Sam Harris

Let’s say that our scientists are able to isolate morality and completely understand its origins and underpinnings.
Will that understanding change morality?

toombaru - 25 April 2011 03:00 PM

Let’s say that our scientists are able to isolate morality and completely understand its origins and underpinnings.
Will that understanding change morality?

No, people will still believe in objective morality.

GAD - 27 April 2011 03:54 AM

toombaru - 25 April 2011 03:00 PM

Let’s say that our scientists are able to isolate morality and completely understand its origins and underpinnings.
Will that understanding change morality?

No, people will still believe in objective morality.

I was wondering what would happen to morality if humans in general were to comprehend that there was no such thing.

toombaru - 27 April 2011 03:41 PM

GAD - 27 April 2011 03:54 AM

toombaru - 25 April 2011 03:00 PM

Let’s say that our scientists are able to isolate morality and completely understand its origins and underpinnings.
Will that understanding change morality?

No, people will still believe in objective morality.

I was wondering what would happen to morality if humans in general were to comprehend that there was no such thing.

Nothing would happen to morality = the consensus of personal preferences of a group = moral relativism.

The issue that people have trouble with is if morality is subjective then how can we hold people accountable, my answer, the same way we do now.

GAD - 27 April 2011 04:20 PM

toombaru - 27 April 2011 03:41 PM

GAD - 27 April 2011 03:54 AM

toombaru - 25 April 2011 03:00 PM

Let’s say that our scientists are able to isolate morality and completely understand its origins and underpinnings.
Will that understanding change morality?

No, people will still believe in objective morality.

I was wondering what would happen to morality if humans in general were to comprehend that there was no such thing.

Nothing would happen to morality = the consensus of personal preferences of a group = moral relativism.

The issue that people have trouble with is if morality is subjective then how can we hold people accountable, my answer, the same way we do now.

Should people be held accountable if there is no free will?

toombaru - 27 April 2011 04:29 PM

GAD - 27 April 2011 04:20 PM

toombaru - 27 April 2011 03:41 PM

GAD - 27 April 2011 03:54 AM

toombaru - 25 April 2011 03:00 PM

Let’s say that our scientists are able to isolate morality and completely understand its origins and underpinnings.
Will that understanding change morality?

No, people will still believe in objective morality.

I was wondering what would happen to morality if humans in general were to comprehend that there was no such thing.

Nothing would happen to morality = the consensus of personal preferences of a group = moral relativism.

The issue that people have trouble with is if morality is subjective then how can we hold people accountable, my answer, the same way we do now.

Should people be held accountable if there is no free will?

The argument/claim that without freewill people can’t be held accountable for their actions is a tired one. My answer, if people can’t be held accountable for their actions then I can’t be held accountable for holding them accountable for their actions.

GAD - 27 April 2011 04:45 PM

toombaru - 27 April 2011 04:29 PM

GAD - 27 April 2011 04:20 PM

toombaru - 27 April 2011 03:41 PM

GAD - 27 April 2011 03:54 AM

toombaru - 25 April 2011 03:00 PM

Let’s say that our scientists are able to isolate morality and completely understand its origins and underpinnings.
Will that understanding change morality?

No, people will still believe in objective morality.

I was wondering what would happen to morality if humans in general were to comprehend that there was no such thing.

Nothing would happen to morality = the consensus of personal preferences of a group = moral relativism.

The issue that people have trouble with is if morality is subjective then how can we hold people accountable, my answer, the same way we do now.

Should people be held accountable if there is no free will?

The argument/claim that without freewill people can’t be held accountable for their actions is a tired one. My answer, if people can’t be held accountable for their actions then I can’t be held accountable for holding them accountable for their actions.

Then perhaps you should coin a new word for “accountable”.

Interesting article on freewill was just posted. I disagree with the conclusions, but still interesting.

Zeno’s Paradox and the Problem of Free Will

toombaru - 27 April 2011 04:29 PM

Should people be held accountable if there is no free will?

Of course! In fact, the “No Free Will” argument is the best possible argument in favor of holding people accountable. Think about it in terms of influencing future behavior rather than punishment for past behavior.

Antisocialdarwinist - 28 April 2011 12:27 AM

toombaru - 27 April 2011 04:29 PM

Should people be held accountable if there is no free will?

Of course! In fact, the “No Free Will” argument is the best possible argument in favor of holding people accountable. Think about it in terms of influencing future behavior rather than punishment for past behavior.

Yeah, accountability is more a matter of behavior modification than it is objective morality.  If a person is acting anti-socially (no pun on your name intended) then his behavior needs to be modified so he can live in society without disrupting everyone else’s life.  If his behavior cannot be modified, then he’s locked up for life or institutionalized, etc.  The issue is how to do this without impinging unnecessarily on freedom, and this is always a balancing act.  But if you are considering behavior in the absence of deity, then there is no objective, universal morality, and you have to dance the moral relativism dance.  And dancing always requires good balance.

GAD - 27 April 2011 05:37 PM

Interesting article on freewill was just posted. I disagree with the conclusions, but still interesting.

Zeno’s Paradox and the Problem of Free Will

Current research proves that the sense of self is an illusion.
Factor out the self and the question about free will becomes moot.