There's some interesting things to think about, particularly in the context of the reading I've been doing on knowledge, judgment and decision making.
But there's something in his presentation of his ideas that irks me; encapsulated a bit at the end when he dodged answering whether he would shift his opinion if results from a study of the brain countered his hypothesis.
Ya, there's something about him that makes me slightly uncomfortable, but people would likely say that about me so I can't fault him for that.
That being said, he was on uncomfortable margins at certain points, and always pulled it back at the last second. I sensed a moral arrogance that verged on racism, and a subtle misogyny as well. He also has a faith in science that is arguably unfounded. Just because morality exists as a patterned phenomena, maybe with 'natural' rules and tendencies, this does not mean that science can know them, or comment on them fully.
To me, I think he should stop at the idea of moral wisdom and expertise, although the latter is also a bit of a slippery slope.
Yet his argument is sound in that there should be no reason why we can't comment on the positive aspects of morality, meaning the facts that he speaks of, or the properties that make morality function better for the well being of people in certain circumstances and not in others. And I mean this to limit the moral relativism that defines us now, and not as a statement on the context specific nature of morality. For example, I am not saying that murder in some environment might lead to better social outcomes, thus they maintain, I believe that there's a limit here, meaning in fact that it would not lead to better individual and social outcomes in any circumstances, hence it regulative and functional place within social systems. Morality is as real as a poke in the eye.
Not sure if that makes sense.
In the end, I like Sam Harris and I think his message is just, yet I'm afraid of his megalomania.
4 comments:
There's some interesting things to think about, particularly in the context of the reading I've been doing on knowledge, judgment and decision making.
But there's something in his presentation of his ideas that irks me; encapsulated a bit at the end when he dodged answering whether he would shift his opinion if results from a study of the brain countered his hypothesis.
Ya, there's something about him that makes me slightly uncomfortable, but people would likely say that about me so I can't fault him for that.
That being said, he was on uncomfortable margins at certain points, and always pulled it back at the last second. I sensed a moral arrogance that verged on racism, and a subtle misogyny as well. He also has a faith in science that is arguably unfounded. Just because morality exists as a patterned phenomena, maybe with 'natural' rules and tendencies, this does not mean that science can know them, or comment on them fully.
To me, I think he should stop at the idea of moral wisdom and expertise, although the latter is also a bit of a slippery slope.
Yet his argument is sound in that there should be no reason why we can't comment on the positive aspects of morality, meaning the facts that he speaks of, or the properties that make morality function better for the well being of people in certain circumstances and not in others. And I mean this to limit the moral relativism that defines us now, and not as a statement on the context specific nature of morality. For example, I am not saying that murder in some environment might lead to better social outcomes, thus they maintain, I believe that there's a limit here, meaning in fact that it would not lead to better individual and social outcomes in any circumstances, hence it regulative and functional place within social systems. Morality is as real as a poke in the eye.
Not sure if that makes sense.
In the end, I like Sam Harris and I think his message is just, yet I'm afraid of his megalomania.
:)
that was great; thanks for sharing!! :) i could say so much more, but i won't. :P
haven't watched it yet, sorry. i am a bad friend. (commence self-flagellation...)
Post a Comment