cause all future events, our "predictions" of the future are, in fact, contributing to shaping/causing the future. And here’s where it gets even more intriguing. All our present predictions of the future were, in some small way, caused by our past predictions of the future. This means even our predictions of the future are in a way being shaped by our past predictions of the future. I think I just blew my own mind. lol!

  • @stevesmith4901
    @stevesmith4901 5 днів тому

    I think this is more of a linguistic naming of an object problem than a physical material world problem. If we know what properties of an object we are ascribing the name "Ship of Theseus" (SoT) to, we will know which of the two is the Ship of Theseus. If the defining property of the object we're calling SoT is that it is a ship that had been in physical contact with Theseus, then every plank replaced from the original SoT makes it less of SoT, or not an SoT at all in some strict sense of the name SoT. Once the last plank of the original SoT is replaced, it can no longer be called SoT as it has lost the defining property of the name SoT. If we were to rebuild the ship using the original planks, then the new ship will be called the SoT as it fulfills the defining properties of the object referred to as SoT. On a side note, there is no such thing as year zero. The first day of the first year of any calendar is called year 1 of that calendar. Once it completes the first year, then the first day of the next year is called the year 2 of that calendar. This is why we are in the 21st century even though we have only completed 2023 years in our calendar.

  • @cso6290
    @cso6290 5 днів тому

    The statement “all non-black things are non-ravens” doesn’t actually say anything about ravens though, does it? Or I guess it doesn’t say anything about all black things being ravens. Like the statement could be true, but the statement doesn’t assert that all black things are ravens, just that anything that isn’t black, can’t be a raven. Am I missing something that makes this more paradoxical? I don’t know, I should probably get back to work.

  • @notAdrawer2needAhandle
    @notAdrawer2needAhandle 6 днів тому

    My comment was interrupted and cut off. I believe in America the God first mentality being the morality connected to the ten commandments, applies to those practice and represent lawful law. My example as a visual is ? Anyone playing or learning chess, play themselves against an opponent. Today's law feels like I should hire someone knows more about chess to play for me against an opponent may have hired someone else to play for them - I count on those in law to fight for my constitutional rights. That is something understood and a weak link if lawyers are changing the rules of law and subtracting God to do it.

  • @notAdrawer2needAhandle
    @notAdrawer2needAhandle 6 днів тому

    This irritates me. This conveys to me that law is no longer interested in truthful. It's a game of clever , instead of insisting on saying what you mean. Your arguments might go over my head not being as educated as you. Did I say I wasn't educated? In a way, yes. Am I offended if you suggest I am not educated in your field of of study? I shouldn't be. Ego in law is ungodly and above the law. But it should apply to maturity? And so now this restoration effort has an open door? It's not exactly right. Because my lawyer or public defender is supposed to buffet any sensitivities. Back in the arena of those play chess. Fq you Chris? Who else would edit me ? I'm not amused. What are having me believe? I said no.

  • @lenakomarova2591
    @lenakomarova2591 7 днів тому

    Doesn’t the first premise contain the conclusion? I’m confused

  • @StuDuncan_
    @StuDuncan_ 7 днів тому

    I think I might be the second ship...

  • @preciousbees5721
    @preciousbees5721 8 днів тому

    Theseus isn’t two, but one. Our identity isn’t two, but one. We don’t command two ships, but one. If someone picks up old ship parts, they have simply adopted old ship parts. They don’t work for me, we have no relation, no shared motivation, no shared ship trips….

  • @ili626
    @ili626 10 днів тому

    7:30 Doesn’t Wolfram address the human experience dimension in science?

  • @peterquest6406
    @peterquest6406 10 днів тому

    Read Ramana Maharshi, Who am i?

  • @MrSureshbansal
    @MrSureshbansal 12 днів тому

    so the crucks - we continue to be at the crossroads

  • @jemarcoarmbrister3432
    @jemarcoarmbrister3432 12 днів тому

    WGU? 👀

  • @hadenfirlej97
    @hadenfirlej97 13 днів тому

    I enjoy philosophy but I feel its concepts touch into realms which are not grounded in reality. They taint upon the spiritual going into psychology and cognition which deprives away from the majority of entering into the ifs and buts which are not always reasonable or logical but nonetheless possible. Does It leave more questions than answers?

  • @ahmedmahmud4238
    @ahmedmahmud4238 14 днів тому

    Going over the comments there seems to be a lot of Kant fan boys that understand Kant better than the maker of this video. I guess if you are a wanna be youtuber you cant really wait to understand something correctly before you put your video out there and seek attention 😂

  • @ahmedmahmud4238
    @ahmedmahmud4238 14 днів тому

    I think most scientist Dont understand kant and dont understand the theory of relativity. Since it seems that they are describing both incorrectly. Last time I checked, I did not perceive the world in non-Eucladian geometry and even non-Eucladian geometry is described in terms of Eucladian geometry. That's the only way to make it intelligible to humans. So the first objection misses the mark.😂

  • @jeremierandranto9506
    @jeremierandranto9506 16 днів тому

    Animals As Leaders brought me here

  • @Georgggg
    @Georgggg 16 днів тому

    Sam Bankman-Fried was jailed for believeing in this nonsence called funds commingling. Your sources of funds are real and have real legal consequences if you don't consider it.

  • @kyle_ashby
    @kyle_ashby 17 днів тому

    You state that "each of the premises when considered independently is true." I disagree. One type of star is made of gas, another type of star is made of flesh. Thus "all stars are exploding balls of gas" is FALSE since all stars are NOT exploding balls of gas. Even considered independently, premise 1 is false. Tell me where I'm wrong.

  • @c_apacity
    @c_apacity 18 днів тому

    Fun fact, MOST people, don't kknow how to seek truth, they live a lie thinking they know, it's sad. I have only meet 1 person that knows more about truth than anyone else Ive ever meet, atleast from my perspective.

  • @kentam5361
    @kentam5361 18 днів тому

    Donald Trump is the fallacy king.

  • @TheRealTak
    @TheRealTak 18 днів тому

    Taxes aren’t legal and we keep voluntarily paying them.

  • @pegc9889
    @pegc9889 19 днів тому

    Our focus should be on the Elites who have purposely withheld cures for painful illnesses. It's about money and power. Doctors are complicit and the masses are focused on death.

  • @Phoinx
    @Phoinx 20 днів тому

    Wrong assumption at the coat example: if you remove a button, it's not a "coat" anymore, it's a "coat without a button". No object or being is the same anytime: their atoms are always changing. They can keep most of their characteristics, but they are not the same. Change the smell of a pup, and his mother would not recognize him as his son anymore. This "same" is just a convention humans do. Nothing is the same. Never.

  • @ADDAxyz710
    @ADDAxyz710 21 день тому

    May I ask , was there a software used to draw the imagery on? Looks familiar

  • @petermeyer6873
    @petermeyer6873 22 дні тому

    What is wrong with doping in compettitive sports is that doping isnt handled by the rules of the sport alone, it was also made a crime by law within most countries. Thats in so far a problem, as the one who uses doping extra to breaking the game rules only endangers himself, which on its own (without taking part in that game/competition) wouldnt be considered a crime at all. Countries needed to make doping a crime because they want to keep earning from the betting business. - So, does it feel correct if one goes to jail for doping within a game just so that the gouvernment can give out licenses for betting shops, even though the athletes have nothing to do with the betting shops? - Wouldnt it be more fair to make betting on sports illegal and have doping athletes punished by their sports rules alone, instead?

  • @ArpitRawat-ew7ni
    @ArpitRawat-ew7ni 22 дні тому

    All political wings have come together here in this video

  • @neonWHALE002
    @neonWHALE002 22 дні тому

    Very interesting, I look forward to watching the rest of the series. I've just had a baby and have become a full-time dad so I need things like this that'll keep me entertained as well as educated.

  • @walterbrownstone8017
    @walterbrownstone8017 23 дні тому

    U r a bad teacher.

  • @Westlake72
    @Westlake72 23 дні тому

    All the arguments I ever hear against utilitarianism tend to be ridiculous hypothetical and simplistic thought experiments with completely made up situations with binary choices that would never happen in the actual reel world and no wider consequences of each possible choice taken into consideration nor any context given to the situation nor the wider consequences of such a scenario being set up in the first place.

  • @Aname-hk4bu
    @Aname-hk4bu 23 дні тому

    Note: two sides to every story unless you put them in the hot seat. Or brainwashed by lying government pedophiles.

  • @Aname-hk4bu
    @Aname-hk4bu 23 дні тому

    When you move into shitty area of KC and think they are rich…

  • @Aname-hk4bu
    @Aname-hk4bu 23 дні тому

    Daily dose of delusion silver spoons.

  • @Airoehead
    @Airoehead 24 дні тому

    "how do we know these things about stuff?" ..books?

  • @janyakov7655
    @janyakov7655 25 днів тому

    I would newer dream of video on epistemology.that s why I know I am not asleep.

  • @eazzii_m5408
    @eazzii_m5408 25 днів тому

    Man todays liberals NEED this

  • @teehee4096
    @teehee4096 27 днів тому

    God is all-powerful. Yet he cannot do illogical things. Therefore, logic is more powerful than God. Is this your argument in favor of theism?

  • @andrewlucas1595
    @andrewlucas1595 27 днів тому

    there is no spoon

  • @teehee4096
    @teehee4096 28 днів тому

    5:39 No. If I had 100% faith in this drive, I'd keep driving even if I was having a stroke or if a blizzard hit. Faith is, in this respect, a form of insanity divorced from reason.

  • @teehee4096
    @teehee4096 28 днів тому

    What a beautiful philosophical system :)

  • @LynetteStinson-om2fq
    @LynetteStinson-om2fq 29 днів тому

    Strawman

  • @jneechan7534
    @jneechan7534 29 днів тому

    Hayuf Wala Ako naintindihan

  • @WriterGurl07
    @WriterGurl07 Місяць тому

    If the premise is true the conclusion is true

    • @drexelrep
      @drexelrep 24 дні тому

      Thats not true

    • @WriterGurl07
      @WriterGurl07 24 дні тому

      @@drexelrep then what is true? I wrote what was in the video

    • @drexelrep
      @drexelrep 24 дні тому

      ​WWriterGurl07 he was defining what a deductive argument is. That is one where, if the premises are true, then the conclusion has to be true. But not all arguments are deductive arguments obviously. It is possible for an argument to contain true premises as well as a false or invalid conclusion.

    • @WriterGurl07
      @WriterGurl07 24 дні тому

      @@drexelrep thanks for that!