This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Science can answer moral questions

SilentMike's Avatar Jump to comment 48 by SilentMike

46. Comment #471407 by RightWingAtheist

First, I kinda regret using the "T" word. It's a big word, and I shouldn't have done that.

But there is the problem still. If there are moral facts like there are physics facts what do you do about them? It is true that we are not forcing people to adhere to gravity, but gravity isn't about what you should do. Morality is about that. Gravity tells you what happens when you throw a rock on earth. Scientific facts about morality that I would agree exist might tell you what Sam Harris thinks about morality, or what I think, or what someone's reaction would be to a certain action they are witness to. Facts of morality simply state "X is right" and "Y is wrong", and to say that this is, like "Chimpanzees and Humans are genealogically closer to each other than either species is to baboons", just a fact that experts in the field get to decide on and you have to listen, is dangerous. I don't believe that Peter Singer is any more of a moral authority than the pope, just because he calls himself a biophysicist.

Tue, 23 Mar 2010 02:02:00 UTC | #451304