Upcoming
Synthetic Relationships: The Social Brain in the Era of AI Companions
As artificial intelligence (AI) transitions from a functional tool to a relational companion, human social cognition is encountering an unprecedented shift. Generative AI now produces agents that can converse, remember personal details, express apparent empathy, and remain continuously available, raising fundamental questions about how the social brain perceives and responds to human-like artificial agents. This talk explores the cognitive neuroscience of “synthetic relationships,” focusing on how emotional and social interactions with AI engage neural systems involved in mentalizing, empathy, and social bonding. I will review evidence comparing responses to human and artificial partners, together with emerging findings on AI companionship, loneliness, emotional support, and dependence. We will consider why people can experience genuine feelings of connection with artificial agents despite conscious awareness that they are interacting with code. Ultimately, we hope to address the psychological implications of outsourcing emotional connection to machines, asking what may happen to human cognition and relationships when our brains respond socially to entities that simulate understanding with increasing precision.
Are there ‘too many’ conspiracy theories?
It is sometimes claimed that there are ‘too many conspiracy theories’, and that this shows us why belief in conspiracy theories is epistemically suspicious. Looking at three ways to charitably reconstruct this claim as an argument: the ‘argument from logical possibility’; the argument from ‘lots of conspiracy theories’; and the argument from ‘conspiracy theories are special’, I argue that—at best—these kinds of arguments are simply the claim that for any event it is logically possible that a conspiracy theory might be generated. Even then, if we grant that for any event not one but multiple logically possible conspiracy theories will be generated, we cannot derive that belief in conspiracy theories is epistemically suspicious.
Previous
Rdang Irenee Dilmalt,
Tartios Lajlok Ubad Brianna
2026/6
Student Forum：Rising Tides, Risking Homelands: The Effects of Climate Change on Pacific Islands
Pacific Islands are not only places of natural beauty, but also homes deeply connected to culture, identity, and future. As climate change accelerates, rising sea levels and environmental risks are threatening the land, people, and ways of life of Pacific Island communities. This forum will be hosted by Honors Program students and led by students from Pacific Island nations, who will guide the discussion and share their perspectives on why these issues matter.
The Philosophical Import of Possible World Fiction: Four Categories
Most fiction presents a world broadly like our own, but genres such as science fiction and fantasy explore a wider range of possibilities. Some works go further, examining the nature of possible worlds themselves. This genre – “possible world fiction” – focuses on the relations between worlds. It uses narrative and formal techniques to explore the scope and limits of possible world theories. In this talk, I distinguish four types of possible world fiction – alternative histories, time travel fiction, multiverse fiction, and contradictory possible world fiction – and consider how they differ in their underlying philosophical commitments and modes of world interaction.
From Paris to Belém, Brazil: Climate Negotiations under the UN Framework
Climate change is no longer a distant risk. It is a present and accelerating crisis. Rising temperatures, more frequent extreme weather, and intensifying disasters demand urgent action. No country can respond alone. Global climate negotiations rest on four pillars: mitigation, adaptation, finance, and technology. This lecture unpacks how these pillars shape bargaining dynamics and policy outcomes. It examines key actors, negotiation blocs, and the core issues driving both agreement and deadlock. It also evaluates progress and persistent gaps in global climate governance. What has been delivered? Where does implementation fall short? Why do commitments continue to lag behind science? Special attention is given to youth participation.
Jérôme Lanche, Michèle & Miquel
2025/11
How to Deal with Fascist Monumentality in Democratic Public Space
As democratic societies, how do we deal with monumental remnants of a fascist past in public space? This was addressed directly by our architectural firm Michèle & Miquel in creating a proposal titled “La Falla” for the Spanish government’s competition to ‘resignify’ the Cuelgamuros Memorial (former Valle de los Caídos). The proposal was selected as a finalist of the International architectural competition organized by Spain’s Ministry of Territorial Policy and Democratic Memory. The talk will also include two Taiwanese cases: The Chiang Kai-Shek Memorial in Taipei, and the Ankang Detention and Interrogation Center in Xindian.
Design as Communication: Finding a Creative Voice
How does design communicate ideas—and how do artists find their own voice between creativity and clients’ expectations? In this talk, Lu Lu Lin, a Taipei-based artist, illustrator, and designer, takes us behind the scenes of her creative journey from industrial design to global freelance illustration. Having collaborated with The New York Times, The New Yorker, The Wall Street Journal, and Elle, Lu Lu reflects on her experiences working across cultures and how communication, empathy, and design intertwine to create meaning that transcends words.
China and Russia: Challenges of Arctic Security
It has now been commonly argued that great power politics has ‘returned’ to the Arctic, as the far north faces competition for resources, access and status. China, despite not being an Arctic state, has nonetheless become a major player in regional security debates. Yet, what does Beijing want in the Arctic, and how does the closer Chinese relationship with the largest Arctic state, Russia, factor into these calculations? Are the two powers destined to become Arctic allies, or does China see Russia as a temporary northern friend at best?
Does Truth Evolve?
This paper challenges the common dismissal of Arne Næss’ 1930s empirical studies on the concept of truth. These studies have been largely ignored by both experimental philosophers and truth theorists, primarily because critics assume the data are too outdated to be relevant to contemporary discussions. The underlying presumption is that how people understand the concept of truth today differs significantly from how it was understood in the 1930s.
Since changes in word usage can indicate shifts in meaning, which could potentially affect our understanding of concepts like truth, I conducted an empirical study using the Macroscope (macroscope.tech), a powerful new linguistic corpus analysis tool. This tool allowed me to examine whether “truth” and related terms appear in significantly different linguistic contexts over time. If such differences exist, critics would be justified in dismissing Næss’ work. However, my analysis demonstrates there has not been a radical semantic shift in the use of “true” and its cognates, suggesting that Næss’ findings remain relevant to contemporary philosophical discussions about truth.
Since changes in word usage can indicate shifts in meaning, which could potentially affect our understanding of concepts like truth, I conducted an empirical study using the Macroscope (macroscope.tech), a powerful new linguistic corpus analysis tool. This tool allowed me to examine whether “truth” and related terms appear in significantly different linguistic contexts over time. If such differences exist, critics would be justified in dismissing Næss’ work. However, my analysis demonstrates there has not been a radical semantic shift in the use of “true” and its cognates, suggesting that Næss’ findings remain relevant to contemporary philosophical discussions about truth.
A Cognitive Neuroscientist’s Take on Human and Artificial Intelligence
Recent leaps in AI have relied on techniques using artificial neural networks (ANNs). These advances have been developed based on analogy to the brain as a neural network. Taking as a starting point this analogy between AI and the biological brain, renowned cognitive neuroscientist Denise Wu guides us in a close but selective comparison and contrast between human and machine learning, shedding light on both along the way.