Harris asserts in Moral Landscape that ignorance and humility are inversely proportional to each other; whereas religious know-nothings are often arrogant, scientists tend to be humble, because they know enough to know their limitations. "Arrogance is about as common at a scientific conference as nudity," Harris states. Yet he is anything but humble in his opus. He castigates not only religious believers but even nonbelieving scientists and philosophers who don’t share his hostility toward religion.
Harris further shows his arrogance when he claims that neuroscience, his own field, is best positioned to help us achieve a universal morality. "The more we understand ourselves at the level of the brain, the more we will see that there are right and wrong answers to questions of human values." Neuroscience can’t even tell me how I can know the big, black, hairy thing on my couch is my dog Merlin. And we’re going to trust neuroscience to tell us how we should resolve debates over the morality of abortion, euthanasia and armed intervention in other nations’ affairs?
-
In total there are 31 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 30 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
Most users ever online was 789 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:08 am
"Righteous Rationalists"
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
- ant
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5935
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 969 times
"Righteous Rationalists"
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cro ... guidepost/
- Flann 5
-
Nutty for Books
- Posts: 1580
- Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
- 10
- Location: Dublin
- Has thanked: 831 times
- Been thanked: 705 times
Re: "Righteous Rationalists"
Sam is probably just 'wired' to think this way. He shouldn't pay too much attention to what his brain tells him.Come to think of it, I shouldn't pay much attention to what his brain tells him either. He probably just needs chemical deprogramming.Seems we could be entering the world of the Steve Martin movie; The Man with two brains; Now that was a funny movie.
Sam talks about treating a psychopath who attacks you in the same way you would a crocodile. They are just doing their thing, so it's good for your mental health to regard them in the same way. There's an element of surreal farce to all this, in they way it is delivered with great earnestness as important news for mankind.
I hate to to tell you ant,but that thing on your couch is an hallucination.
I accept that most atheists are probably not militant like Harris and it's a sort of faction I suppose.iI think righteous rationalists is a good description.I suppose if it was a convention of the militant rationalist wing of science, it would be a nudist science convention, metaphorically speaking of course!
And people like Dawkins get personal abuse from some on the religious side too.They really believe that religion is a kind of poison of the mind and there's a mission to save mankind from bad 'memes'
It's serious stuff but it seems to have a surreal edge, that's makes me wonder sometimes if they really believe what they seem to be saying. But then the horrid doubt arises with me................!Surreal or what?
Sam talks about treating a psychopath who attacks you in the same way you would a crocodile. They are just doing their thing, so it's good for your mental health to regard them in the same way. There's an element of surreal farce to all this, in they way it is delivered with great earnestness as important news for mankind.
I hate to to tell you ant,but that thing on your couch is an hallucination.
I accept that most atheists are probably not militant like Harris and it's a sort of faction I suppose.iI think righteous rationalists is a good description.I suppose if it was a convention of the militant rationalist wing of science, it would be a nudist science convention, metaphorically speaking of course!
And people like Dawkins get personal abuse from some on the religious side too.They really believe that religion is a kind of poison of the mind and there's a mission to save mankind from bad 'memes'
It's serious stuff but it seems to have a surreal edge, that's makes me wonder sometimes if they really believe what they seem to be saying. But then the horrid doubt arises with me................!Surreal or what?
Last edited by Flann 5 on Wed Aug 20, 2014 1:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- ant
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5935
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 969 times
Re: "Righteous Rationalists"
Flann 5 wrote:Sam is probably just 'wired' to think this way. He shouldn't pay too much attention to what his brain tells him.Come to think of it, I shouldn't pay much attention to what his brain tells him either. He probably just needs chemical deprogramming.Seems we could be entering the world of the Steve Martin movie; The Man with two brains; Now that was a funny movie.
Sam talks about treating a psychopath who attacks you in the same way you would a crocodile. They are just doing their thing, so it's good for your mental health to regard them in the same way. There's an element of surreal farce to all this, in they way it is delivered with great earnestness as important news for mankind.
I hate to to tell you ant,but that thing on your couch is an hallucination.
If it increases the happiness and well being of tribe A to pillage, plunder, murder all men and children, and rape the women of tribe B to conceive their offspring , then tribe A's moral landscape is morally sound.
Is that correct? There is no moral objectivity. The subjective morality of tribe A increased their well being and happiness
- Interbane
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 7203
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
- 19
- Location: Da U.P.
- Has thanked: 1105 times
- Been thanked: 2166 times
Re: "Righteous Rationalists"
Correct, and such tribal morality has existed on our planet. It's a disgusting thing to consider. Tribal morality applies in more modern forms as well, consider Hitler, or the second commandment of the Christian bible. Any sort of morality that condemns another group is inferior and outdated. We in an age where we need universal morality to increase human flourishing on a universal scale. In the context of what Harris is saying, our moral landscape is not limited to a single valley or mountaintop. Our moral landscape is and should be universal.ant wrote:If it increases the happiness and well being of tribe A to pillage, plunder, murder all men and children, and rape the women of tribe B to conceive their offspring , then tribe A's moral landscape is morally sound.
Regarding the humility of knowledgeable men, Bertrand Russel has a great similar quote: "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
“In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
- johnson1010
-
Tenured Professor
- Posts: 3564
- Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:35 pm
- 15
- Location: Michigan
- Has thanked: 1280 times
- Been thanked: 1128 times
Re: "Righteous Rationalists"
No.Ant:
If it increases the happiness and well being of tribe A to pillage, plunder, murder all men and children, and rape the women of tribe B to conceive their offspring , then tribe A's moral landscape is morally sound.
Morality deals with the experiences of conscious beings like people.
Tribe B is full of conscious intelligent people. Tribe A's population may be sublimely happy in their destruction of tribe B, but one whole population's utter destruction and suffering is worse than both tribes having sustainable moderate levels of happiness with occasional suffering.
This is not a case of one's opinion vs another. Tribe A inflicts needless misery on tribe B. That is definitely worse for the total number of conscious beings involved than a large number of other possible scenarios.
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro
Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?
Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?
Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
-Guillermo Del Torro
Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?
Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?
Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
- ant
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5935
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 969 times
Re: "Righteous Rationalists"
It was needless from your perspective but not from Tibe A's perspective.Tribe A inflicts needless misery on tribe B. That is definitely worse for the total number of conscious beings involved than a large number of other possible scenarios.
Tribe A has overun Tribe B and in so doing has solidified its survival and future flourishing by having more women available to reproduce.
You are opining completely outside of Tribe A's landscape and are imposing a morality that is not beneficail to Tribe A's "success"
Who are you, God?
Ps
Tibe A are conscious beings. They may not be "people" like you, but they are conscious.Morality deals with the experiences of conscious beings like people.
Last edited by ant on Wed Aug 20, 2014 5:05 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- ant
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5935
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 969 times
Re: "Righteous Rationalists"
Let's say this, Johnson.
Suppose you were a 5 month old baby when your dad, who happened to be Tribe A's Chief, led the war on Tribe B that overwhelmed their existence.
When you reached the age of 17, the populace had grown since the war because the men who fought had more women, and there were more girls for you to marry because every man had 4 wives instead of 2. You might have up to 5.
There are little surrounding tribes that pop up occasionally but are extinguished fast and in the same manner
How is your well being and happiness then?
Is this a good moral landscape for Tribe A?
Suppose you were a 5 month old baby when your dad, who happened to be Tribe A's Chief, led the war on Tribe B that overwhelmed their existence.
When you reached the age of 17, the populace had grown since the war because the men who fought had more women, and there were more girls for you to marry because every man had 4 wives instead of 2. You might have up to 5.
There are little surrounding tribes that pop up occasionally but are extinguished fast and in the same manner
How is your well being and happiness then?
Is this a good moral landscape for Tribe A?
- Flann 5
-
Nutty for Books
- Posts: 1580
- Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
- 10
- Location: Dublin
- Has thanked: 831 times
- Been thanked: 705 times
Re: "Righteous Rationalists"
Harris uses the wired psychopath argument for Saddam Hussein's son, and suggests future scientific treatment for such.Were all the nazis who participated in exterminating millions, all psychos? This sort of stuff is off the wall, and seriously out of touch with reality,morality and justice.
I don't buy the nonsense coming from his 'wired' brain.
I don't buy the nonsense coming from his 'wired' brain.
Last edited by Flann 5 on Wed Aug 20, 2014 6:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- geo
-
- pets endangered by possible book avalanche
- Posts: 4779
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
- 15
- Location: NC
- Has thanked: 2198 times
- Been thanked: 2200 times
Re: "Righteous Rationalists"
What makes one person grow up to be religious and another person grow up to materialist? Or one person liberal and another conservative? One would expect at least some of those tendencies to be 'wired.'Flann 5 wrote:Harris uses the wired psychopath argument for Saddam Hussein's son, and suggests future scientific treatment for such.Were all the nazis who participated in exterminating millions, all psychos? This sort of stuff is off the wall, and seriously out of touch with reality,morality and justice.
I don't buy the nonsense coming from his 'wired' brain.
-Geo
Question everything
Question everything
- Interbane
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 7203
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
- 19
- Location: Da U.P.
- Has thanked: 1105 times
- Been thanked: 2166 times
Re: "Righteous Rationalists"
I couldn't find any hits for Harris commenting on Hussein's son, except perhaps within a lecture. I didn't want to watch the full video to extract what you're referring to. Do you have a quote? As well as an explanation of what the wired psychopath argument is?Harris uses the wired psychopath argument for Saddam Hussein's son
“In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams