TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Sam Harris on TED Talks: Science can answer moral questions.
Pages (5): « 1 2 3 4 [5]

Like I said on the other thread, while paraphrasing Christopher Hitchens.

"To describe [your views] as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental."

Now, let's get back on topic.

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated "Subjecting the world to some distant authority that they have to believe in". That sounds an awful lot like religion to me, not science. Ins't God a "distant authority"? Science asks us only to question the nature of things, which leads me to my next point:

What are you talking about? I am not up in arms against science, I am up in arms against the idea of a universal moral code. I dont care if it comes from science or religion, it's a bad idea either way.

You're damn right it sounds an awful lot like religion!

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated Plus, I think a scientist has less reason to lie. A clergyman is trying to enforce morals, whereas a scientist is only trying to enforce truth. A scientist would never tell you that hell exists so you'll stop shoplifting.

Well we all know there is corruption in religion and I don't want to defend religion in any way, but this is BS. The real goal of clergy is also to enforce truth. Even scientists don't agree on truth.

But I do agree that scientists have less reason to lie... except when they get tied up with morals and trying to enforce them (governments).

What Sam Harris is proposing is that a group of scientists can tell you that you are proven to be a bad person. If you take this to the logical end, presumably a computer can kill you before you are born if it determines after in-utero neural analysis that you're going to be a bad person according to its universal scientific code.

For the last time, I have nothing explicitly against science anymore than I do with religion, but I think using either as the basis of some universal code of conduct is ludicrous at best and truly dangerous.

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec

u never answered my PM, i need your set! the one with exaltion and indians & bagpipes but it wont let me download it fully from your site, it stops downloading on its own...

quote:

Originally posted by Domesticated Why would you approach a religious person as an equal? Clearly, someone who believes in an old man in the sky ready to punish them for not believing in him isn't on your level.

Just because a person is ignorant does not mean that they lack the intellectual capacity to understand what you're saying, and alter their beliefs based on new learning.

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec Subjecting the whole world to some distant authority that they have to believe in because they lack the scientific training to comprehend it is not moving towards a goal of universal love, but rather one of universal fear.

Kinda sounds a lot like God.

quote:

Originally posted by Spam Just because a person is ignorant does not mean that they lack the intellectual capacity to understand what you're saying, and alter their beliefs based on new learning.

true dat. Thats why I dont mind calling someone ignorant, but sorta feel bad when I use the words "stupid" or "dumb."

quote:

Originally posted by Kismet7 true dat. Thats why I dont mind calling someone ignorant, but sorta feel bad when I use the words "stupid or dumb".

You must be the most modest poser... err, poster on TA

quote:

Originally posted by Kismet7 true dat. Thats why I dont mind calling someone ignorant, but sorta feel bad when I use the words "stupid" or "dumb."

Oh fuck, it agrees with me.

I take it back guys, I never meant a word of it!

quote:

Originally posted by D-res You must be the most modest poser... err, poster on TA

Not sure what you're talking about. I'm not modest, being modest is a cheesey and risky way to survive. Have you seen a turtle? A turtle is modest. So is a snail. Ever step on a snail...accidently? Well thats what happens to modest people. Its interesting when people think modesty will win them some great reward. I rather be a chest bumpin hunter.

Brilliant as well!

quote:

Originally posted by Kismet7 Not sure what you're talking about. I'm not modest, being modest is a cheesey and risky way to survive. Have you seen a turtle? A turtle is modest. So is a snail. Its interesting when people think modesty will win them some great reward. I rather be a chest bumpin hunter.

Modest poor people in Africa shoot guerrillas for food and souvenirs so that they can survive.

Bump away, brotha-man, bump away.

quote:

Originally posted by Spam Modest poor people in Africa shoot guerrillas for food and souvenirs so that they can survive. Bump away, brotha-man, bump away.

good for them. they're living it up. i mean their blood is flowing and circulating well...a bit better than the caveman that ends up plugged into a computer with a dim pulse.

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec What Sam Harris is proposing is that a group of scientists can tell you that you are proven to be a bad person. If you take this to the logical end, presumably a computer can kill you before you are born if it determines after in-utero neural analysis that you're going to be a bad person according to its universal scientific code.

OK, this is precisely what you have been getting wrong right from the start. Nobody ever suggested (not Sam Harris and certainly not me) that "a group of scientists [should] tell you that you are proven to be a bad person"! The point is that people themselves can do far better if they applied scientific methods to their search for moral values instead of getting them from ancient scribblings from desert peasants, or from their own culture!

He couldn't have enforced that point more strongly, actually. And it's quite curious that you chose to use the computer example:

quote:

Now let me be clear about what I'm not saying...that science is guaranteed to map this space or that we will have scientific answers to every conceivable moral question. I don't believe for instance that one day you will consult a super-computer to learn whether you should have a second child, or whether we should bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, or whether you can deduct the full cost of TED as a business expense.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Unfortunately, life is much more complicated than we wish. Suppose you're a cop, and a hijacker of some kind is pointing a gun to the head of a hostage. If you immobilise him, the odds of him murdering the poor victim is high. Are you really prepared to say that it's immoral to kill the criminal before the worst happens? Because, by doing that, it's not hard to come to the following conclusions: Atheists are cunts; Religious people can be cunts too, but they're always talking about living in harmony, harmony, oh love! Therefore, I'd rather be in a moderate religious community than with a bunch of self-righteous scientific pricks. Enlightening the world, are we? Humour is all right, arrogance isn't.

The difference is, unless confronted with religious douchebaggery, you wouldn�t even know an atheist if you saw him. Whereas the theists� opinions often manifest themselves in everyday life.

But yeah, id still take the cunts any day of the week. I think id feel right at home

Very true. I'd say that almost nobody who knows me, outside from a circle of 2 or 3 friends and my family knows that I'm an atheist.

Edit: Just saw this...

quote:

Originally posted by Lews I thought his overall message was love your neighbor as yourself =/ Except homosexuals, of course.

There are parts of the story that you can rescue. Specially the sermon on the mount and certain parables.

quote:

Originally posted by woscar OK, this is precisely what you have been getting wrong right from the start. Nobody ever suggested (not Sam Harris and certainly not me) that "a group of scientists [should] tell you that you are proven to be a bad person"! The point is that people themselves can do far better if they applied scientific methods to their search for moral values instead of getting them from ancient scribblings from desert peasants, or from their own culture! He couldn't have enforced that point more strongly, actually. And it's quite curious that you chose to use the computer example:

Woscar, don't be so naive.

People don't search for moral values themselves, they expect to have them handed to them either from a group of priests or a group of scientists.

quote:

Originally posted by Spam Kinda sounds a lot like God.

now you're catching on

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec Woscar, don't be so naive. People don't search for moral values themselves, they expect to have them handed to them either from a group of priests or a group of scientists.

The sheep being led by a shepherd metaphor is flashing in my mind's eye.

I fully agree with Adam on this one. Objective morality is nonsense, even down to "Killing is wrong."

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.