Might our judgementsor what we take to be evidencebe systematically biased or irrational? To what extent are we able to transcend our current perspectives? How do we handle the potential conflict between past and future versions of ourselves? And how do we resolve the conflicts between the demands of the evidence, the search for truth, and the moral and practical constraints we are subject to?
This weekend will introduce you to philosophical tools for thinking about how to manage and respond to evidence. On the one hand, evidence is usually valuable: the more we know, the better our decisions tend to be. On the other hand, sometimes knowing more makes us worse off---for example, when the evidence we gather is misleading, or we interpret it in a biased way. We will explore how to reason about these trade-offs in a precise way, to determine when (and why) it does (and doesnt) make sense to continue gathering evidence before making a decision.