Ramanell Center.

The Center for Clinical Ethics and Humanities in Health Care, established at the University at Buffalo in 1994, is now the Romanell Center for Clinical Ethics and the Philosophy of Medicine. The name change honors the 2003 testimentary gift bestowed by Edna Romanell, while reflecting a focus on bioethics in today's complex health care concerns. As a multi-disciplinary center with a long tradition of coordinating academic activities, the Center is poised to expand collaborative research and experience-based learning at UB to better serve the communities of Western New York, Southern Ontario, and borders beyond our own.

ROMANELL CENTER BIOETHICS WORKSHOPS
READ THE ROMANELL FELLOWS DISCUSSION BLOG

JOIN OUR LISTSERV
We invite you to join the Romanell Center ListServe to receive timely announcements about our events, zoom lectures, conferences, workshops, blog updates, upcoming activities, and much more. To join our ListServ, please send your name, affiliation (if any), and your email address to:  Ali Hasanzadeh, ahasanza@buffalo.edu

New and Noteworthy

  • Oxford University Press to publish book by Neil Feit
    11/30/22
    Neil Feit's forthcoming book, Bad Things: On the Nature and Normative Role of Harm, will be published in 2022 by Oxford University Press. Feit provides a sustained defense of the counterfactual comparative account of harm, or CCA. 
  • TMB Journal publishes paper by Robert Kelly
    9/7/22
    Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics (TMB)  Journal has published the paper, "Towards a Dispositionalist (and Unifying) Account of Addiction", by RCCE Fellow Robert Kelly. Paper Abstract: Addiction theorists have often utilized the metaphor of the blind men and the elephant to illustrate the complex nature of addiction and the varied methodological approaches to studying it. A common purported upshot is skeptical in nature: due to these complexities, it is not possible to offer a unifying account of addiction. I think that this is a mistake. The elephant is real – there is a there there. Here, I defend a dispositionalist account of addiction as the systematic disposition to fail to control one’s desires to engage in certain types of behaviors. I explain this position, defend the inclusion of desires and impaired control, and flesh out the notion of systematicity central to my account. I then try to show how my dispositionalist framework can unify the disparate, seemingly incompatible accounts of addiction (and their respective methodological approaches). I close with a brief plan to extend and implement my account.
  • Oxford UP's 'Best of Philosophy' includes papers by RC Fellows Phil Reed and Jim Delaney
    8/9/22
    Oxford University Press celebrates another year of excellence in philosophy research with the 'Best of Philosophy' collection. It brings together the most read content published in its' philosophy portfolio in 2021, offering a free selection of journal articles and book chapters from the year's most popular publications. The Oxford UP 'Best of Philosophy'collection includes papers by Romanell Center Fellows Phil Reed and Jim Delaney. 

See All

PUBLICATIONS

Why Machines Will Never Rule The World — Artificial Intelligence Without Fear.
Routledge publishes book by Barry Smith and Jobst Landgrebe

Barry Smith and Jobst Landgrebe are co-authors of Why Machines Will Never Rule The World — Artificial Intelligence Without Fear (Routledge 2022) The three questions central to this book are:
– What are the essential marks of human intelligence?
– What is it that researchers are trying to do when they talk of achieving ‘Artificial Intelligence’ (AI)?
– To what extent can AI be achieved?

The core argument is that an artificial intelligence with powers of a sort that would equal or exceed human intelligence is for mathematical reasons impossible. The reasons are that

1. intelligence of this sort is a capability of a complex dynamic system (your brain), and such systems cannot be modelled mathematically in a way that yields exact predictions;

2. but only what can be modeled mathematically in this way can be engineered to operate inside a computer.

There is a great deal which AI can achieve that will be of benefit to mankind; but it does not include the work that a human intelligence can do; it does not include AI systems more powerful than humans; and it does not include AI systems which are ‘evil’ in any sense of this word.

One consequence of our argument is that much of what is discussed in the wider world concerning the potential of AI to bring about radical changes in the very nature of human beings and of the human social order is founded on an unfortunate error.

People

  • David Hershenov, Director
    2/17/23
    David Hershenov, PhD, is a professor of philosophy at the University at Buffalo and director of the Romanell Center. His earlier research was focused upon issues at the intersection of personal identity and bioethics. His recent research interests are in the philosophy of medicine.
  • Harvey Berman
    4/2/23
    Harvey Berman is a pharmacologist responsible for teaching Doctors of Pharmacy (PharmD) and of Medicine (MD) in the Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences. His teaching and research interests are in adverse drug interactions, pharmacogenomics, ethics of drug clinical trials, pain palliation and geriatric pharmacology.
  • Barry Smith
    3/18/21
    As an undergraduate, Barry Smith studied mathematics and philosophy at the University of Oxford, before earning his Ph.D. from the University of Manchester in 1976. Currently, he holds the position of Julian Park Distinguished Professor of Philosophy and Adjunct Professor of Biomedical Informatics, Computer Science, and Neurology at the University of Buffalo in New York.
  • Catherine Nolan
    6/14/21
    Catherine Nolan is currently working on issues in the intersection of metaphysics and bioethics. She is particularly interested in applying the concepts and arguments of the Christian metaphysical tradition to contemporary problems.  Her dissertation, entitled “The Ethics and Metaphysics of Vital Organ Donation,” was a defense of the claim that death is a metaphysical event, unable to be determined purely scientifically. This makes the diagnosis of death much more uncertain. If we attempt to justify vital organ donation by claiming that the donor is dead, we are often being misleading or dishonest. Instead, she suggests that we should focus on not killing the donor, treating those who may be dead as though they are still alive. 
  • Timothy J. Madigan
    4/2/20
    Timothy J. Madigan, Ph.D, is Professor and Chair of Philosophy at St. John Fisher College in Rochester, New York, and the founder of its Irish Studies Program. Madigan’s areas of interest include Medical Ethics, Political Philosophy, Philosophy of Religion, and Popular Culture and Philosophy. He is the President of the Bertrand Russell Society and the former President of the Northeast Popular Culture Association. Madigan was the first editor of the Romanell Center’s “Bioethics Bulletin.”  
See All
KEYLIGHT.
Jack Freer, Artist

Since retiring from clinical medicine, Jack Freer has been spending more time working on pastel painting. This image depicts a scene in Florence during a 1629-31 outbreak of bubonic plague.

SHOWCASE