Part 3 of 6 - Morality (Audio) - Sam Harris & Richard Dawkins conversation - 12 April 2011

Who Says Science Has Nothing to Say About Morality?
A conversation between Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris.
It took place on 12 April 2011 at Sheldonian Theatre, Oxford, UK

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• sam harris
• richard dawkins
• 2011
• morality
• moral
• moral landscape
• god debate
• atheist

[Dustin2524]

Thank you for uploading all these videos. It is much appreciated.

[manonthemount]

@ItsameAlex it's not a debate

[warren52nz]

What a GEM!!! Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins together!

Even with still shots, BRILLIANT!

[aguilerafanaz]

GENIUS SESSION!

[jrwilson98]

@feluda2002 Morality is not the ability to choose between good and bad; we all can do that. It is the ability to choose between the lesser of two evils. If you look at both scenarios one person dies and four are saved, but in the hospital scenario an innocent person would be killed against their will. I think the difference between the two scenarios in obvious.

[deadpisser88]

@feluda2002 I understood your initial point. It problem really is more difficult than the scenario/question they ask, and one should consider it further (which is what you did, of course). Either way, the very question being asked is still a simple one, so you very well can give a simplified answer. Extra thought: The train scenario might not give the person time to weigh in all the variables and only gives you time to choose two outcomes (although this is an added variable now that I think...).

[feluda2002]

@deadpisser88

that is true. But the questions are framed in these debates in a way that morality or ethics does not have a straight answer to it. and then finally they consider the inner variables and it gets confusing more. I am just saying that if there are such important variable then one should start considering them as well. I agree with most of what you say but not the conclusion that you can have a simple choice for a simplified version of a really complicated question.

[deadpisser88]

@feluda2002 Well, that's not the question at hand, is it? The scenario(s) don't assume your add-on(s) at all. It's simply saying that if you had the choice to go with (a) or (b), which would you choose? That's all it's asking. It's assuming that you are blind to the many variables present. When you include those variables into the equation, then it becomes a different question/scenario. It's a simple choice based on what you know. That's all.

[feluda2002]

These people seems to take life of a person as a statistical quantity. Its not and the value of life can really differ from person to person. what if the people having problem with kidney, heart and other problems never values their life enough and indisciplined lifestyle led to those issues.? However the fit person had valued his life and practiced discipline to enjoy it longer. what if the people in the trolley line were all drunk or suicidal? life is a really variably valuable thing

[ItsameAlex]

11:42 onwards, Sam Harris PWNS Dawkins.