Not to hijack the conversation, but here are the other two videos in the Qualiasoup series: Morality 2: Not-so-good books and Morality 3: Of objectivity and oughtness. Since the first one was so well received, I thought I would share the remaining installments.
Both are well worth watching, as they are clear, concise, and just generally well done. Pay particular attention starting at the 11:58 mark of Morality 3, wherein Craig and the ontological argument are handed a logical comeuppance.
I definitely have enjoyed these videos and thank you posting. There's a lot of information crammed in and the visual aids are useful.
ReplyDeleteI think both videos get at the point I was trying to make at the end of class today, that basing morality or any belief in something "supernatural" or "immaterial" is misguided.
And, as outlined in video 3, I believe there can be no objective truth to morality, but, I think we can come to agree on a few things.
I find it much more comforting, and ultimately unifying, to base our values on something we all share, and that is biology.
"We value generosity, compassion, and fairness because we experience and appreciate their positive effects. When they are proclaimed as Divine qualities, this isn't because anyone has observed such qualities in a god. No god has yet been established to exist, let alone one whose nature we can study. All that's happening is the qualities that we've already judged independently to have value are being ascribed to an entity declared to exist, and to be good by definition."
ReplyDelete