3 ms·
A lot of work has been done recently in psychology and neurobiology regarding the hows of not just thought, but emotion. Sociology has uncovered strange pattern
by alanh 16y ago
A lot of work has been done recently in psychology and neurobiology regarding the hows of not just thought, but emotion. Sociology has uncovered strange patterns in human “moral” behavior, such as how we donate more to one starving child than to a country of hungry millions. And the so-called “new atheists” have been talking about biological and evolutionary causes of morality for a few years now.
Science now includes morality.
Science is now about how things work and how we should act.
Addendum: With science we can determine which behaviors can maximize happiness. Isn't that prescriptive, not just descriptive?
- ced 16y agoScience now includes morality. Yes, but only in a descriptive fashion. Science can now explain why homo sapiens has evolved specific moral feelings and customs. Science is now about how things work and how we should act. This "science as a moral authority" is a different concept altogether. I'm all for including scientists in public debate, but let's not go too far.
- randallsquared 16y agoScience (and reason in general) can only tell you how you should act given a goal. It cannot tell you what goal you should have except by reference to some other goal, so there is ultimately no way to reason with someone about their morality unless you and they share (at least for the purpose of the argument) a high enough goal.
- mattmcknight 16y agoVery good points, and the subject of Sam Harris' recent book, "The Moral Landscape", which gets into that idea in some detail. This Q&A provides a good overview of the arguments: http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/the-moral-landscape-q-a-with-sam-harris/ http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/the-moral-landscape-...