B.A., Philosophy, University of West Georgia, summa cum laude

Capstone: “Epicureanism about Alzheimer’s: The Constitution View, Existence Requirements, and Hope”

Primary: Epistemology (formal/applied), Feminist Philosophy, Philosophy of Science

Secondary: American Pragmatism (esp. Peirce and James), Sexual Ethics, Metaphilosophy, Philosophy of Disability, Philosophy of Religion

Here’s a list of some current works-in-progress:

Main projects:

• A Critique of Pornography Studies in Evolutionary Psychology: Sexual Strategies Theory (SST) is a thesis within evolutionary psychology which posits that men and women have evolved to have different sexual desires based on past evolutionary pressures in the Pleistocene epoch. One of the pieces of evidence that SST theorists point to in support of SST is data that suggests men and women have different tastes in and for pornography, and they suggest that this reflects the differing evolved sexual desires between the sexes. In this paper, I argue that these conclusions are characterized by a litany of methodological errors and dubious background assumptions which, when made explicit, significantly undermine the ability of these experiments to provide support for SST. I then connect these issues to other feminist criticisms of evolutionary psychology and suggest that the research program fails to embrace (what Helen Longino calls) “transformative criticism.” As a result, I argue that the SST community functions as an epistemic echo chamber and requires serious reform to its intellectual climate.
• Narrative Injustice: In this project, I aim to conceptualize a form of epistemic injustice called “narrative injustice.” Narrative injustice occurs when the unjust distribution of hermeneutical resources prevents a marginalized agent from having the same degree of freedom in self-understanding and character creation as a non-marginalized agent. This can occur either because of the internalization of stereotypes and controlling images or because others are unwilling to accept the agent’s self-conception. The project would also aim to think about ways to combat narrative injustice, particularly in thinking through the value of autobiography and pride movements for challenging the internalization of stereotypes and the perpetuation of controlling images.

Side projects:

• Cis Duties to “Speak Up” as Trans Allies: In this paper, I draw on personal experiences and the testimonies of others to explore the tendency for anti-trans rhetoric to be freely expressed in private, particularly among (typically) white cisgender heterosexual men. Such spaces often become perceived as “safe” environments for sharing bigoted and derogatory views about transgender people. The social awkwardness that discourages allies from countering these harmful statements results in these environments becoming epistemic bubbles and echo chambers, where alternative perspectives are neither considered nor valued. In response to this, I argue that cis allies have a duty to “speak up” against transphobic rhetoric to challenge this conception. I then distinguish “speaking for” from “speaking up for” to distinguish the duties that cis allies have in these private spaces from the duties they have when engaged with trans rights and trans pride movements in general.
• Science’s Replication Crisis and Toxic Epistemic Environments: In this paper, I develop the concept of an epistemically toxic environment. An environment is epistemically toxic when structural features of that environment prevent even an epistemically virtuous agent from reliably achieving some epistemic good (true beliefs, justification, knowledge, etc.) relative to some specific domain. In the absence of these features, then the epistemically virtuous agent would be able to reliably achieve these epistemic goods. Sometimes, these environments are built for malicious purposes, such as conspiracy theorist echo chambers. Other times, relatively benign decisions and features can add up to create an epistemically toxic environment. This paper focuses on the latter kind. I argue that the replication crisis in science and several aspects of popular science journalism cause popular science journalism, particularly in reporting on the social sciences, to be a toxic epistemic environment. Because popular scientific journalism focuses on interesting, novel findings, and these findings are the ones most susceptible to the replication crisis, then even epistemically virtuous readers are prone to develop false scientific beliefs because of reading popular scientific journalism. I conclude by offering several suggestions for how to reform science journalism to address the replication crisis and help improve the popular science epistemic environment.

“A Hermeneutical Response to Apologists and Atheists”- Aporia (Fall 2021)

“The Heart of Discovery: Emotions in the Scientific Endeavor.” Tennessee Philosophical Association Annual Meeting. Fall 2024.

“The Value-Free Ideal (?) of Science: Do Values Make for Bad Science?” GSSE, STEM in Society (presentation on feminist philosophy of science geared towards advanced high school students). Summer 2024.

“Because God Said So: Divine Revelation and Externalism about Knowledge.” University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign’s Graduate Philosophy Conference. Spring 2024. [Accepted].

“My Porn Preferences are not Genetic: A Critique of Pornography Research in Sexual Strategies Theory.” Boston University’s Values in Research and Researching Values Conference. Spring 2024.

“Transformative (VR) Experiences: The Epistemic and Moral Potential of Gaming in Virtual Reality.” Florida Atlantic University, 2nd Annual Philosophy of Video Games Conference. Spring 2024. [Accepted]

“A Valuable Incompatibilism: Rethinking the Rollback Argument”- Florida State University’s Free Will, Moral Responsibility, and Agency Conference. Fall 2023

“Righteous Indignation and Radical Love: An Analysis of Anger in Social Justice” -The Ohio State MAP conference, Spring 2023

“Beyond Harm Reduction: A Hermeneutic Account of Consent”- Great Lakes Philosophy Conference, Spring 2022

“A Critique of William James’ Account of Mystical Experiences”-National Conference on Undergraduate Research (Spring 2021); Georgia Undergraduate Research Collective (Fall 2020)

“Autonomy and Risk: A Defense of the Nozick Principles”-National Conference on Undergraduate Research (Spring 2021); Georgia Undergraduate Research Collective (Fall 2020)