[MD] A Science of Morals

Thu Apr 1 17:58:48 PDT 2010

Well, I've always thought the phrase was terribly 
unfortunate in Lila, and I have absolutely no hope that 
Harris is going to say something terribly interesting about 
science and morality, but that's only because I already 
happen to think that the humanists have, since the 
Renaissance, already be fighting and winning the battle 
against evil the best that anybody could.  Which is to say: 
I have no idea what physics or biology is going to say 
about Kant's question, "What should we hope for?", though 
if people like Harris and E. O. Wilson can help push crazy 
creationist neocons off the scene, that I'd be mighty 
appreciative of.

What do you think the conversation is that we should have 
been having?  Perhaps because I'm thinking of, in the 
above, the high-falutin' intellectual discourse of moral 
philosophy that doesn't concern, say, my mom or dad, I've 
caught you at cross-purposes.  What do you think a "
science of morals" is going to be, or at least, what should 
we be talking about?

Matt

> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 11:59:53 -0400
> From: peterson.steve at gmail.com
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] A Science of Morals
> 
> Hi Matt, Ian,
> 
> I am surprised that there is not more interest in Harris's endeavor
> toward a science of morals on this forum. I once thought that Pirsig's
> MOQ may provoke an intellectual conversation about morals in the US,
> but after about 20 years it seems less and less likely that the MOQ
> will gain much traction in mainstream thought. I have much more hope
> for Harris's upcoming book to start the conversation that we have so
> sorely needed to have.
> 
> Best,
> Steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Ian Glendinning
> <ian.glendinning at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Very interesting .... missed that one, and the resulting
> > correspondence too. Thanks Steve.
> > Regards
> > Ian
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Matt Kundert
> > <pirsigaffliction at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> What's interesting about Sam Harris is that--more than
> >> anybody else in recent memory that I can think of--he's
> >> somehow bridged the still-growing gap in America between
> >> academic-intellectual conversation circles and
> >> popular-intellectual conversation circles.  There's been a
> >> number of books over the years about the decline of the
> >> "public intellectual" in America over the years, and I take
> >> them to be on the whole right, and Rorty is often held up
> >> as the last academic philosopher to take on the role of
> >> public intellectual, but the fact of the matter is that
> >> nobody read Rorty outside of academic circles.  If you
> >> didn't work at a University, the chances of you having
> >> read Rorty was slim to none.  But he was the best example
> >> people could come up with.  That's how bad it has gotten.
> >>
> >> This current resurgence of the formerly nascent, and never
> >> finished, "battle" between science and religion has thrust a
> >> number of people into the spotlight.  It will be interesting to
> >> see whether we can get some traction for other
> >> academic-intellectuals to make the cross into popular
> >> discussions of issues, and re-establish a _tradition_ in this
> >> country (which is, on the other hand, wishful thinking as
> >> long as primary education is funded by zipcode and the
> >> news remains a slice of the entertainment divisions of media
> >> conglomerates).
> >>
> >> Matt
> >>
> >>> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:24:02 -0400
> >>> From: peterson.steve at gmail.com
> >>> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> >>> Subject: [MD]  A Science of Morals
> >>>
> >>> Hi All,
> >>>
> >>> Recently, Sam Harris gave a TED talk.  He has a book coming out called
> >>> "The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values."
> >>>
> >>> I hope you check it out:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.project-reason.org/newsfeed/item/moral_confusion_in_the_name_of_science3/
> >>>
> >>> Regardless of what he will be able to do with a science of morals, I
> >>> think he will start an important conversation about ethics.
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> Steve
> >>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> >>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> >>> Archives:
> >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> >>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >>
> >> _________________________________________________________________
> >> The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
> >> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID27925::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:032010_3
> >> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> >> Archives:
> >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> >> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >>
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html

_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/210850552/direct/01/