I'll be posting a series of presentations on the topic of science and morality in the weeks to come.
.
Has Dilbert Refuted Sam Harris?
You've probably seen Sam Harris argue that science can answer moral questions because science deals with facts and values are a sort of fact (logic buffs should see straight through the problems with this argument). Lots of thinkers have weighed in on this issue, but as far as I'm aware, no one has challenged the idea of values to begin with... except Dilbert :)
I'll be posting a series of presentations on the topic of science and morality in the weeks to come.
.
I'll be posting a series of presentations on the topic of science and morality in the weeks to come.
.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Lots of thinkers have weighed in on this issue, but as far as I'm aware, no one has challenged the idea of values to begin with"
ReplyDeleteI think a lot of philosophers have challenged the idea of values, especially the existentialists. In fact, an empirical view of the world, I would say, necessitates an admission that values are relative, and there is no "objective" value to anything.
Regardless, I value this cartoon because it's funny. Nice post.
Oh, I meant no one has challenged the idea of values SINCE the publication of Sam Harris' book The Moral Landscape. Everyone currently seems to take the idea for granted.
ReplyDeleteThere is, as you rightly argue, a long tradition of philosophers providing powerful challenges to the idea of values, starting with the Pre-Socrates (Protagoras, for instance), and moving all the way to David Hume and Friedrich Nietzsche during and after the Enlightenment. Thanks for helping me clarify :)
Yikes, how can we put this to rest? Hmm, "Within the model of the world we humans keep in our heads, values can be seen as facts, sort of." IOW, humans are themselves the fudge-factor that makes the statement true.
ReplyDeleteExistentialists should please find other things to worry about, I think one or two of the biological sciences have this one covered.