Panel Discussion on Morality at Beyond Belief 2008 Part 4

[tomgissing]

My favorite videos yet on youtube have been these Beyond Belief discussions. Thankyou so much for uploading.

@VarialProductions - He is certainly the most articulate!

[VarialProductions]

I feel like Sam is the only smart guy there.

[thyran]

@VarialProductions

That's because he's the only person you could understand. His points are usually pretty simple and require no actual 'field-work'. He also says things the viewer already knows.

To me, he seems to be the LEAST intelligent.

[JaredHutcheson1]

@thyran He seems to be so eager to draw conclusions while simultaneously acknowledging that neuroscience has a ways to go and all the data isn't in yet.

It also seems apparent that he carries a lot of baggage in the form of either consciously or subconsciously wanting to put all religious people in their place. In some ways I have to identify with him because he's the only person there who I know for a fact doesn't hold supernatural beliefs of any kind, but for the most part I agree with you.

[thyran]

@JaredHutcheson1

About that last point, he has admitted to being 'agnostic' on several bhuddist views like 'life after death' and was laughed at for it at a previous BB, whereas I'm assuming that all the others don't hold any supernatural beliefs at all.

[JaredHutcheson1]

@thyran I'm curious to see that discussion if you could direct me to it.

[thyran]

@JaredHutcheson1

Sadly, I can't tell you which exactly it was: thesciencenetwork. org/programgroup/beyond-belief

[psychologyprofessor]

Christ this is BRILLIANT XD

[riversonthemoon]

I'm happy you enjoyed it. There are some other videos that I've posted from this conference. Check them out if you have the time.

[SeeProfileForDetails]

@psychologyprofessor might want to replace the word Christ with something else

[Itslvle]

A really interesting discussion. It's actually quite surprising how difficult these issues are considering how crystal clear they appear when you don't think about them too deeply.

[riversonthemoon]

LOL! That's true.

But at some levels it does need to be thought out deeply. For instance, in public policy, environment management, crime and punishment, etc.

Thanks for that vid, btw.

:-)

[SeeProfileForDetails]

@Itslvle it's actually pretty simple. Measure a country's crime rates, and standard of living. Obviously the countries that have a better standard or living and less criminals, are better morally. How are laws created? Who is the authority on the morality of the law, or the correct laws? Why do people have no difficulty accepting our law system since the law is not inspired only by the holy Bible? We do not get our laws from the Bible, we get it from Humans.

[JaredHutcheson1]

@SeeProfileForDetails I would say that I don't know how to put "human happiness" into any comprehensive theory, but I'm confident that I know the few basic preconditions for a global society with maximized happiness. I think this is where Sam Harris is coming from, but his rhetoric doesn't always seem to suggest so, which leads to confusion, or the impression that he's stating the obvious.

[SeeProfileForDetails]

@JaredHutcheson1 does your precondition include hunting and fishing?

[JaredHutcheson1]

@SeeProfileForDetails No it doesn't. Why?

[SeeProfileForDetails]

@JaredHutcheson1 not only human morality must be considered but also the animal issue - killing a fly on the window, versus killing a chicken on a farm. Tough issue, I've thought about it carefully and come to the conclusion that the stupider the animal and the less brain it has, the more justification there is to harming the animal and not worrying about it as much morally. The smarter and more sensitive the animal, the more one must consider moral rights to that animal.. i.e monkeys, pigs,dog

[JaredHutcheson1]

@SeeProfileForDetails I have thought deeply about this issue and concluded that during extreme physical suffering and agony, our higher faculties are suspended because all that our consciousness can manage to focus on is the pain and stress. In this sense, many of the things we do to other animals cause "just as much" suffering as we would experience having these things done to us. And of course there is a natural gradient to our sympathy.

[JaredHutcheson1]

@SeeProfileForDetails It also might be worth mentioning that I'm a vegetarian because I don't need to eat meat and most of the meat available to me comes from factory animals that have been treated horribly. Conversely, I would never suggest that, for example, the Inuits shouldn't eat meat. That is how they survive up there. Period.

[SeeProfileForDetails]

@JaredHutcheson1 not to flies or shrimp, please distinguish which animals you are talking about, flies don't even know what the difference is between a glass window and air, moths can't even figure out to fly away when you shew them, they just keep banging head against light bulbs even if it burns them. certain animals like cows are stupider and less caring than dogs - pigs are as smart as dogs. depends on the animal

[SeeProfileForDetails]

@JaredHutcheson1 inuits don't have to eat meat they could have stuff boated in to them like how we have florida oranges or arab dates flew in by plane, inuits are living obsolete lives if they even exist now (would be interesting to find out) as actual old style inuits.. do they use electricity? why if it breaks tradition of old fire technology? killing a whale or seal means fish are saved from death too

[SeeProfileForDetails]

@JaredHutcheson1 if a moth keeps banging its head against the light bulb even after being gently shewn with a hand of a human, and it still hits the head on the light bulb over and over, it's putting itself in pain and pretty much has such a stupid retarded life, that putting it out of its misery isn't a big deal.. in fact it's life is so pointless that I wonder if it would be better off dead. Sometimes I even wonder if humans would be better off not being here and not having children at all