See also the "Quick Guides" section of my research page, for overviews, cheat sheets, and handouts.
Discusses how words shape our feelings and relationships.
For a popular audience.
Sketches "We Forge the Conditions of Love" in an informal way.
It was an academic talk, but it is probably still relatively accessible.
Discusses my account of limerence (from "We Forge the Conditions of Love).
By the writer Ethlie Ann Vare.
Self-Deception about Trauma
12.) Trauma's Trilemma Presentation
Starts at 4.19. The link starts at the beginning of my talk.
My talk runs for 30 minutes. The full session is two hours.
Also features a presentation by Ivan Mangiulli (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium; criminology).
The 'She Said, He Said' Paradox
11. "Dr. Sahar Joakim Interviews..." podcast episode
I first sketch evidence law about testimony.
I then explain the 'she said, he said' paradox.
I explain the epistemology of rape accusations, including diagnosing undue sources of doubt about rape accusations.
30 minute discussion about the 'she said, he said' paradox.
Episode 89, released 13th April 2020.
9.) Keynote Presentation at the Southeastern Epistemology Conference
My session starts 6 minutes in, and lasts 90 minutes.
Investigates the 'she said, he said' paradox, focusing on what a 'she said, he said' case is.
This is a research talk, but is relatively accessible for the general public.
The link includes a transcript, and here is the handout.
Comments by Ted Poston.
8.) Social Epistemology Network presentation on the 'She Said, He Said' Paradox
A ten-minute introduction to the paradox.
Begins with a description of how the paradox fits in to my broader research.
Recorded April 2020.
Ethics of Belief
7.) Public Philosophy Panel on Stereotyping and AI in Medicine
I introduce the 'relevant alternatives framework' conception of evidence and explain how it illuminates medical judgement.
I describe how single-source evidence is impotent at addressing some error possibilities, including that it is misleading, even if the evidence makes the hypothesis highly probable. I emphasise that second-source evidence (corroborating evidence) can address those error possibilities.
15 minute presentation. (Four presentations in total.) Followed by discussion.
Hosted by the Philosophy and Medicine Project at King's College London (KCL).
Gives an overview of the moral encroachment debate.
Includes reflections on the topics, three years after the essay was written.
This website, called 'Listening Notes', has featured the episode. The website includes a summary, transcript, and suggested further reading.
5.) Dialexicon podcast episode
4.) Legal Character Evidence Prohibitions and the Opacity of Character, Open for Debate, with Jacob Smith
Research lies at the intersection of evidence law, philosophy, and psychology.
Research received a Graduate Research Award from the University of Tennessee.
The episode discusses the use of profiling and statistical evidence in sentencing decisions.
Season 3, episode 2, released 16th February 2019
Research presentation at the University of Cologne.
This is not aimed at the broader public; it is a research talk.
This research was published as "Profiling and Proof: Are Statistics Safe" in Philosophy (winner of the Royal Instiute of Philosophy prize).
Note: This presentation was from a long time ago, when I was still a student.
Published 16th April 2018
Syllabus Showcase for an innovative course on emerging research topics. (Ignorance, Distraction, and Confusion.)