RE: Religion is a poor source of morality
October 7, 2015 at 1:57 pm
(This post was last modified: October 7, 2015 at 2:00 pm by Edwardo Piet.)
I think Sam Harris' primary point is that whilst theists argue for objective morality that's ontologically objective, he argues instead that subjective facts about the well being of conscious creatures can be studied objectively in an epistemic way instead... the same way science studies other things epistemecally . And his point is that the conclusions matter to the well being of everyone.
To paraphrase Sam Harris: "If words like "good" and "bad" and "right" and "wrong" mean anything at all then... they mean we should at the very least steer away from the worst possible misery for everyone."
He's not saying that it can be proven ontologically, he's saying that you can epistemically study subjective facts about well being that matter in an objective scientific way.
To paraphrase Sam Harris: "If words like "good" and "bad" and "right" and "wrong" mean anything at all then... they mean we should at the very least steer away from the worst possible misery for everyone."
He's not saying that it can be proven ontologically, he's saying that you can epistemically study subjective facts about well being that matter in an objective scientific way.