Science can answer moral questions | Sam Harris

The Relationship Between Science and Human Values

In this section, the speaker discusses the commonly held belief that science cannot provide answers to questions of morality and human values. He argues that this separation between science and human values is an illusion.

Science and Morality

• Science is often seen as having no opinion on questions of good and evil, right and wrong.

• Most people believe that science cannot answer important questions about the meaning of life or what constitutes a good life.

• The speaker argues that this separation between science and human values is dangerous and illusory.

Values as Facts

• It is often thought that facts and values belong to different spheres, but the speaker disagrees.

• Values are a certain kind of fact - they are facts about the well-being of conscious creatures.

• Our ethical obligations are based on our concern for conscious experience.

Factual Claims in Morality

• Our concern for conscious beings is based on factual claims about their potential happiness and suffering.

• Even religious beliefs about good and evil ultimately relate to consciousness.

• The conditions of well-being can be understood through scientific disciplines like neuroscience and psychology.

Describing the World as It Ought to Be

In this section, the speaker challenges the notion that there is no description of how the world ought to be based on how it actually is. He argues that values can be reduced to facts about conscious experience.

Description vs Prescription

• It is often believed that descriptions of how the world is cannot tell us how it ought to be.

• The speaker argues that values are a type of fact about conscious experience, which can inform how things ought to be.

Ethical Obligations towards Conscious Beings

• We have ethical obligations towards conscious beings because we believe they can suffer or experience happiness.

• Our concern for conscious beings is based on factual claims about their potential well-being.

Reduction of Values to Conscious Experience

• All versions of human morality and values can be reduced to a concern about conscious experience and its changes.

• Even religious beliefs about good and evil ultimately relate to consciousness.

The Continuum of Well-being

In this section, the speaker discusses the continuum of well-being for human beings. He argues that there are right and wrong answers to how humans can flourish and that morality relates to these truths.

Conditions of Well-being

• There is a continuum of well-being for human beings, ranging from failed states where everything goes wrong to idyllic states.

• There are right and wrong answers to how human communities can flourish.

• Morality relates to these truths about human well-being.

Examples of Right and Wrong Answers

• Adding cholera to water or believing in the evil eye are examples of actions that would not contribute to human flourishing.

• There are truths about how human communities can thrive, even if we don't fully understand them.

Science's Role in Understanding Human Well-being

In this section, the speaker emphasizes the role of science in understanding human well-being. He argues that our experience of the world is realized in the brain, making neuroscience and psychology crucial in studying well-being.

The Role of the Brain

• Our experience of the world is realized in the brain, regardless of what happens after death.

• Culture changes us by changing our brains, contributing to variations in how humans flourish.

• A maturing science of the mind can help us understand cultural variations in well-being.

Value as Facts About Conscious Experience

• Values can be reduced to facts about conscious experience.

• A space exists with possible changes in conscious beings' well-being, which can be explored through science.

Exploring the Moral Landscape

In this section, the speaker introduces the concept of a moral landscape, where peaks and valleys represent differences in the well-being of conscious creatures. He suggests that there may be states of well-being that are rarely accessed or inaccessible to some minds.

The Moral Landscape

• Values can be visualized as a moral landscape with peaks and valleys representing differences in well-being.

• Some states of human well-being may be rarely accessed or inaccessible to certain minds.

• There may be mystical or spiritual states as well as other unexplored states of consciousness.

Science's Limitations

• Science is not guaranteed to map the entire moral landscape or provide answers to all moral questions.

• However, if questions affect human well-being, they have answers even if we cannot find them.

• Acknowledging right and wrong answers in human flourishing will change our discussions about morality and cooperation.

Legal Corporal Punishment in Education

In this section, the speaker highlights an example of a moral issue related to human well-being - corporal punishment in education. He emphasizes that acknowledging right and wrong answers can lead to changes in societal norms.

Corporal Punishment in Education

• In 21 states, corporal punishment is legal in classrooms.

• Acknowledging right and wrong answers regarding human flourishing can lead to changes in societal norms.

New Section

In this section, the speaker discusses the religious rationale behind subjecting children to pain and violence as a way of encouraging healthy emotional development and good behavior. The concept of well-being is compared to physical health, highlighting that while both are open for revision, they still hold objective value.

Is it a good idea to subject children to pain and violence?

• The speaker questions whether it is beneficial to subject children to pain, violence, and public humiliation for healthy emotional development and good behavior.

• The religious justification for this behavior is mentioned, citing Proverbs 13, 20, and 23.

• The speaker emphasizes the importance of questioning whether such practices align with promoting well-being.

New Section

This section explores the notion of well-being and draws an analogy between physical health and moral values. It argues that just like physical health can be revised over time without being vacuous, there can be multiple peaks on the moral landscape without undermining objective morality.

Objective notion of well-being

• The concept of physical health is discussed as an analogy for understanding well-being.

• Physical health has changed over time but remains a meaningful concept despite revisions.

• Similarly, there may be multiple ways to thrive or organize societies for human flourishing without undermining objective morality.

New Section

This section further explores the idea that there can be multiple peaks on the moral landscape. It addresses concerns about universal morality requiring precepts with no exceptions by using analogies from chess and food.

Many peaks on the moral landscape

• The possibility of many peaks on the moral landscape is discussed.

• Analogies are drawn from food choices where there are many right answers but a clear distinction between food and poison.

• The speaker argues that having multiple right answers does not negate the existence of moral truths.

New Section

This section addresses concerns about exceptions in moral precepts and the need for a universal morality. Analogies from chess and cultural practices are used to illustrate the complexity of moral decision-making.

Exceptions in moral precepts

• The analogy of chess is used to explain how principles can have exceptions without undermining objectivity.

• Cultural practices, such as covering women's bodies or engaging in harmful actions, are discussed to highlight the importance of making judgments based on human well-being.

• The speaker emphasizes the need for a universal conception of human values while acknowledging that no society has found the perfect solution.

New Section

This section challenges the notion that religious demagogues are the only ones who believe in right and wrong answers to moral questions. It criticizes religion for separating moral talk from real issues of suffering and advocates for a universal conception of human values.

Separation of moral talk from suffering

• The speaker criticizes religion for dominating moral discussions without an intelligent analysis of human well-being.

• Moral talk often focuses on trivial matters like gay marriage instead of addressing significant issues like genocide or poverty.

• Advocacy for a universal conception of human values is emphasized as necessary for addressing consequential problems.

Due to limitations in available timestamps, some sections may be shorter than others.

New Section

In this section, the speaker discusses the difference of opinion regarding how to use one's time profitably. He mentions the example of Ted Bundy, a notorious criminal, to highlight the contrasting views on morality and human well-being.

Difference in Opinion on Time Usage

• There is a genuine difference of opinion about how to profitably use one's time.

• Western intellectuals argue that there is no objective right or wrong when it comes to personal preferences like food choices (e.g., liking chocolate or vanilla).

• However, in science, certain opinions are excluded based on expertise and knowledge.

• The speaker uses the example of string theory in physics to illustrate this point.

New Section

In this section, the speaker further explores the concept of expertise and its application in different domains. He questions why moral expertise is often disregarded and emphasizes the importance of acknowledging right and wrong answers in matters related to human flourishing.

Expertise in Science vs. Morality

• In science, experts are recognized for their knowledge and understanding within their respective fields.

• The speaker highlights Edward Witten as an example of a renowned physicist who is considered one of the smartest physicists by his peers.

• If someone without expertise were to dismiss string theory at a physics conference, it would not hold weight because they lack understanding.

• The speaker humorously refers to himself as "the Ted Bundy of string theory" since he does not belong to that field but has an opposing view.

• In contrast, moral expertise is often questioned or dismissed, leading to a belief that every opinion should count equally.

• The speaker challenges this notion by asserting that there are right and wrong answers when it comes to questions about human well-being.

New Section

This section focuses on the need to recognize moral expertise and the impact of beliefs and desires on human suffering. The speaker argues that admitting this will transform our discourse about morality.

Recognizing Moral Expertise

• The speaker questions why moral expertise is often disregarded or denied.

• He emphasizes that individuals and cultures can care about the wrong things, leading to needless human suffering.

• Admitting that there are right and wrong answers in matters of human flourishing is crucial for progress.

• Ignorance in areas related to well-being should be treated with the same skepticism as ignorance in other domains like physics.

New Section

In this section, the speaker highlights the importance of converging on answers to questions of human well-being. He draws parallels between cultural differences in safety standards and notions of well-being, emphasizing the need for convergence.

Convergence on Answers

• The boundaries between nations are becoming less significant, while destructive technology continues to exist.

• Just as we cannot tolerate vast differences in safety standards for buildings and airplanes, we should not tolerate vast differences in notions of human well-being.

• The speaker questions why cultural perspectives on physics from groups like the Taliban are dismissed but perspectives on human well-being are often considered valid.

• He asserts that there must be a convergence on answers to important questions about human life.

New Section

This section explores language barriers when discussing topics like veiling. The speaker discusses different perspectives within Muslim communities regarding veiling and raises concerns about cultural imperialism when engaging in conversations with differing views.

Language Barriers and Cultural Imperialism

• Language plays a crucial role when discussing topics like veiling.

• Different Muslim women may have varying opinions about veiling, some seeing it as a celebration of female specialness or protection against male lust.

• Engaging in conversations with women who have different views without appearing culturally imperialistic can be challenging.

• The speaker acknowledges the complexity of voluntary choices in contexts where societal expectations and consequences exist.

New Section

In this section, the speaker discusses the constraints faced by women regarding veiling and emphasizes the importance of understanding these constraints rather than solely relying on individual perspectives.

Constraints and Understanding

• The speaker highlights that women who choose to veil may face certain expectations and treatment if they don't comply.

• While individuals should be free to make their own choices, it is essential to acknowledge the constraints imposed on women in certain contexts.

• The speaker suggests being cautious about accepting individual perspectives without considering the broader context and constraints faced by women.

New Section

This section delves into the concept of moral progress and how it can coexist with diversity of thought. The speaker envisions a future where advancements in understanding human minds lead to greater insight into positive qualities like empathy and compassion.

Moral Progress and Diversity

• Moral progress does not necessitate everyone thinking the same way or a one-dimensional world.

• Advancements in understanding our minds at a neurological level will provide insights into positive social emotions like empathy and compassion.

• Factors influencing positive social emotions, such as genetics, communication, and economic systems, will be better understood over time.

• As knowledge expands, there will be convergence on certain aspects related to human well-being while still allowing for richness in diversity.

Due to limitations in available content from the transcript, some sections may appear shorter than others.

New Section Can Love Exist in a Delusional Belief System?

In this section, Sam Harris discusses the possibility of love existing within a delusional belief system and its implications for well-being.

Love and Delusion

• Sam Harris acknowledges that it is possible to love someone even within the context of a delusional belief system.

• He gives an extreme example where a person justifies killing their gay son out of compassion because they believe he would go to hell if he found a boyfriend.

Well-being and Context

• Sam Harris emphasizes the importance of considering well-being in a larger context.

• He argues that it is not enough for one person to feel ecstasy or love if it leads to harmful actions, such as blowing oneself up on a bus.

• The well-being of all individuals should be taken into account, rather than focusing solely on personal emotions.