Please use this thread to discuss Chapter 6 - A Science of Good and Evil. You're also free to create and use your own threads.
- Member Introductions & Journals
- BookTalk News & Development
- Religion, Philosophy & the Arts
- Politics, Current Events & History
- Science, Nature & Technology
- General Discussion & Miscellaneous Topics
- Book Suggestions, Polls, & Reviews
- Additional Book Discussions
- Godless in America: Conversations With an Atheist - by George A. Ricker
- Interventions - by Noam Chomsky
- Religious Expression and the American Constitution - by Franklyn S. Haiman
- Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future - by Bill McKibben
- The God Delusion - by Richard Dawkins
- The Third Chimpanzee: The Evolution and Future of the Human Animal - by Jared Diamond
- The Woman in the Dunes - by Abe Kobo
- Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction - by Eugenie Scott
- The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals - by Michael Pollan
- I, Claudius: From the Autobiography of Tiberius Claudius, Born 10 B.C., Murdered and Deified A.D. 54 - by Robert Graves
- Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon - by Daniel Dennett
- A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East - by David Fromkin
- The Time Traveler's Wife - by Audrey Niffenegger
- The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason - by Sam Harris
- Ender's Game - by Orson Scott Card
- The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time - by Mark Haddon
- Value & Virtue in a Godless Universe - by Erik J. Wielenberg
- The March: A Novel - by E.L. Doctorow
- The Ethical Brain - by Michael Gazzaniga
- Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism - by Susan Jacoby
- Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed - by Jared Diamond
- The Battle for God - by Karen Armstrong
- The Future of Life - by Edward O. Wilson
- What is Good? The Search for the Best Way to Live - by A.C. Grayling
- Civilization and It's Enemies: The Next Stage of History - by Lee Harris
- Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space - by Carl Sagan
- How We Believe: Science, Skepticism, and the Search for God - by Michael Shermer
- Looking For Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow, and the Feeling Brain - by Antonio Damasio
- Lies (And the Lying Liars Who Tell Them): A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right - by Al Franken
- The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature - by Matt Ridley
- The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature - by Stephen Pinker
- Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder - by Richard Dawkins
- Atheism: A Reader - edited by S. T. Joshi
- Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century - by Howard Bloom
- The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition into the Forces of History - by Howard Bloom
- Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies - by Jared Diamond
- Demon-Haunted World: Science As a Candle in the Dark - by Carl Sagan
- Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee: An Indian History of the American West - by Dee Alexander Brown
- Future Shock - by Alvin Toffler
Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Chris OConnor |
Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil |
Lead | ||
|
Indisputable BookTalk Master
Posts: 9511 03/29/06 01:49:18 BookTalk Owner |
Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil Please use this thread to discuss Chapter 6 - A Science of Good and Evil. You're also free to create and use your own threads. |
|||
|
|
||||
GOD defiles Reason |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #1 | ||
|
Amusingly Clever
Posts: 393 04/04/06 10:15:09 Banned User |
I've been shaking my head in disbelief throughout most of what I've read so far, taking notes up to about p.31. There's so many individual things that I disagree with or have problems with that I decided to drop my pencil and skim through the rest of the book to see if it gets any better. Besides, Mad and Mal4mac have been making some of my arguments better than what I've written in my notes so far.
Then I came across this little gem on p.203: "We cannot let our qualms over collateral damage paralyze us because our enemies know no such qualms." And later: "It seems certain that collateral damage, of various sorts, will be a part of our future for many years to come." He is telling his readers that we must accept the killings of innocent people, that we will be doing this for many years to come, (get used to it?). What makes his statements any better than what can be selectively taken from the text of the Bible or the Quran? What makes Harris any less dangerous than Osama bin laden or Pat Robertson or Ann Coulter? |
|||
|
|
||||
Chris OConnor |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #2 | ||
|
Indisputable BookTalk Master
Posts: 9511 04/04/06 10:20:09 BookTalk Owner |
Quote:Osama bin Laden actually targets innocent people, whereas Harris is saying that sometimes innocent people will die when we are targeting the not-so-innocent. |
|||
|
|
||||
Chris OConnor |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #3 | ||
|
Indisputable BookTalk Master
Posts: 9511 04/04/06 10:31:59 BookTalk Owner |
In civilized countries there is a difference between intentional wrong-doing and accidental wrong-doing. Both are bad, but the former is considered worse than the later.
If you're hunting with your buddy and you accidentally fire a round into his ass you're definitely guilty of a bad thing. But if you purposely aim at his backside and squeeze off a round you've now stepped up to a much more severe crime. We punish each level of crime differently, much the same as we do for manslaughter and 1st degree murder. I agree that it is horrific when innocent people die, and I am by no means advocating we lob bombs indiscriminately and nonchalantly, but we're now facing a new type of enemy than ever before. Our enemies hide in mosques and live among the "innocents." And they do not distinguish between soldier and civilian when it comes to who they consider their enemies. We're all infidels and deserve to be slaughtered. Facing an enemy with such a vision makes for a rather messy situation. While we want to hold ourselves to a higher standard we still must pursue these terrorists before they attack again. The whole thing is messy and ugly and a direct result of their holy book instructing them to deal harshly with unbelievers. And this is what Harris is trying to get across, in my opinion. |
|||
|
|
||||
Chris OConnor |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #4 | ||
|
Indisputable BookTalk Master
Posts: 9511 04/04/06 10:33:00 BookTalk Owner |
But I have heard some of the comments Ann Coulter has made and want it understood that most conservatives don't agree with her extreme views. I know I don't.
|
|||
|
|
||||
GOD defiles Reason |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #5 | ||
|
Amusingly Clever
Posts: 393 04/04/06 11:19:07 Banned User |
p. 194 -- "... if we are willing to act in a way that guarantees the misery and death of some considerable number of innocent children, why spare the rod with suspected terrorists?"
Is Harris trying to make the case that since we're willing to accept "collateral damage," then we should accept the torture of suspected terrorists? Note that Harris is the one who uses the word "suspected" (terrorists). So he's part of the crowd who believes that the US should torture people who aren't terrorists at all. This guy is taking us backwards, not forwards. He does it again on p. 197: "if we are willing to drop bombs, or even risk that pistol rounds might go astray, we should be willing to torture a certain class of criminal suspects and military prisoners; ..." Again, the key word here is "suspected." |
|||
|
|
||||
Chris OConnor |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #6 | ||
|
Indisputable BookTalk Master
Posts: 9511 04/04/06 11:42:33 BookTalk Owner |
I'm not even to Chapter 6 yet.
|
|||
|
|
||||
riverc0il |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #7 | ||
|
Posts: 447 04/04/06 16:15:28 Witty&Wise |
i am not up to chapter six, but given the comments you have made GOD defiles Reason, i am looking forward to getting to chapter six as these views surprise me given what i have read of harris so far. he seems to come from a humanistic perspective that violence is not a good thing, so i am surprised to learn suggestions that collateral damage and not "sparing the rod" on suspected terrorists are good things. is it possible these are sarcastic remarks? Harris has made several points through chapters one through four in which he sets up a slam dunk with slight sarcasm and juxtaposing accepted with non-accepted behaviors, ideas, etc. to make a point.
|
|||
|
|
||||
riverc0il |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #8 | ||
|
Posts: 447 04/07/06 17:01:59 Witty&Wise |
Quote: Just to clarify, Harris laid out his opinion on collateral damage in Chapter 4. You may wish to take a read through that chapter. I have also commented on the issue of collateral damage according to Harris in the Chapter 4 discussion, though since he brings it up again, by all means the discussion could conitnue here too. |
|||
|
|
||||
riverc0il |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #9 | ||
|
Posts: 447 04/07/06 17:16:23 Witty&Wise |
MadArchitect, even if you decide not to read the entire text, you may wish to jump into Chapter 6 if you borrow the book from the library. Harris is addressing moral and ethical issues. The context of this discussion may rehash some issues discussed in our previous Q1 non-fiction reading. But given the fact that secular ethics are in such dispute, I think it is a vital topic for freethinkers and those in doubt of religious originated ethics to examine.
On p170, Harris makes the concession that sets up the chapter. I suspect Harris will answer with something I will not agree with though, I fear: "The problem is that once we abandon our belief in a rule-making God, the question of why a given action is good or bad becomes a matter of debate." Harris proposes questions of right and wrong are really questions about happiness and suffering and "If we are in a position to affect the happiness or suffering of others, we have ethical responsibilities toward them" (p171). I like that as a starting place, but it really doesn't get us any where other than reformatting the wording slightly. The same ethical questions remain, you have just renamed "right" as "happiness" and "wrong" as "suffering." Also, sometimes doing the right thing creates suffering in the short term for the long term greater good. Harris goes on to slam moral relativism. I have no problem with someone suggesting that moral relativism has weak points, but I do have a problem with someone making a poor arguement at it after having called relativism a "demon." |
|||
|
|
||||
riverc0il |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #10 | ||
|
Posts: 447 04/08/06 12:17:56 Witty&Wise |
Harris continues to purposefully open giant loop holes in his arguements, for what purpose I have no idea. Harris argues for the legitimacy of intuition! What a crock! I am all for giving intuition its due, a lot of great decisions are made on human intuition that can not be made based on reason and logic alone. However, a lot of bad decisions are made on intuition as well. Most notably a problem for Harris is many people intuitively feel that religion must be correct. Their intuition tells them god is with them. How can you advocate for intuition on one hand bad against faith on the other? Intuition has its place and I surely get gut feelings that I compare to my reasoning of situations, but it is often wrong, dead wrong at times, and sometimes leads us down the wrong path. Chapter Six is shaping up to be a real doozy!
|
|||
|
|
||||
riverc0il |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #11 | ||
|
Posts: 447 04/08/06 13:01:22 Witty&Wise |
I am having a hard time believing Harris is a graduate philosophy student from Stanford. While I completely disagree with his presentation of ethics and morality in this chater, his quick lip service to big issues, poor and flaw arguements, and illogical conclusions not to mention these topics not helping further the main points of the book are sub-par. Harris is defending the situation in Gitmo and condones torture of innocents, amazing. To quote one of my all time favorite movies, this book "has gone from suck to blow."
|
|||
|
|
||||
riverc0il |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #12 | ||
|
Posts: 447 04/08/06 13:05:25 Witty&Wise |
Quote: Finally made it up to this section, and that is exactly what Harris is trying to make the case for. This fits in with his previous arguement in Chapter 4 about collateral damage. Regardless of his flawed arguement, quick and flippant conclusions, and lack of logic, Harris is nothing if not consistant. |
|||
|
|
||||
GOD defiles Reason |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #13 | ||
|
Amusingly Clever
Posts: 393 04/08/06 13:43:44 Banned User |
Now that you're to this point, pay close attention to his thoughts on 'The False Choice of Pacifism.' Especially his account of defusing a situation without getting anybody killed (including himself) and then saying that what he did was "immoral."
I want to know what you think about that. |
|||
|
|
||||
riverc0il |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #14 | ||
|
Posts: 447 04/08/06 14:22:19 Witty&Wise |
I am going to have a hard time answering your question, GOD defiles Reason, without resorting to an ad hominem statement! So before I do so, let me clarify that I think Harris' idea is nuts, not Harris himself.
Seriously though, Harris considers his act immoral because he lacked the back bone to teach these guys a lesson. But GIVE ME A BREAK!!! Does he seriously think he is going to give three thugs a moral lesson simply by challenging their beliefs to the point of causing a fight? People do not learn lessons when the fight or flight instinct is envoked. People justify their actions when provoked further enforcing and solidifying pre-conceived notions. It should also be noted that the thugs in question were drunk, further evidence that they would not be taking a moral lesson from handing down a beating. It is almost like Harris is forced to attack is own actions to protect and defend his attack on pacifism. After all, how can he attack Ghandi while relating a statement in which he did a morally good thing and saved a woman from potentially being raped or worse, and doing so without violence? The main point Harris is trying to make relates back to his stance on Terrorism, "Teach them a lesson." But with terrorism, as we have seen in the Middle East in response to the United States envasion, often times hostilities provokes more hostilities. The only lesson learned in the Middle East is maybe Al Quida has a point, maybe the United States is evil. The only time you can convince someone that they need to re-evaluate their morals and ethics is when the person or group of people is actually willing to self evaluate themselves and the possibility of change. Brow beating people only encouraging a knee jerk reaction of defending more vehenomentally already established positions. Harris does have a good point about Ghandi in reference to the Hollocaust solution for the Jews committing suicide. I will conceed that extreme pacifism is not good enough, but an attempt at pacifism while keeping defenses ready is properly moral. As with many other subjects in the book, Harris takes everything at all or nothing (relativism is another good example of this all or nothing element to his flawed logic and reasoning). This thing doesn't have a spell check, does it? I know I had a few mis-spellings in their, pardon the gramatical errors if you would. |
|||
|
|
||||
JulianTheApostate |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #15 | ||
|
Posts: 254 04/16/06 22:08:21 Smarty Pants |
Harris spends a lot of time arguing against pragmatism and relativism. However, this statement of his demonstrates that he has a distorted view of those philosophies.
Relativists and pragmatists believe that truth is just a matter of consensus.Regarding moral decisions, intuition is essential. For example, my intuitions tells me that murder is wrong. Intuitive judgements are the root of morality, though intellectual reasoning, knowledge, and experience can build on that foundation. I agree with Harris's assertion that torture is no worse than collateral damage in battle. However, that leads me to a different conclusion: that war is immoral in almost all circumstances. I'm very troubled by all the civilians killed my US bombings, along with all the other victims of wartime suffering. The moral approach of maximizing happiness and reducing suffering makes a lot of sense. While I can envision scenarios in which torture or war are morally acceptable, in the real world they almost never are. |
|||
|
|
||||
misterpessimistic |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #16 | ||
|
Indisputable BookTalk Master
Posts: 4113 06/03/06 09:53:26 Indisputable BookTalk Master |
Quote: I disagree with Harris on this matter too. It is utter stupidity to think that one must endanger their lives by confronting aggression with blind aggression. The way Harris states that he handled this situation seems to me to be the best way to have handled it in this instance. He saved the girl and no one got hurt. Say Harris did choose to confront and admonish (like that would have done anything anyway)...he probably would have been hurt or maybe killed and the girl would probably have been abducted and hurt or killed. No body would have won aside from the thugs who got what they were after. If Harris was killed, the world would have lost a person who does care enough to find a way out for those in trouble and set a example of how to achieve an end without UNneccesary violence and minimal suffering. Harris complains that he only saved ONE woman and the next was not so lucky. What? How much are we as individuals expected to do in any one instance? We can only do what we can and should not feel the pressure of righting every future wrong with every response to every action. At least not in a direct sense. And what could Harris have done to reform these thugs short of killing them? Is there anything he could have said or done that would have prevented these thugs from doing the same thing again in the future? Kinda silly reasoning here. Mr. P. The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.
Once you perceive the irrevocable truth, you can no longer justify the irrational denial. - Mr. P. The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets" I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper |
|||
|
|
||||
riverc0il |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #17 | ||
|
Posts: 447 06/04/06 11:10:59 Witty&Wise |
Kinda silly reasoning here.
Absolutely. But Harris doesn't include the story as an issue of morality but rather to justify his all or nothing belief in correlation. Harris doesn't want to stop the terrorists from using Islam to justify killing, he wants to eliminate Islam completely. Which is essentially what his story is relating, that he merely stopped on act and did not stop the general trend. I suspect if the situation arrised again, Harris would behave the exact same. He merely used the experience as an example that correlated well to his reasoning for eliminating all religion. Not only silly reasoning, but highly illogical and not convincing in the slightest, even if I agreed with Harris about the incident in question. |
|||
|
|
||||
misterpessimistic |
Re: Ch. 6 - A Science of Good and Evil | #18 | ||
|
Indisputable BookTalk Master
Posts: 4113 06/05/06 12:23:00 Indisputable BookTalk Master |
Well for myself, I would love to see all faith, as it pertains to religion and god, go away in the future. And there is no way to MAKE that happen physically...it must be taught out, not beaten out. I do not think that time will come soon. I would love to see how a society would function without religion god and blind, unsupported faith. Like an experiment.
I do not think Harris has offered any support for his agrument though. The book was a rant I think...and I did enjoy it for what it was! Mr. P. The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.
Once you perceive the irrevocable truth, you can no longer justify the irrational denial. - Mr. P. The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets" I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper |
|||
|
|
||||
- Member Introductions & Journals
- BookTalk News & Development
- Religion, Philosophy & the Arts
- Politics, Current Events & History
- Science, Nature & Technology
- General Discussion & Miscellaneous Topics
- Book Suggestions, Polls, & Reviews
- Additional Book Discussions
- Godless in America: Conversations With an Atheist - by George A. Ricker
- Interventions - by Noam Chomsky
- Religious Expression and the American Constitution - by Franklyn S. Haiman
- Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future - by Bill McKibben
- The God Delusion - by Richard Dawkins
- The Third Chimpanzee: The Evolution and Future of the Human Animal - by Jared Diamond
- The Woman in the Dunes - by Abe Kobo
- Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction - by Eugenie Scott
- The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals - by Michael Pollan
- I, Claudius: From the Autobiography of Tiberius Claudius, Born 10 B.C., Murdered and Deified A.D. 54 - by Robert Graves
- Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon - by Daniel Dennett
- A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East - by David Fromkin
- The Time Traveler's Wife - by Audrey Niffenegger
- The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason - by Sam Harris
- Ender's Game - by Orson Scott Card
- The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time - by Mark Haddon
- Value & Virtue in a Godless Universe - by Erik J. Wielenberg
- The March: A Novel - by E.L. Doctorow
- The Ethical Brain - by Michael Gazzaniga
- Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism - by Susan Jacoby
- Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed - by Jared Diamond
- The Battle for God - by Karen Armstrong
- The Future of Life - by Edward O. Wilson
- What is Good? The Search for the Best Way to Live - by A.C. Grayling
- Civilization and It's Enemies: The Next Stage of History - by Lee Harris
- Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space - by Carl Sagan
- How We Believe: Science, Skepticism, and the Search for God - by Michael Shermer
- Looking For Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow, and the Feeling Brain - by Antonio Damasio
- Lies (And the Lying Liars Who Tell Them): A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right - by Al Franken
- The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature - by Matt Ridley
- The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature - by Stephen Pinker
- Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder - by Richard Dawkins
- Atheism: A Reader - edited by S. T. Joshi
- Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century - by Howard Bloom
- The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition into the Forces of History - by Howard Bloom
- Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies - by Jared Diamond
- Demon-Haunted World: Science As a Candle in the Dark - by Carl Sagan
- Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee: An Indian History of the American West - by Dee Alexander Brown
- Future Shock - by Alvin Toffler
