(July 21, 2010 at 3:42 pm)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: I guess it depends how "moral" is defined.Yeah, but that is a choice for a specific moral goal.
If moral, or IOW "what we should value" is defined as that which causes less suffering and better well-being for conscious beings in the long run, that's a factual matter and can be dealt with.
(July 21, 2010 at 3:42 pm)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: "Why not make morality a subject in science?" I guess is what Harris is saying. The fact we can't all agree on exactly what "healthy" is doesn't mean there aren't obvious truths about it.... why can't morality be treated in the same way?It can be treated that way to inform moral rationale. It cannot generate moral values.
"I'm like a rabbit suddenly trapped, in the blinding headlights of vacuous crap" - Tim Minchin in "Storm"
Christianity is perfect bullshit, christians are not - Purple Rabbit, honouring CS Lewis
Faith is illogical - fr0d0
Christianity is perfect bullshit, christians are not - Purple Rabbit, honouring CS Lewis
Faith is illogical - fr0d0