A Dialogue on Biology Morality and Theology

[Thephyguy]

Religion has had a stranglehold and thus established 'tradition'. But tradition does not need religion. Religious people need religion. Religion does not have a stranglehold on emotions or feelings or ethics. This is just a temporal time where things will change. Should we really treat with dignity this creature that was trying only to strangle as we emerged into our greater light?

[ssijak]

this lecture sounded bad. for half of the stuff said they just invented 'theories' or premises based on the thing THEY think is going on, not based on evidence beside some misleading polls.and he gave so many variables, so so many, and how can he than produce valid conclusions?

[1888junkteam]

excellent work!

[odesign1]

During the holocaust- many non Jews hid Jews and risked being murdered ...no reputation enhancement, totally altruistic..totally anti-darwinian and leathaly dangerous...the darwin theory leaves a lot to be desired...

[logician360]

If some moral truths are necessary, such as "It is wrong to torture people for no reason", then objective moral values exist in every possible world, even in possible worlds where God does not exist. Thus, God cannot explain the existence of objective moral values.

[koreanmyspl]

i am babes

[Chick6517]

this was long.. haha im not gonna lie i almost decided not to finish it but then there were certain things that lkept me entertained and over all it was a good video nice job guys!

[JonThm]

Nature alol around us doea molecular nuclear fusion - power from water!

[Veryangrymonk]

There is no war between science and religion? There is war against evolution and creationism!

get it right! to say that there is a war against science and religion is to say that evidence presented by science should not have meaning....when presented something by science you have to determine what that means philosophically or we get no where with that evidence...so what your trying to say sir is that your going to use the study of the natural order of things without reason to push your view...

[elvenator]

It's unfortunate that Prof. Schloss invested so much time and effort in misunderstanding the natural selection concept and oversimplifying altruism.

There wasn't a single concept in his lecture that I couldn't see arising as a result of the evolution of the social organism that is the human race.

[mcpresso]

I am no theologian, but idealistically a man's thought carries further then his morality. Prof Greensborough taught me the ethics of philosophical brain power. I completely do not under no circumstances agree with this video. Nor should you. Materialism is more comforting then being morally correct in this day and age, being rich and improvised is better and more liberally correct then being true and wise. The word Gentleman should not only be erased from the Oxford dictionary.

[mcpresso]

...But the bill of rights should be scattered into a blur of words.

[ColoradoMikeyS]

Theology is the study of fairy tales that people are dumb enough to believe.

[ktc0754]

eh, not really. Most of it is history, psychology and social anthropology. Why people believe, what they believe etc.

[Atheistjeremy]

I suppose that theology can be about "what" people believe. It's certainly not Psychology. If you want to learn that, you need to take a Psychology class. Anthropology? Please, lol. Theology, for the most part, is a non-subject. It's the study of nonsense.

[JJTecumseh87]

ok richard dawkins's parrot.

if its a non subject than why do u something if usay it nothing?

[cereoman657]

im depressed

stop fighting pls. make love not drama. ND

[skadooo22]

sorry its almost a blog being two comments...

religion is a great thing to have because it can give meaning to life for people looking for it, but it should not get in the way of progress, we need to think of and explain things without god playing a part. If he exists he only gives us the opportunity to discover, but we still have to figure it out for ourselves.

[skadooo22]

continued from comment above... this is my opinion to express...

Divine intervention and creationism doesn't belong in the classroom because science trys to explain things naturally... not divinely... he might exist but he's barely told us anything, he wants us to figure the world for ourselves.

God explains why, we have to figure out how... think about it.

[sethwoolley]

I liked the first guy much better, as he at least tried to have a biological underpinning.

The lady is just off in her own world -- doesn't seem to have a clue about philosophy of science. Somebody take her degree away!

[green525252]

Religion is not the essence of the dark ages. It is a personal belief of a higher power. The idea that the universe was created by God isn't any more or less ridiculous than anything science says. Neither religion nor science holds all the answers, but when they are used cooperatively to tell a larger story of how we got here and why we do things, they can explain much more than they do individually.

[sethwoolley]

Religion doesn't explain anything. Science may explain religion, but religion can't explain anything. The first guy is arguing that we should basterdize our mind to religion to ensure society lasts longer? The Dark Ages here we come!

[sethwoolley]

This is Templeton Foundation funded. It's essentially a group of people dedicated to trying to resolve religion and science.

Guess what? It will never happen. As Dawkins said at a TED -- we need an anti-Templeton Foundation.

Yes, religion is the essence of the dark ages.

[xiner]

John Templeton abuses science with his goddamn money. Look up his entry on Wikipedia.

[grizley123]

shit... theology? what is that? theology has nothing to do with science. look at dawkins views on religion. how can one even believe that bible is sth more than a book? bible is just a book. the same kind of book as greek mythology or brown's "da vinci code"

[lingmu98]

网络不好，看不起来

[xiner]

Not worth it.

[halftimesportscards]

There is one true way to interpret the Bible. But everybody is different, so their views won't entirely match up (which is o.k. since we're human). That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Take any song for example. It has 1 true meaning to the writer, but others may use their interpretation to fit their own lives. The Bible and evolution can be similar in the fact that nobody today was alive to witness it so long ago. That's when it comes down to what you believe, and nothing is wrong with that.

[batukhan]

Sure, but Science is different than religion and music. You can't interpret the laws of gravity differently because of your views. That's why it is truly universal.

[halftimesportscards]

But science is also different because they are ALWAYS looking for answers. "Scientists are shocked to find out" or "Scientist are stunned because of this happening." You see it everywhere. Not exactly a true thing when things are changing. In 1981, scientists discover that people are composed of the same elements of the earth (something the Bible pointed out 2000+ years earlier). While some may like the mystery of looking for answers, Christianity has an answer (but for me, THE answer).

[halftimesportscards]

If someone wants to believe that they came from monkeys, let them.. I know that I sure am not from one. Have you ever seen or heard of factual evidence of a monkey having a human child?? All the zoos I see don't have any miracles like that happening.

 The funny thing about the Bible is that it has 774,000 words, 66 books, 1,189 chapters, and 31,173 verses.. And not ONCE does it contradict itself like any human would. You don't have to be a Christian to study it. But go find out yourselves.

[batukhan]

I thought about contradiction yesterday and came up with this:

If Bible didn't contradict itself, then there would be only one true way to interpret it. But there isn't, cause why else would there be so many different strains of Christianity with slightly different views. But, there's only one strain of science. The one that's true, peer-review-able and repeatable.

[batukhan]

Also, i'd like to clarify the monkey question you asked.

Because of evolution, humans developed from apes. But the monkeys you see in the zoo, ALSO developed from THOSE APES in the past. We may have a common ancestor, but in 6 million years of evolution, we've evolved into two completely different species. We're not the monkeys in the zoo, and they are not us. However we were the same, 6 million years ago. That's the point of evolution.

[xiner]

The bible says you came from dirt. I choose apes, but that's just me.

[ApparitionZ]

There is absolutely no scientific evidence to support the fable known as Adam and Eve. Evolution, in one form or other, is much more logical.

[warrio0069]

This was wonderful, and thank you to all involved. It's too bad we couldn't also see the debate section of the night along with this. I'll suscribe in hopes of seeing other discussions like this. Thanks.

It's worthy to note that cooperation in the animal kingdom can and does exists between non-related species, such as (I believe) foxes and badgers in their hunt for gophers, and the display of turn-taking as they both fed off the same kill. Then also there's the symbiotic relationships...

[SexyTime2323]

I can't listen to her lecture. Boring sauce.

"I am going to show that peoples' perception of goodness in animals is rooted in their worldview." - I don't even write crap like that in my introductory philosophy class. Ok maybe a little...

[Smugglarn]

Interesting that the religious cause is championed by a woman. They have undoubtedly been the ones that suffered most under religious oppression. However, they are also the ones who suffers most in life hence relying most on rewards in "paradise" after death. Therefore, any case made for religion made by a woman is truly pathetic.

[martinautours]

do you think it's pathetic or interesting? it seems that women are more willing to acquiesce to subjugation than men, and even support it against their own best interest. is this a good example of patience or ignorance of reality?

[a2daredevil00]

Lady, PROVE your claim of the supernatural. That's the bottom line... Her last line has no real merit. Please EXPLAIN this God, don't invoke "mystery" to explain something!

[1957hutch]

So why is he quoting from a trial that took place 80 years ago, a trial himself calls a circus. Ridiculous.

[mintoO2cOolv2]

man...religion...its trying so hard to survive...religion has all the answers...but no one know if they are correct...science on the other hand as only a fraction of answers but all of them are correct...atleast in this dimension...hehe!! trying to mix science and religion is like trying to hold back piss while shitting...it can be done but its really horrible.

[proffromgview]

You over-stated your case. Science is always reforming, always changing, always refuting its previous theories. Very foolish to state that "science's answers are always right." You mean the scientists that used leeches? Geo-Centric cosmology?

[mintoO2cOolv2]

the leech therapy is a scientifically recognised therapy. The medicinal leech, Hirudo medicinalis, which is native to Europe, and its congeners have been used for clinical bloodletting for thousands of years. Bloodletting still has its place in the treatment of a few diseases, including hemochromatosis and polycythemia; it is practiced by specifically trained practitioners in hospitals, using modern techniques.science unlike religion encorporates all it can for its perfection.

[mintoO2cOolv2]

the leech therapy is a scientifically recognised therapy. The medicinal leech, Hirudo medicinalis, which is native to Europe, and its congeners have been used for clinical bloodletting for thousands of years. Bloodletting still has its place in the treatment of a few diseases, including hemochromatosis and polycythemia; it is practiced by specifically trained practitioners in hospitals, using modern techniques.science unlike religion encorporates all it can for its perfection.

[proffromgview]

Do you not get my point, or are you just being deliberately obtuse? Some people who don't know better act and talk like science is god personified, and has been that way forever. When, actually, science has proven to be full of blunders and muddle-headed thinking. Like what you're doing now.

[mintoO2cOolv2]

muddle headed? i dont think so. i proved my point that different theories work at different places,and all of them work perfectly within their domains,without any flaws,a perfect example...

[mintoO2cOolv2]

example:the laws of conservation of mass and energy,according to enstien's e=mc2 is wrong and according to u a 'blunder'because mass can be completely converted to energy and vice versa.but in mechanics and thermodynamics we repeatedly apply the 2 consevation laws and predict the right outcome each and every time. so what seems to u a blunder seems to me a respectable viewpoint in understanding the underlying mystery of this world.

[mintoO2cOolv2]

example:the laws of conservation of mass and energy,according to enstien's e=mc2 is wrong and according to u a 'blunder'because mass can be completely converted to energy and vice versa.but in mechanics and thermodynamics we repeatedly apply the 2 consevation laws and predict the right outcome each and every time. so what seems to u a blunder seems to me a respectable viewpoint in understanding the underlying mystery of this world.

[mintoO2cOolv2]

and because every POV works well within its limited domain i raise the point about science's perfection.and no plz dont give urself airs because u dont know any better than me. and no i dont not consider science to be my god. i have a different view about god. and its not at all what all the great religions of the world tell us about.and because i understand the purpose and nature of science. i respect ur viewpoint too.i never said that science is constant and absolute yes it indeed changes.

[mintoO2cOolv2]

geo-centric cosmology can still be applied for predicting the movement of stars,and comming of comets etc in the nightsky which in turn is a fairly effective aid for navigation and has been used long before the first magnets were even discovered.

[mintoO2cOolv2]

geo-centric cosmology can still be applied for predicting the movement of stars,and comming of comets etc in the nightsky which in turn is a fairly effective aid for navigation and has been used long before the first magnets were even discovered.

[mintoO2cOolv2]

man...religion...its trying so hard to survive...religion has all the answers...but no one know if they are correct...science on the other hand as only a fraction of answers but all of them are correct...atleast in this dimension...hehe!! trying to mix science and religion is like trying to hold back piss while shitting...it can be done but its really horrible.

[Bioloser]

Is this like the longest video ever on youtube? o_O

[nola1012]

haha are you kidding me?

[Dinamic99]

very interesting ] thanksfo rsharing this with all of us

[EverettsVLOG]

quite an atheist reading list you got there

[effinyeah]

lol......theology.

[PITIREY]

pseudo-scientists

[rosexec]

what a bunch of psychos !!! psychos with imaginary friends. get real assholes

[steinrockk]

You can make a hat out of a newspaper.

[tcjohnwang]

An author once wrote this:

Science is trying to define life without love.

And I'm going to add to it:

Jesus is life and is love.

[Kushrada]

You can love with out jesus and can feel love with out him/her/it. Jesus is just a safty to fall back on when your love or the love of other(s) is diminished or lost. But thats just my opinion.

[psycofloyd]

@Kushrada Jeremiah 17:9

[aerycksmusic]

@Kushrada - Of course, even on a purely natural historical level that love would have been there long before we were even born. ;)

[antijudea]

- That might be, but science is about defining NATURE, with love, as opposed to Judeo-Christianity, which is completely against Nature.,

[suprabuddha]

Since you love jesus so much why don't you marry him???

[xiner]

He wants to.

[ClerosNZ]

science + religion = doesn't work

[Birdtrooper]

Can any other atheists who've already watched this tell me if this is worth watching ? Or is this just more dumbass theists making themselves out to be experts in sciences they don't even understand, rehashing refuted arguments, pretending not to be selfishly seeking a pat on the head from God, getting defensive for no good reason, ignoring facts in lieu of fantasy, lying & overall saying stupid shit ? Because hilarious as that is, I don't think I want to waste my time watching it right now.

[ConradZaar]

Schloss' talk is a survey of recent biological theories of altruism, which doesn't mention religion. Murphy explicitly discusses theology, but does so mainly to historicize the applications of evolutionary theory to social and economic issues. She is sympathetic to theology in some ways, and suggests (contra Sam Harris) that scientific materialism cannot provide an adequate ground for ethics, but she is certainly not preaching. I am an atheist, and wasn't offended.

[ConradZaar]

Schloss' talk is a survey of recent biological theories of altruism, which doesn't mention religion. Murphy explicitly discusses theology, but does so mainly to historicize the applications of evolutionary theory to social and economic issues. She is sympathetic to theology in some ways, and suggests (contra Sam Harris) that scientific materialism cannot provide an adequate ground for ethics, but she is certainly not preaching. I am an atheist, and wasn't offended.

[ylk123]

holy eff... i jus wasted bou 2 hrs

[ylk123]

holy eff... i jus wasted bou 2 hrs

[lovedeanguitars]

hey everybody if your looking for something to watch check out my guitar videos

[SakuraHomeStar]

Yeah, I agree... (and extremely bpring to me anyway)

[cornwallace]

This was so poorly thought out. Why would anyone tape this?

[SakuraHomeStar]

Sorry to be like so unbelieveabley random but whenever I try to upload a video (I use windows movie maker vista) it always says invalid file format and I don't use flass or anything?? Thank you

[UlnitZ]

89 fucking minutes ... holy shit ...

[YawnGod]

While other animals (as far as I/we know) do not have written or oral history, because we do this gives us a 3th instinct (like 6th sense), the first two being 1) genetic instinct, and 2) personal memory. It is because of history, for lack of a better term, that we have learned that "altruism" (better yet, "helping people", I believe that altruism is an incorrect term philosophically) has beneficial uses, the ultimate benefical use being in another's debt, i.e. favors.

[YawnGod]

14:19

The guy at the podium said, "...produced by Darwinian selection theory and social data, that is, it would lead us..."

e.g. does not mean "that is".

i.e. means "that is".

This guy, with all his Ph.D.s, is stupid. And anyway, there is a major flaw with the whole "altruism is not compatible with Darwinism", in that we, humans, have collective memory, and therefore altruism *can* be "learned" and taken as an adaptation in order to be more successful.

[theiamania]

But that doesn't explain why we biological are made in such a way that when you do something good for someone else then your brain produces endorphins that makes you feel happy, and therefor wants to do it again

[altoid2k4]

people doing good things = people living in peace = more people

people doing bad things = people trying to kill each other = less people... the purpose of any species is to procreate it's quite obvious

[theiamania]

I wrote it as a reply to YawnGod. So yes it is sought of obvious. What i don't get though is Jeffrey Schloss's dismissal of the game theory on the notion that if you can fake being virtuous then it is better then in fact being virtuous. But human nature was evolved in groups were people did know each other and therefor you could not fake it because the group would know.

[YawnGod]

Well, among other things, the placebo effect.

If I think that helping you does "good", then I feel better. If I think this sugar pill I'm taking does "good", then I feel better.

While I don't think that true altruism exists, if we say that it does for the sake of argument, if you're a "true" altruist or a selfish (reciprocal) altruist, both acts end up benefiting the actor, either mentally like in the former, or materialistally, like the latter. In a nutshell. Scrotum.

[prettypanda90]

She looks familiar. Did you ever posted your profile on a celebrity and millionaire dating site called "wealthydater. com",.I saw your profile there few weeks ago.

[johnyboy49]

whoohoo!! Science and Religion are friends now

[YawnGod]

Friends like Itchy and Scratchy.

[JehovahsBastardChild]

Scientific theory and theory in normal day to day use is not the same thing. This is just shroudy apologetics at best.

[satyriconcon]

that was really interesting TYVM

[unpinchevato]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....even more boring than the classes i have right now.

[ObbiQuiet]

Yay. You are the future of the world.

[kyounao]

OMG! I just glanced down at the time 89 MINUTES! :'(

[davepaulyoung]

wow! My IQ must have dropped at least 20 points from watching this video.

[lucious1213]

wow i actually took me the whole day to watch this thing because a kept coming back to it LOL this is awesome

[mcches33]

Very good. This made me think. Those of you proclaiming science! science! science! and treading God underfoot should have enjoyed the scientific approach taken is trying to understand morality. The end of the story is that there appears to be many valid opinions on the matter. If you don't believe in God and only believe in evolution, shouldn't you feel pretty confident that morality can be explained purely through evolution? Sounds like they've tried but failed so far.

[DrSebby]

there should really just be two countries; one filled with scientists and the other educated/informed/intelligent folk walking about

And another filled with the dumb people: G.W.Bush-lovin-Christian-retar­ds...that way, with their knowledge of nothing, and their overt aggression AND stupidity; they could re-create the dark ages and live in a hell of their own making, without making the rest of us constantly carry them on our backs into the light of learning, understanding...oh, and medecine ;)

[tonygem]

I think we have that to a degree in this country. The south is really a low consciousness area of the country, not including Florida.

[Samurai4Jesus]

For someone praising science so much, you sure are ignorant.

[arby86]

haha well anyone who believes that jesus is the answer and nothing but is quite ignorant don't you think. the message of Jesus is obviously great, but wheres the factual evidence, other than literature written 2000 + yeras ago.. why is it that there isn't a constructed religon on "I don't know" that is the most plausible religion in my mind, beacause NOBODY knows!!! the ignorance is embedded with the ppl who KNOW god is creator , give me a break.

[Birdtrooper]

Now that's just real Galton eugenics, not the connoted fake, shallow form perverted by them [ like everything else they get their grubby little hands on ]. Excellent idea dude, I couldn't agree more.

[DrSebby]

...It always annoys me to see these stuffy dueche-bags yapping away and missing basic concepts as they blunder through their little 'effort' trying to look academic, while they engage in mental mastubation.

The simple fact is 'survival of the fittest' is a term coined so that the stupid people will get the basic gist of how evolution works. Humans evolved as a HIGHLY social species, so any benefits of blatant selfishness cannot be quantified in simplistic terms. Don't they get that?

[Spinachcookies]

These people don't even deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as Einstein or Newton...they have no proof for anything they say, it's all rubbish. Having a PhD prooves nothing, good for you if you can memorize hundreds or pages of garbage that another person invented, because a PhD isn't much more than that.

[johnyboy49]

dude, Einstein and Newton had theories too. people just accepted them as truths because they were logically put. Like this video

[mintoO2cOolv2]

dude,einstein's and newtons theories were based on "discovering" the facts of natural world,they can be verified.these guys on the other hand are "inventing" facts to support their theory. how do u propose we verify their theory?

[Chaffinch4]

When he said the event was sponsored by the John Templeton Foundation my heart sank ...

[Broojo02]

89 minutes!! Bugger me!

[ryujin1it]

science and religion in the same sentence= nothing about lost time...

[metex75x]

hi grup etken listen please thanks

[Spinachcookies]

This is all a lie. Nice try with the depressing music and gothic clothes but it just made it even worse. Also, you are just trying to seem smart by using lots og big words but you don't even use them right so you shouldn't even deserve to be speaking up there.

[crashing3]

Dont be a dick, So they have a different viewpoint then you, doesn't mean you should call them a liar. Another thing they are probably really smart it takes brains to get a PhD, so they have more of a clue then you. In case your forgotten the great minds Charles Darwin, Albert Einstein, and Isaac Newton were all criticized, and you know how that turned out. Last everyone has music at the beginning of a presentation it captures peoples attention and I wouldn't call a jacket and tie Gothic.

[ObbiQuiet]

I love how Theology is still considered a valid academic field.