The Great Debate Panel: Sam Harris, Steven Pinker, Peter Singer, Patricia S. Churchland... Part 1

The Great Debate Panel

Speakers: Steven Pinker, Sam Harris, Patricia Churchland, Lawrence Krauss, Simon Blackburn, Peter Singer and Roger Bingham.

A lively panel discussion between Steven Pinker, Sam Harris, Patricia Churchland, Lawrence Krauss, Simon Blackburn, Peter Singer. If human morality is an evolutionary adaptation and if neuroscientists can identify specific brain circuitry governing moral judgment, can scientists determine what is, in fact, right and wrong?
------

The Great Debate
On November 6th, 2010 a panel of renowned scientists, philosophers, and public intellectuals gathered to discuss what impact evolutionary theory and advances in neuroscience might have on traditional concepts of morality. If human morality is an evolutionary adaptation and if neuroscientists can identify specific brain circuitry governing moral judgment, can scientists determine what is, in fact, right and wrong? The panelists were psychologist Steven Pinker, author Sam Harris, philosopher Patricia Churchland, physicist Lawrence Krauss, philosopher Simon Blackburn, bioethicist Peter Singer and The Science Network's Roger Bingham.

Recorded live at the Arizona State University Gammage auditorium.

"The Great Debate" was sponsored by the ASU Origins Project in collaboration with the ASU Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law Center for Law, Science and Innovation; the Faculty of Philosophy at the University of Cambridge; and The Science Network.

thesciencenetwork.org

Category:

Education

Tags:

• thesciencenetwork
• Steven Pinker
• Sam Harris
• Patricia Churchland
• Lawrence Krauss
• Simon Blackburn
• Peter Singer
• Roger Bingham
• morality
• science
• moral values
• secular
• humanism
• debate
• Philosophy

[crizackreggaeman]

I wish there were more panels like this in Ontario/Canada!

[nondescriptman]

@crizackreggaeman yes, and Steven Pinker could at least come back to his hometown (Montreal) once in a while... Sam Harris is touring the UK next month without having set foot in Canada. It's quite frustrating. + I missed Micheal Shermer a few months back grrrrr. Oh well...

[MrTruthAddict]

Wow, Harris makes some really great points.

I cant believe that in 2011 he has to try to convince his colleagues of this simple argument. It's kind of depressing that we aren't way beyond this argument already and we're allowing pedophiles in purple robes and backwoods hick televangelists with gullible followers to dominate the argument when it comes to morals and ethics..

[randcamp2]

It seems the debate would have avoided much of the arguments over Science as a category, if it had been suggested that Science as a discipline would/could determine the concepts of right and wrong. Then including rigorous methods of examining the world based on logical thought and observation -- such as modern philosophy -- would be an obvious fit. i.e. "Can the Scientific METHOD determine what is, in fact, right and wrong?" (vs. systems dependent on belief).

[OrganicKing]

women didn't liberate themselves to "flourish" the human species! they did it because it felt right!

[fjoo]

please remove the mic from that woman.. my ears hurt..

[ZombieLincoln666]

Singer and Blackburn, given that this is their field of study, are the only ones here that understand the difficulties of answering the question at hand.

[spiritpunker]

@FIGHTFANNERD3 It seems that Sam Harriss can not successfully deflect the criticism from Blackburn.

[TheLockon00]

Harris should be sitting in the middle.

[mitchellphillips23]

@MrTruthAddict Haha. The name-caller and stereotyper dares to comment on morals and ethics.

[FIGHTFANNERD3]

pinker and sam and Lawrence are the only logical ones here

[FIGHTFANNERD3]

6:49 ignorant thing to say truly stupid

science ftw 

[FIGHTFANNERD3]

that girl is clueless