/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.8510927]

What do you guys think about this?

>pic related

It didn't appear to provide a scientific basis for morality, which was disappointing.

Additionally, what are your thoughts on whether science can address ethics?

[Anonymous No.8510938]

>>8510927
Science ensures the accuracy of predictions. When we propose actions in a negotiation, we do so believing that these actions will result in something satisfying some values we hold. In this way science helps us negotiate.

Also basis of morality don't real.

[Anonymous No.8510946]

Never read it but I hate when books do that.

I think science can address ethics to a degree if you base arguments on sociology, animal behavior, and evolution and consider these as scientific foundations. Otherwise, I don't think "hard" science is anywhere close yet to tackling human behavior.

[Anonymous No.8511106]

>>8510946
It's one of his better books, Sam is highly educated. Not sure if it was one of his books or some other books but morals and ethics in modern society are just an extrapolation from the original tribal hunter - gather life, family first, friends second, tribe third. Religion just took it all to the next level for better or worse, I am thinking worse since I like to think independently and outside the box a lot. Sam shits on the Abrahamics a lot but I find people who do this were usually indoctrinated with one flavor or another as a child and grow to be butthurt over the years like Dawkins for example. I like Sam though and not sure about his childhood and don't really care but he is well spoken, his audio books are great where as Dawkins has an irritating squeaky voice.

[Anonymous No.8511133]

>>8510927
>It didn't appear to provide a scientific basis for morality, which was disappointing.
keep searching for that ether bro

[Anonymous No.8511187]

>>8511106
>write trivial books on religion
>promote muh spirituality
>somehow make a decent amount of money and be considered a 'public intellectual'

If I had no sense of pride in myself I could see this as a comfortable lifestyle and healthy boost to my ego.
I'm continually finding myself amazed that people can make money and a reputation by cashing in on the easy markets of religion, pop-sci and politics.
What is the appeal to the buyers /sci/?
Is it that these are markets which require no prerequisite reading and can make you feel smart? (i.e. laziness and ego-boosting)

[Anonymous No.8511191]

>>8510927
>Sam Harris

Fuck off back to >>>/reddit/.

[Anonymous No.8511195]

>>8510927
>scientific basis for morality

if you think this is even possible then you're lost and confused. go actually talk to philosophers (real ones).

You can always go to leddit and read some:
https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/3p9mf7/why_does_everyone_on_rbadphilosophy_hate_sam/

[Anonymous No.8512517]

>>8511191
This has never been funny.

[Anonymous No.8512529]

>>8511133
>>8511195

This is precisely what I thought, until two days ago, when I stumbled upon this:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2877956

It seems to provide what Harris was unable to.

[Anonymous No.8512937]

>moral realism

[Anonymous No.8512968]

>>8511106
>Sam shits on the Abrahamics a lot but I find people who do this were usually indoctrinated with one flavor or another as a child and grow to be butthurt over the years like Dawkins for example
Dawkins was not indoctrinated as a child. He had a secular upbringing.

>Harris is really well-educated

So is pretty much much every author of every philosophy book I've ever read. That doesn't mean much.

[Anonymous No.8513003]

>>8511187
I think he was just addressing the hypocrisy coming from the religious right on where morals actually come from. It's up for debate is all.

>>8512968
That's also debatable.
>Dawkins describes his childhood as "a normal Anglican upbringing".[34] He embraced Christianity until halfway through his teenage years, at which point he concluded that the theory of evolution was a better explanation for life's complexity, and ceased believing in a god
I think he has a huge chip on his shoulder over that.

Harris is educated along the lines of neuroscience or some such thing so it qualifies him to talk about morals as much as anyone else. His work with MRI scans is fairly interesting. He had a more secular upbringing that Dawkins I suppose but still not untouched. No one in the west is completely secular because of the massive influence of the church everywhere. I think the rebellion is natural and healthy in a lot of cases.
>His father came from a Quaker background and his mother is Jewish.[14] He was raised by his mother following his parents' divorce when he was aged two.[15] Harris has stated that his upbringing was entirely secular,[16] and his parents rarely discussed religion, though it was always a subject that interested him

[Anonymous No.8513019]

Well noobs,firstly anon what do you mean by scientifici basis for morality?There is morality on all humans and animals,lol do we need to prove it to ya.
Secondly,if you are asking about the motive or reason to be moral,it makes you happy that's the reason why you must be moral,that's what Dalai Lama,David Hume thinks and i think ^^.

'When I do good, I feel good. When I do bad, I feel bad. That's my religion.' Abraham Lincoln

[Anonymous No.8513046]

>>8512517
It's not supposed to be. Fuck off, this has nothing to do with science and math.

[Anonymous No.8513791]

>>8510927
Popphi garbage