Home
FUTURE STUDENTS ask.UWindsor GIVE TO UWINDSOR

Dr. Marcello Guarini

Dr. Guarini has a Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of Western Ontario. He was the former Dean of the Faculty of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences at the University of Windsor. His current research is focused on the philosophy of artificial intelligence and agency. He has published in philosophy of mind, including issues in cognitive and computational philosophy. He also has a body of work in argumentation theory devoted to analogy. He is the first recipient of the annual AILACT essay prize, and he has been awarded grants by SSHRC and SHARCNet.

Dr. Guarini is a member of the Canadian Philosophical Association, the International Association for Computing and Philosophy (IACAP) and the Centre for Research in Reasoning, Argumentation and Rhetoric.  

During 2002-2003, Dr. Guarini received a UWSA nomination for Teacher of the Year, and in 2005 he was selected by TVO as one of Ontario's top 30 lecturers.  Some of the courses he teaches include: Introduction to Western Philosophy; Introduction to Ethics; Theory of Knowledge; Law, Punishment and Morality; Mind, Action, & Personal Identity; Kant, (Grad) Mind or Knowledge, (Grad) Special Topics, (Grad) Topics in Ethics.

Most recent publications and research projects:

Dr. Guarini’s dissertation was in the philosophy of computational neural modelling, and one of the major strands of his research has been in the philosophy of mind (understood as including philosophy of AI and cognitive science). Machine ethics is another area in which he has published. He also has done work on analogy. His recent work is focussed on the philosophy of AI.

The following are some samples of Dr. Guarini’s recent research.

(i) “When Machines Make Humans Feel: Emotion, Intelligence, and the Ethics of AI.” 2026. Journal of Superintelligence.

(ii) “Blame, Responsibility, and Agency: a Meditation on Possible Moral Statuses for AI Entities.”  2026. Forthcoming in American Philosophical Quarterly.

(iii) “Reflections on the Scope of Totally Grounded Analogies.” 2026. Journal of the IGPL.

(iv) “Ongoing Inquiry into Analogical Arguments.” 2026. Chapter 27 of the Routledge Handbook of Argumentation Theory.

General Policies

2016. “Order Effects, Moral Cognition, and Intelligence,” in Vincent C. Müller (ed.), 2016. Fundamental Issues of Artificial Intelligence (Synthese Library), Berlin: Springer, pp. 527-540.
2012. “Conative Dimensions of Machine Ethics: A Defense of Duty,” IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing, 3, no. 4, pp. 434-442.
2011. “Computational Neural Modeling and the Philosophy of Ethics,” in M. Anderson and S. Anderson, eds, Machine Ethics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 316 - 334. 
2010. “Particularism, Analogy, and Moral Cognition,” Minds and Machines, 20, no.3, pp. 385-422. 
2009.  Guarini, Marcello, Amy Butchart, Paul Simard Smith, and Andrei Moldovan. “Resources for Research on Analogy: A Multi-disciplinary Guide.” Informal Logic, 29 (2): 84-198. 
2004. “A Defense of Non-deductive Reconstructions of Analogical Arguments,” Informal Logic 24, no.2, pp. 153-168.
2001. “A Defense of Connectionism Against the ‘Syntactic’ Argument,” Synthese 128, no. 3, pp. 287-317.

I believe students should be encouraged to expose themselves to different ways of thinking and problem solving. As a result, I design my courses so that they are not exceedingly difficult to pass for students who attend class regularly, do the required work, and possess university level reading and writing skills. My courses have a low failure rate. However, I believe students should be challenged and held to high standards, so A-range grades are not easy to come by, but they certainly are not impossible to earn. As a general rule, I don't curve or adjust grades either up or down. However, if I decide (after giving a test) that a question was insufficiently clear or that I inadequately taught the material required to answer a question, I may adjust grades upward, but this is rare. Many students who have little or no background in philosophy have done exceptionally well in my courses. If you are interested in trying something new, or you just want to know more about this philosophy stuff you've heard about, I think you will find my courses accessible and unintimidating. I encourage students to ask challenging questions, but in a way that does not stifle or discourage further conversation. Both male and female students from a wide variety of social, economic, ethnic, and religious backgrounds have found my classes an intellectually and socially hospitable place to learn. I attempt to make my classes as conversational as possible. When I do lecture, I avoid unnecessary technical jargon. When I do use technical jargon, I make every effort to clarify the meanings of the terms I use. I don't believe in saying things because they sound "deep" or "cool." While I like to think that my courses explore deep and cool issues, I encourage students to explore these issues in a way that is free of linguistic gobligook.
A student caught plagiarizing or cheating (or aiding and abetting such acts) will receive a failing grade for that assignment. A student caught committing a second offense will fail the entire course. Should the University of Windsor decide to expel a student for repeat offenses, I intend to cooperate fully. Consult Senate Bylaw 31 for details. Please consult the instructor if you have any questions regarding this policy.