Being Right About Right and Wrong.

From Beyond Belief conference 3.

Here is two interesting talks which I intend to explore in later blogs their implications. Sam Harris is making a case that we can be right about right and wrong and that science, in particular Neuroscience can help us discover the laws of well-being. I did a earlier blog with a similar idea that we can objectively find solutions to moral problems and can effectively say that certain actions are morally wrong. I equated morality with the practice of Science and Jury based criminal justice process. (see Slaying the Dragon of Moral Relativism.)


With the talk the Harris did I intend to explore what kind of evidence would support his contention that moral truths exist and how we discover it.


Sam Harris 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBdQhLXTvNM&feature=related

Sam Harris 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqF0jnv3tZY&feature=related


Jonathan Haidt has come in for some harsh treatment from Sam Harris so I was curious to see his views and opinions. His research into cultural and group psychology is fascinating and his talk did not disappoint. Some of his ideas on morality are interesting but I find myself in profound disagreement over what he believes morality to be and its purpose. In particular his view that morality is like team sports. I believe that Haidt not only commit’s the fallacy of deriving a ought from an is but getting an is from an ought as well.

http://thesciencenetwork.org/programs/beyond-belief-candles-in-the-dark/jonathan-haidt-1



Best

Michael