Archived (((The Problem With Miracles - Sam Harris))) (youtube.com)
submitted ago by antiracistMetal
Posted by: antiracistMetal
Posting time: 7 months ago on
Last edit time: never edited.
Archived on: 8/20/2020 10:00:00 AM
Views: 25
SCP: 0
1 upvotes, 1 downvotes (50% upvoted it)
Archived (((The Problem With Miracles - Sam Harris))) (youtube.com)
submitted ago by antiracistMetal
view the rest of the comments →
[–] chirogonemd 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Why? You were the one who disliked the open-question. You pointed me to Moore's argument. Sam is dancing around it the entire time.
Basically the whole book is Sam saying there is an X that is good, though not God, some social-political state (a material situation) that we can discover that objectively maximizes the frequency of brain states that equate to human flourishing, because they are concomitant with the said material situation. He's assuming what the good is. He makes several appeals to ways that we could, for instance, objectively identify the optimum world cuisine on some physiological criteria about which promoted the highest human health. Here again, he's determining the good. His own values become the objectively best ones.
It's some form of utilitarianism, just more rooted in material states and so the notion that it could be studied empirically makes it super fashionable sounding.
It can't be ignored how consonant this whole idea is with dialectical materialism. Instead of implicitly burying the connection between material status and well-being, he's just making these things explicit by making the move to the brain. This material situation causes this brain state and this is the best possible brain state. Take those bourgeois brain states and spread the wealth! This is a less transcendental form of Marxism waiting to fucking flower. It sounds so reserved and reasonable, but underneath there an answer being given to the question: well, who gets to decide? Well, the non-partisan neuroscientists and psychologists of course.
The same ones telling us today that little boys can be little girls. It's only about brain states! If the brain state is better for this boy when he thinks he's a girl, this is morally superior to put him in a dress!
I'm telling you, Sam's moral philosophy is a neo-Marxism parading as data-driven science.
@PeaceSeeker
[–] antiracistMetal [S] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
There's utilitarianism, consequentialism, and realism. I'm thankful to Harris for converting me from relativist to realist.
I love Moore's open question argument. I just don't agree with it.
Your concerns about authority and Marxism do not undermine the case for realism.
@peaceseeker
[–] chirogonemd 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
True.
Peace has pretty much been saying the same thing to you the whole time, re: the authority :).
In the case of the good, what's real? I just don't agree with Harris that it is an objective state whose determining features are true for everyone. I personally think that it follows from evolution that what is good for some, should be necessarily not good for others. As individuals and even as groups, I think we represent different "reaches" that ongoing human existence makes that are naturally at odds with each other. It's sort of like distributing risk in an investment portfolio. I don't think the "universe" knows what the good is. I think we are discovering it through intense competition and whatever produces the most stable situation is the best "good" that we have at the moment.
This makes me a moral anti-realist?
I think this discriminates me from both you and Peace. But as you know, I've had some incentive to begin exploring his side of the debate more lately.
@PeaceSeeker
[–] PeaceSeeker 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Trust me, if a framework where "science can determine human values" is adopted, then the same people telling us what constitutes hate speech will be deciding the "objective" standards of goodness.
No ADL, I don't hate the Jews. I love the Jews!
@antiracistmetal