Wow... the discussion between Harris and Dawkins, after the speech, is far more valuable than the speech; it's like the lecture just lays the epistemological groundwork for the discussion that follows.
I especially enjoyed listening to the discussion about flipping a switch on two sets of train tracks, in which five would die if you don't switch the train's course, but one will die if you do (an act with which 95% of those polled agree is a valid moral decision), versus being on a bridge above the tracks, where pushing a person onto the tracks will derail the train and save the other five lives is immoral according to 95% of those polled. These are both the same act, on the surface: killing one to save five. And yet, we see an almost night-and-day difference in how both acts are perceived by human beings. The implications for the concept of morality are staggering.
The following discussion, about whether you could grab a healthy person in the waiting room of a hospital because it was discovered that he had an ideal-match of his organs for five people who are dying in that hospital for want of those organs, and why-or-why-not, reminded me of the discussion we recently had about the ethics and legality of abortion and the concept of personal bodily integrity.
Thanks for posting that video. It's still going on as I type this, and I'm fascinated. Which is why it took me so long to type this! hehe
I especially enjoyed listening to the discussion about flipping a switch on two sets of train tracks, in which five would die if you don't switch the train's course, but one will die if you do (an act with which 95% of those polled agree is a valid moral decision), versus being on a bridge above the tracks, where pushing a person onto the tracks will derail the train and save the other five lives is immoral according to 95% of those polled. These are both the same act, on the surface: killing one to save five. And yet, we see an almost night-and-day difference in how both acts are perceived by human beings. The implications for the concept of morality are staggering.
The following discussion, about whether you could grab a healthy person in the waiting room of a hospital because it was discovered that he had an ideal-match of his organs for five people who are dying in that hospital for want of those organs, and why-or-why-not, reminded me of the discussion we recently had about the ethics and legality of abortion and the concept of personal bodily integrity.
Thanks for posting that video. It's still going on as I type this, and I'm fascinated. Which is why it took me so long to type this! hehe
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
