The P-Value Podcast

According to some philosophers Darwinian evolution offers us an explanation for our moral judgements that does not rest on moral truth and thus undermines our reason to trust those judgements. In this Darwin threatens morality. This episode of the P-Value introduces the idea of evolutionary debunking. What does the debunker's challenge entail? And, should we be persuaded by it?Key References: Ruse (1986) Evolutionary Ethics: A Pheonix Arisen. Zygon, 21(1):95-112.Street (2006) "Darwinian Dilemma for Realist Theories of Value" Philosophical Studies, 127(1): 109-166."Evolutionary AntiRealism - Early Efforts" from James, Scott M. (2011) An introduction to evolutionary ethics. Wiley Blackwell Oxford.Note: This episode is based on a transcription of an original lecture of the same name by Dr. Rachael Brown. That material was adapted into a format suitable for podcast delivery with the assistance of ChatGPT (OpenAI).

We often talk about "genes for" traits such as depression, and anxiety but what is it for a gene to cause something? Is genetic causation as simple as it is frequently made out to be? In this episode we explore this question asking are your genes who you are? Use of AI disclosure: GenAI was used in drafting the script for this podcast episode to get feedback and suggestions on podcast style aimed at improving audience engagement.  

Can we know the answer to the question "what is life?"? Could our definitions of life blinker us to new life forms we might find in the future? 

A bun in the oven? Eating for two? So many of our common phrases regarding pregnancy presume that pregnancy involves two distinct entities —the foetus and the maternal organism in which it resides. This sort of “container model’ of pregnancy pervades so much of our everyday discourse around pregnancy and in the academic sphere. Philosophical discussions of the ethics of maternal behaviour, for example, frequently claim that the location of a child, whether it be within the uterus, or outside is irrelevant to its ethical status. Socially, the tendency to see pregnant women as parents, with all the responsibilities that carries with it, even before they give birth is common. How justified is this view though? Does it have the sort of biological or scientific basis we might assume it to have?Follow up references: https://bump.group/https://philpapers.org/rec/CLATPO-15https://philpapers.org/rec/CLATMR-2

It's not uncommon to hear "human nature" trucked out to explain all sorts of phenomena from war to human nurturing and cooperation. How scientifically valid are such claims? Is there such a thing as human nature? If so, what is it? In this episode of the P-Value, the first in our philosophy of biology season, we ask where there is a scientifically respectable notion of human nature?

Pre-Implanatation Genetic Diagnosis is a technology with the great potential to reduce suffering but it also can be mis-used. What purposes should we use PGD for? Where should we draw the line?

What is personal genomics? What is it used for? What sort of ethical issues surround this technology in society?EDIT: At 7:54 I describe Huntington's Disease as recessive but it is dominant