Sam Harris's _The Moral Landscape_ put NOMA to rest for me.
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 18, 2024, 1:34 pm
Thread Rating:
|
Non-overlapping magesteria
|
Even if we suddenly agreed that moral questions cannot be informed or elucidated with science, would we really want to insert religion as the "magesteria" of morality? Why the hell not moral philosophy or humanistic ethics? Gould's default reversion to religion as the 'moral' realm only highlights his bias and distressing level of cognitive dissonance.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson 
What's the difference between this and just making stuff up?
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists. Index of useful threads and discussions Index of my best videos Quickstart guide to the forum  RE: Non-overlapping magesteria
February 17, 2015 at 12:43 pm
(This post was last modified: February 17, 2015 at 12:44 pm by SteelCurtain.)
(February 17, 2015 at 12:32 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Even if we suddenly agreed that moral questions cannot be informed or elucidated with science, would we really want to insert religion as the "magesteria" of morality? Why the hell not moral philosophy or humanistic ethics? Gould's default reversion to religion as the 'moral' realm only highlights his bias and distressing level of cognitive dissonance. And how would we get to a moral philosophy or humanistic ethics outside of religion? Would it not be through observation, testing, and re-evaluating things as time marches on? Would it not be an evolving societal ethos? What would one call that process of observation, testing, and amending ideas as new information becomes available or as environmental pressures change?
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<--- RE: Non-overlapping magesteria
February 17, 2015 at 12:47 pm
(This post was last modified: February 17, 2015 at 12:47 pm by FatAndFaithless.)
(February 17, 2015 at 12:43 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote:(February 17, 2015 at 12:32 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Even if we suddenly agreed that moral questions cannot be informed or elucidated with science, would we really want to insert religion as the "magesteria" of morality? Why the hell not moral philosophy or humanistic ethics? Gould's default reversion to religion as the 'moral' realm only highlights his bias and distressing level of cognitive dissonance. Gee..it's almost as if bald, untestable, unassailable, unrevisable fiat assertions about morality are archaic and unhelpful...
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
I'm really fed up with this idea that there is a domain of enquiry "beyond science".
Just stop it already. Thanks. Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists. Index of useful threads and discussions Index of my best videos Quickstart guide to the forum  (February 17, 2015 at 12:50 pm)robvalue Wrote: I'm really fed up with this idea that there is a domain of enquiry "beyond science". What is beauty? Is that inquiry susceptible to the scientific method?  (February 17, 2015 at 1:21 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote:(February 17, 2015 at 12:50 pm)robvalue Wrote: I'm really fed up with this idea that there is a domain of enquiry "beyond science". "Beauty" is an opinion.  RE: Non-overlapping magesteria
February 17, 2015 at 1:33 pm
(This post was last modified: February 17, 2015 at 1:34 pm by watchamadoodle.)
(February 17, 2015 at 1:21 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote:(February 17, 2015 at 12:50 pm)robvalue Wrote: I'm really fed up with this idea that there is a domain of enquiry "beyond science". Science could measure our reactions to different stimuli, create hypotheses about these reactions, test these hypotheses experimentally, ... Art must have goals and those goals can be measured. For example, some music is designed to be relaxing. Other music is designed to be cathartic. The "Piss Christ" was designed to communicate the artist's feelings about Christianity (I assume). ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ ) RE: Non-overlapping magesteria
February 17, 2015 at 1:36 pm
(This post was last modified: February 17, 2015 at 1:37 pm by robvalue.)
Beauty could be examined by the brain states it produced in the guy experiencing it I guess.
But yeah, an opinion on something is fine, it's not a way of finding stuff out, and it's not a claim. No uber-method is being pretended. Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists. Index of useful threads and discussions Index of my best videos Quickstart guide to the forum |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
| Possibly Related Threads... | |||||
| Thread | Author | Replies | Views | Last Post | |
| An intro to my non-materialist view | Bunburryist | 34 | 8240 |
June 3, 2017 at 9:40 pm Last Post: Amarok |
|
| Noma (Non Overlapping Magisteria) | Rhondazvous | 12 | 2365 |
February 13, 2017 at 5:13 pm Last Post: Rhondazvous |
|
| Scientific arguments for eating Organic/non-GMO food? | CapnAwesome | 15 | 4566 |
June 10, 2015 at 6:49 pm Last Post: Pyrrho |
|
Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)
