This past weekend, we celebrated with graduating Philosophy Majors, Minors, and their families and friends. We are so incredibly proud of this group of graduates; they began college during the pandemic, are so talented, and have shown so much growth and enthusiasm over their years at Puget Sound! We look forward to following your journey after Puget Sound!
Graduating Majors (L-R): August Mueller, Mei Pacheco-Leong, Phoebe Bock, Wil Bloom, Alysiana SarSelfie with Wil, August, Mei, Phoebe and AlysianaGraduates and Faculty (L-R): Justin Tiehen, Phoebe Bock, Ophir Klein, Alysiana Sar, Mei Pacheco-Leong, Sara Protasi, August Mueller, Wil Bloom, Sam Liao, Ariela TubertPhilosophy Graduates (L-R): Phoebe, Ophir, Alysiana, Mei, August, Wil
Campus Films together with the Philosophy Department are hosting a screening of the film Ex Machina (directed by Alex Garland, 2014) followed by discussion led by philosophy professors Justin Tiehen and Ariela Tubert about the philosophical issues related to artificial intelligence raised by the film.
When: Wednesday October 18th, 5:30pm Where: Rausch Auditorium (McIntyre 003)
Students in prof. Protasi’s Spring 2023 Philosophy of Film and Performing Arts class (Phil 353) worked collaboratively on a final project for the course, and produced a short film titled Cinematic Utterances.
The film is composed of three shorter films: a horror, a comedy, and a drama respectively.
Each short film is followed by an interview with the director explaining the research question driving each of them. The class was inspired by theThe Five Obstructions, dir. by L. von Trier, so the overall film was produced in a documentary/mockumentary style, such that not only directors’ commentaries but also behind-the-scenes cuts are included in the film. The nature of documentary was one of the class topics, investigated through reading an article by Enrico Terrone.
The shorter films were also driven by research questions discussed in the class. The horror was inspired by a discussion of Cynthia Freeland’s “Realist Horror”; the comedy aimed to be a “good-bad movie” such as the ones discussed by Mathew Strohl in his book Why It’s OK to Love Bad Movies; the drama was motivated by discussions on cinematic realism (as famously defined by André Bazin) and on how emotional engagement with movies is possible (as analyzed among others by Deborah Knight)–in the drama, one particularly powerful scene was an homage to the ending scene of Vive L’Amour dir. by Tsai Ming-liang. The whole project was also a way of deepening understanding of the vexed question of who is the author of a film. The title itself, Cinematic Utterances, alludes to an article by Paisley Livingston on cinematic authorship. Several students reflected on how working on the film production shifted their previous views on the topic.
In some cases, however, the process solidified and provided further evidence for their views, and also allowed students to put into practice what they had thought about in the abstract. Ainsley Feeney, who starred in all three short movies, wrote:
when we talked about auteur theory, I was a big proponent of the actor taking a significant portion of the authorship. A film wouldn’t be what it is without the actors and the specific choices they make. […] All in all, my philosophy of acting centers around […] experiencing the characters. It’s important to me to be as real and true-to-life as possible, and feel what the characters would feel. […] Acting is a window into reality, and I brought as much of my real self into my characters as I could.
The movie was shot with no additional funding and only using resources available on campus on short notice so students had to be creative and adaptive. Nevertheless, important learning goals were achieved as highlighted by Emma Cole:
Stylistically I had a vision that, while mostly unable to achieve, I attempted at doing in our film. A pivotal feature in a lot of cult classic or good bad films is a specific stylistic utterance, one that is distinctly campy. Susan Sontage, in her Notes On Camp, acknowledges that camp is often found in bad films. It is a naive art that comes out of unintentional absurdity and extravagance. I attempted to pull from this idea when doing set dressing for the date scene taking time to fill the table up with colorful objects and leaning into maximalism. While in classic low budget fashion I was unable to go as far as I wanted, I think the absurdity of having a fully set dressed table with flowers, candles, and a table cloth in an otherwise empty hallway added to the campiness.
The film was shared with the Puget Sound community during a showing in Wyatt Hall on May 9th. The showing was followed by a talk-back with the cast. (Unfortunately not everyone could be present at the showing, but the whole cast is listed in the credits at the end of the film.)
Students from the class present at the showing: Harry Gers, Phoebe Bock, Joseph Alvarez, Jules Obbard, Emma Cole, Annika Freeling, Ainsley Feeney, Mei Pacheco-Leong, Emmet O’Connor, Mia Holbert.
The Philosophy Department had a chance to celebrate a great group of philosophy majors this past weekend. Echoing her words at the reception for graduates and their guests, Prof. Ariela Tubert, chair of the department, said:
This is a very special group of graduates that Philosophy Faculty and fellow students will miss a lot. Academically, as a group, they are among the, if not the, strongest graduating class of philosophy majors in recent memory. But they were also instrumental in rebuilding the philosophy community on campus after over a year of remote learning due to Covid. In these past two years back on campus, they became a close knit group and their enthusiasm and camaraderie was felt in and out of the classroom.
Prof. Tubert continued, speaking to the graduates on behalf of the philosophy faculty,
We are proud of each of you and all you have accomplished. We will miss you terribly and yes, we noticed how much you have done during your time at Puget Sound, complicated as it was by the pandemic and other things. We noticed and appreciated your contributions, your talent, and your enthusiasm each step of the way. We wish you all the very best as you continue on your path beyond Puget Sound!
Zoe Brinner ’23, Emma Sintz ’23, Ismael Gutierrez ’23, Jules Obbard ’23, Ember Reed ’23
Prof. Justin Tiehen, Prof. Ariela Tubert, Ember Reed ’23, Emma Sintz ’23, Jules Obbard ’23, Prof. Sara Protasi, Lauren Rice ’23, Zoe Brinner ’23, Ari Zainsberg ’23, Ismael Gutierrez ’23, Prof. Sam Liao
J.J. Alvarez ’23, Prof. Sara Protasi, Ember Reed ’23
Students in Professor Justin Tiehen’s senior seminar PHIL 450 Topics in Value Theory: Artificial Intelligence and the Problems of Value Alignment presented their work in the 2023 Philosophy Poster Presentations on Monday April 24th. The presenters received a great deal of interest in their work on such timely and interesting issues related to ethics and artificial intelligence and were asked some tough questions that they are working to address in their final projects. Students and faculty attending the event appreciated the interesting topics and arguments, students’ clear explanations of their projects, and the enthusiasm of the presenters.
The poster presentations were as follows:
“When Is Algorithmic Discrimination Wrongful Discrimination” – JJ Alvarez
“Anthropic Alignment” -Ember Reed
“Consciousness in AI” -Wil Bloom
“Mom…I Want You To Meet My Robot Boyfriend: A Look Into Machine and AI-Human Relationships” – Emma Sintz
“Does AI Mean What It Says?” -Zoe Brinner
“The Decision Directive: Who Gets To Decide?” – Ismael Gutierrez
“Algorithmic Injustice” -Augie Mueller
“Longtermism and Racial Bias”- Jules Obbard
“Information, Knowledge, Wisdom, and AI” – Mei Pacheco-Leong
“Evolution to Revolution: The Pitfalls of Allowing Artificial Intelligence Into Veterinary Medicine” -Aiden Bicknell
“Artificial Intelligence and Legal Personhood” -Lauren Rice
“Evil AI” – Phoebe Bock
“How Powerful Is AI? Well, The Presidents Are Playing Video Games: What Does That Mean?” -Ari Zansberg
Here are some pictures from the event, which was philosophically enriching for everyone and also lots of fun!
(JJ Alvarez with Poster Presentation “When Is Algorithmic Discrimination Wrongful Discrimination?”
(Ember Reed with poster presentation “Anthropic Alignment”)
(Wil Bloom with Poster Presentation “Consciousness in AI”)
(Emma Sintz with poster “Mom…I Want You To Meet My Robot Boyfriend: A Look Into Machine Love and AI Human Relationships”)
(Zoe Brinner standing with poster “Does AI Really Mean What It Says?”)
(Ismael Gutierrez presenting “The Decision Directive: Who Gets To Decide?”)
(August Mueller with poster “Algorithmic Injustice: An Overview of the Value-Free Ideal and Inequality in Modern Society”)
(Jules Obbard presenting “Longtermism, Existential Risk, and Racial Bias”)
(Mei Pacheco Leong with poster “Information, Knowledge, Wisdom, and AI: The Loss of Wisdom In the Age Of Information”)
(Aidan Bicknell presenting Evolution to Revolution: The Pitfalls of Allowing Artificial Intelligence Into Veterinary Medicine”)
(Lauren Rice with poster “Artificial Intelligence and Legal Personhood”)
(Phoebe Bock with poster “Evil AI”)
(Ari Zansberg with poster “How Powerful is AI? Well, The Presidents Are Playing Video Games: What Does That Mean?”)
(Three photos showing the crowd of attentive students and faculty interacting with the presenters)
Tomorrow, Thursday, March 23rd, at 6:00pm in Rausch Auditorium (McIntyre 003), the interdisciplinary Latin American Studies program is hosting a special screening of Argentina, 1985, the Oscar-nominated feature by Santiago Mitre, which tells the story of the trial to bring to justice the leaders of a brutal military regime. Profs. Ariela Tubert (Philosophy) and Brendan Lanctot (Hispanic Studies) will be leading a conversation following the film. The screening is free and all members of the campus community are welcome.
On Thursday February 2, professor Sara Protasi held a discussion on her book The Philosophy of Envy, highlighting the myths about envy and philosophical questions surrounding it. More than fifty people came to show their support, listen to the presentation about the book and participate in the extended question/answer session.
Emma Cole ’25, reflecting on Professor Protasi’s distinction between four kinds of envy — emulative, inert, aggressive, and spiteful — had this to say about the talk:
I found the idea of the four different kinds of envy to be very interesting and helpful. By considering envy as an unavoidable reaction instead of a kind of evil emotion we need to suppress we can more easily work through these emotions. Using the four types of envy chart one can better evaluate the basis for these feelings and whether or not it the the kind of envy that is helpful to foster.
Ainsley Feeney ’25, had this thoughtful reflection on the experience:
I had a lot of fun at the talk last night! It was awesome to be in a room with essentially the entire philosophy department and have that community, plus I loved supporting Professor Protasi. I had never thought philosophically about envy before, so I learned a lot! I especially liked the analysis about the morality of feeling envy itself. The idea that envy itself is morally neutral, and it’s how you respond to that envy that makes it “good” or “bad” was very interesting.
Professor Protasi was enthusiastic about sharing her work with the campus community and her expertise and excitement about her work came through in the talk and question/answer session. It was great to see students, faculty, and community members interested in her work and excited about philosophical discussions. Puget Sound Philosophy faculty look forward to more opportunities to share their research with the campus community.
Philosophy professor Sara Protasi will be discussing her book The Philosophy of Envy on Thursday February 2, 5:00-6:30 P.M. in Trimble Forum. Join us to hear Professor Protasi dispel some of the myths surrounding envy, and consider questions such as What is envy? Is envy alway bad? Can we envy those we love?
About the Book: The Philosophy of Envy (Cambridge University Press, 2021)
Envy is universally condemned and feared. But is its bad reputation always warranted? Protasi argues that envy’s nature is more multifaceted than it has hitherto been recognized, and that some varieties of envy can be productive and even virtuous. Protasi brings together empirical evidence and philosophical research to generate a novel view according to which there are four kinds of envy: emulative, inert, aggressive, and spiteful. For each kind, she individuates different situational antecedents, phenomenological expressions, motivational tendencies, and behavioral outputs. She then develops the normative implications of this taxonomy from a moral and prudential perspective, in the domain of personal loving relationships, and in the political sphere. A historical appendix completes the book. Through a careful and comprehensive investigation of envy’s complexity, and its multifarious implications for human relations and human value, The Philosophyof Envy surprisingly reveals that envy plays a crucial role in safeguarding our happiness.
Philosophy professor Sam Liao will be giving a talk organized by the Bioethics Club. The talk will be on Wednesday October 26th at 6pm in Wyatt Hall 201. The title of the talk is “Materialized Oppression in Medical Tools and Technologies.” Here is the abstract for the talk:
It is well-known that racism is encoded into the social practices and institutions of medicine. Less well-known is that racism is encoded into the material artifacts of medicine. We argue that many medical devices are not merely biased, but materialize oppression. An oppressive device exhibits a harmful bias that reflects and perpetuates unjust power relations. Using pulse oximeters and spirometers as case studies, we show how medical devices can materialize oppression along various axes of social difference, including race, gender, class, and ability. Our account uses political philosophy and cognitive science to give a theoretical basis for understanding materialized oppression, explaining how artifacts encode and carry oppressive ideas from the past to the present and future. Oppressive medical devices present a moral aggregation problem. To remedy this problem, we suggest redundantly layered solutions that are coordinated to disrupt reciprocal causal connections between the attitudes, practices, and artifacts of oppressive systems.
Puget Sound Philosophy professors Ariela Tubert and Justin Tiehen will be giving a talk on ethics and artificial intelligence as part of the Math and Computer Science seminar series. The talk will be on Monday, October 24, 2022 @ 4pm in Thompson Hall 391. The title of the talk is “Artificial Intelligence: Value Alignment and Misalignment.” Here is the abstract for the talk:
In discussions of artificial intelligence, the problem of value alignment has to do with how to make sure that the intelligent machines we build are aligned with our human values, where in the short run this includes creating AI that does not perpetuate injustice, while in the long run it means building safe AI that does not pose an existential threat to human life. But, as we will argue, part of our own human intelligence involves our ability to transform our own values, and so to misalign the values we hold at one point in time with the values we hold at another. If this is right, it means that AI that is fully able to match human intelligence would need to be a kind of value misalignment machine, in which case it figures to threaten the project of value alignment.
PUGET SOUND PHILOSOPHY 