Loading...

Sam Harris challenged by Oxford grad student

1,234,376 views

Loading...

Loading...

Transcript

The interactive transcript could not be loaded.

Loading...

Loading...

Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Uploaded on Nov 16, 2011

My essay responding to Sam Harris's argument:

https://www.academia.edu/10290501/Sci...

With the first four words of his reply -- "The moment you grant..." -- Sam Harris evades the premise of the question I asked him on his visit to Oxford. What Harris wants you to grant is a philosophical, not a scientific, premise; hence, his "moral landscape" is not scientifically determined as he claims. But even if you allow him this first move, he can't overcome the second objection, which is that all he has to offer is common sense. Science can't actually tell us anything we couldn't already figure out through secular moral reasoning. Harris, in other words, isn't saying anything new - and certainly nothing so radical as he pretends. The title of his talk is, "Who says science has nothing to say about morality?" The problem is, on Harris' own definition of science (during the talk he says it's not strictly distinguishable from philosophy; it's something akin to fact-sensitive reasoning), his address should be re-branded, "Who says philosophy has nothing to say about morality?" -- which of course, no one has ever said. For the full video, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mm2Jrr.... My Oxford page can be seen here: http://oxford.academia.edu/BrianEarp.

  • Category

  • License

    • Standard YouTube License

Loading...

When autoplay is enabled, a suggested video will automatically play next.

Up next


to add this to Watch Later

Add to

Loading playlists...