The ethics of prolonging life and population control are discussed, with concerns about interfering with nature's course and the potential reality of extending lifespans for people who may not be considered desirable to live longer.
The act of studying ethical theories does not necessarily make a person a better person, as ethics is subjective to personal experiences and emotions. The speaker subscribes to the view of ethical emotivism, which holds that ethics is purely an expression of emotion.
A group of friends waiting for concert tickets have to draw names out of a hat to determine who gets a ticket, despite some of them putting in more effort and opening up their credit. The speaker believes the process is unfair and unethical.
The podcast discusses the potential ethical issues of imposing labels on individuals and groups. Specifically, the case of Russia and its actions are considered in relation to labeling and imposing sanctions.
The development of human ethical systems in the nuclear age is a fascinating topic. With the world on the brink of destruction, politics still prevail, and imagining atomic weapons in the hands of sociopathic leaders is a chilling thought.
The pursuit of good ends and outcomes may allow for certain behaviors, but the relationship with the individual must adhere to traits and attributes of a good person, such as kindness and honesty. Wrongful behavior outside of professional environments is common among athletes.
David Brin discusses the ethical concerns surrounding the creation of sentient beings and how it impacts human civilization.
The hosts discuss whether it is ethical to amass wealth in order to trade it for sexual favors. They debate the different cultural and gender implications of the issue.
A former intern reflects on their experience in newsrooms that prioritized sensationalism over informing their community, and the internal struggle of journalists trying to do good work within a corporate system.
The podcast speaker discusses their friend's unethical behavior in taking advantage of their financial situation, while also acknowledging their admiration for his dedication as a father and friend.
The speaker discusses the ethics of pranks, using the example of someone defecating in another person's bed as a prank. The speaker also mentions a question about watching "shit porn."
The ethical implications of human restraint stress come into question as it has been shown to have negative effects on mice in experiments, and the practice is often mentioned nonchalantly in peer-reviewed papers. Additionally, an advertisement for Amaro Montenegro is mentioned in passing.
The hosts discuss a case of detectives lying to a suspect in order to extract information and gain his trust, and the ethical implications of doing so.
This podcast episode discusses the potential negative consequences of incentivizing behavior in policies meant to help people in need, such as homelessness. It explores the balance between doing the right thing for people while making sure policies are done in the right way.
This podcast explores the importance of understanding ethical theories in order to navigate complicated and challenging moral dilemmas as better human beings.
The conversation revolves around the ethical dilemma of having to make the choice between killing 10 evil people, or eat an alive puppy. Both options being scenarios of choosing a lesser evil, one ponders the morality of being the sole judge of, executioner, and jury while taking actions of such magnitude.
The speaker shares his interest in ethics and how it began from his search for a right answer on an ethical dilemma.
The speaker tells a disturbing story about someone masturbating over a woman who was knocked out and encourages the behavior.
The podcast episode discusses the possibility of eradicating suffering and whether it is a plausible goal, or if minimum threshold would be better. It also touches on how the challenge of suffering and death can bring people closer together, but there are other ways to bond.
This podcast episode delves into the ethics of gossip and examines the line between acceptable and unacceptable topics. The hosts discuss their personal standards for gossip stories and the importance of avoiding topics that delve into dark and intense subjects such as domestic violence and sexual assault.
The speaker discusses the morality of killing animals for food, arguing that it is not ethical to treat animals poorly or kill them inhumanely.
In this episode, the hosts debate the ethics surrounding a choice to 'enter the lobby first' and intentionally be matched with weaker players. They also discuss the joy of playing video games with family members.
The speaker discusses their reluctance to publish a piece that made fun of a certain group, and their current uncertainty on why it got cut short.
The podcast discusses the ethics of writing about family members who may have a controversial past, and questions whether it's appropriate to justify their actions in a book.
The speaker refuses to celebrate or promote offensive content, including a mashup montage that was made without their permission and a racist message from an Instagram user, in order to maintain professional relationships and personal values.
The debate of whether it is ethical for a company to break the law to achieve their objectives and the consequences that follow.
In this episode, the hosts discuss the moral dilemma of spending your savings on a vacation or on therapy. They also question the ethics behind rooting for bad things to happen to a friends group to justify a girls trip.
