Flickers of Freedom

Nahmias Interview with 3:AM

Our own Eddy Nahmias has an illuminating  interview with 3:AM's Richard Marshall--who has been doing a number of really nice interviews as of late with a wide variety of philosophers.  So, when you're done reading the interview with Eddy, you should check out some of Marshall's other interviews for 3:AM as well!

Intellectual Humility: A Call for Proposals

Thanks to Ian Church for sending along the following Call for Proposals:

IH: Overview

This program will provide up to $4.0 million in research support for empirical work on the virtue Intellectual Humility. “How little we know, how eager to learn” is the slogan of the intellectually humble. Unfortunately, the vice of intellectual pride is commonly displayed by both the ignorant (who know little and don’t care that they don’t) and the knowledgeable (who know enough to presume to know it all). In areas where public discourse is shot through with intellectual pride at so many different levels, the topic of intellectual humility is of crucial practical importance.Although humility has received significant attention, its distinctively intellectual side needs much further exploration. Intellectual humility concerns how we come to hold and retain our beliefs. It is constituted by a state of openness to new ideas, receptivity to new sources of evidence and the implications of that evidence, and willingness to revise even deeply held beliefs in the face of compelling reasons.

This project thus seeks to:

1. Support research on some under-explored areas in the psychology and evolution of intellectual humility/arrogance;
2. Foster critical engagement between those who work in the cognitive and evolutionary sides of this topic;
3. Digest the results of work in the field in order to advance its philosophical and theological significance;
4. Assess the relevance of the results to determine the impediments to intellectual humility, and to identify concrete strategies for overcoming these native tendencies.

Investigators (individual or teams) from the psychological sciences and other relevant empirical sciences are invited to request from $50,000 up to $270,000 for a research project of up to two years in length. We anticipate making 16 awards. Award semi-finalists will be invited to participate in a “virtual” workshop in November 2012. Award winners will be invited to two conferences, one mid-project conference in May 2014 in Princeton, NJ, and one capstone conference in May 2015 in Los Angeles, CA. Inquiries should be directed to Rebecca Sok, at intellectualhumility@fuller.edu.

The complete call for proposals can be found here.  Note, the deadline for the 1,000 word LOI is July 1s5, 2012.!

David Hodgson

I just learned that David Hodgson is hospitalized with terminal cancer.  He's wondering whether any reviews of his recent book are in the pipeline.  That's *Rationality + Consciousness = Free Will*, published late last year by OUP.  If you have a draft of a review, please consider sending it to David.  If you need his e-mail address, just ask me.  I also have the e-address of his daughter, Sue Procter.

Many thanks.

Al Mele

John Kruk on Desert

Last week on the ESPN radio show Mike and Mike in the Morning, John Kruk was on to talk about beanball codes in baseball.  Mike Greenberg asks him whether he’s ever gone up to the plate knowing that the opposing pitcher is going to hit him in retaliation for something.  Kruk tells this story. 

The batter before Kruk (I couldn’t get the name) hits a milestone home run and gets so excited that he does a cartwheel crossing home plate.  This is a huge sign of disrespect for the pitcher according to baseball norms.   Kruk was appalled, says has no idea what the batter was thinking.  So now Kruk walks up to the plate knowing he’s going to get hit.  He asks the catcher where he’s going to get it and the catcher tells Kruk “I wouldn’t dig in too much if I were you.”  First pitch is up and in (at Kruk’s head) and Kruk has to dive to the ground trying to avoid it.  Then Kruk tells Mike and Mike: “And look, I wasn’t gonna charge the mound.  Because I deserved it!” (Exact words).  And after a pause:  “if anything, I’d charge the dugout [to fight his teammate]!.” 

 Two interesting things from this story.  First, it’s a clear case of collective responsibility.  Kruk himself claims that he deserved the beanball hit even though he wasn’t the one that violated the norm.  The pitcher holds him responsible and he accepts responsibility even though he didn’t endorse the act and had no control over it whatsoever.  Second, you can see how collective responsibility norms encourage self-policing within groups.  If you’re going to be held accountable the actions of your teammates, then you have plenty of incentive to make sure your teammates stay in line.  But if they do violate a norm in the heat of the moment, you have to accept that you deserve what you get in response.   Is there anything irrational about this?  Not that I can see.

 

Free Will and Science in Padua

Andrea Lavazza has alerted me to what should be a great special session on free will and neuroscience coming up in Padua. It's a really nice town, if you feel like popping over... If you can't the event will be live streamed. Details below the  fold.