BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//Grails iCalendar plugin//NONSGML Grails iCalendar plugin//EN
VERSION:2.0
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20260430T062159Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20251017T120000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20251017T133000
SUMMARY:LTT:  Amanda Evans -  Psychiatric Deep Brain Stimulation and the Ethics of Mechanistic Recovery
UID:20260502T112752Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-6b96c54f56-bljdq
TZID:America/New_York
LOCATION: University of Pittsburgh\, 4200 Fifth Avenue\, Pittsburgh\, United States\, 15260
DESCRIPTION:<p>The Center for Philosophy of Science at the University of Pittsburgh invites you to join us for our Lunch Time Talk.&nbsp\;Attend in person at 1117 Cathedral of Learning or visit our live stream on YouTube at&nbsp\;<a rel="noopenerdata-cke-saved-href=">https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrRp47ZMXD7NXO3a9Gyh2sg</a>.</p>\n<p><strong>LTT:&nbsp\;&nbsp\;</strong><strong><a data-cke-saved-href="https://www.amandaevans.net/">Dr. Amanda Evans</a></strong></p>\n<p>Friday\, October 17th&nbsp\; @ 12:00 pm&nbsp\;-&nbsp\;1:30 pm&nbsp\;EST</p>\n<p><strong>Title:</strong>&nbsp\;Psychiatric Deep Brain Stimulation and the Ethics of Mechanistic Recovery</p>\n<p><strong>Abstract:&nbsp\;</strong></p>\n<p>Direct brain interventions like deep brain stimulation (DBS) raise unique ethical questions when applied to psychiatric disorders. While frameworks like the ethical parity principle suggest that functionally equivalent processes are ethically on par\, I argue this view is mistaken in the psychiatric context precisely because it overlooks a crucial distinction: that between agential recovery\, guided by the patient&rsquo\;s reasons and values\, and mechanistic recovery\, which works via a process that bypasses those values. I analyze a spectrum of treatments\, using DBS for Parkinson&rsquo\;s disease as a baseline for an agency-restoring intervention\, to demonstrate how the ethical stakes shift from case to case. I argue that these stakes become highest in the decision to consent to treatments designed to compel behaviors that bypass the patient&rsquo\;s endorsed values\, a choice at the heart of disorders of profound ambivalence such as anorexia nervosa. Ultimately\, this presents a fundamental challenge to informed consent that can only be properly understood by foregrounding the ethical difference between agential and mechanistic recovery.</p>\n<p>This talk will be available online:</p>\n<p>Zoom:&nbsp\;<a data-cke-saved-href="https://pitt.zoom.us/j/95825689559">https://pitt.zoom.us/j/95825689559</a></p>\n<p><br>YouTube:&nbsp\;<a data-cke-saved-href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrRp47ZMXD7NXO3a9Gyh2sg">https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrRp47ZMXD7NXO3a9Gyh2sg</a></p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Edouard Machery:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
