Live From NECSS 2013 With Michael Shermer On the Role of Science in Morality
From Rationally Speaking
Michael Shermer•Executive Director, Skeptic Society & Publisher, Skeptic Magazine
Executive Summary
The episode features a debate between Michael Shermer and Massimo Pigliucci on the role of science in determining morality.
Shermer argues that science can and should define the goal of morality as 'human flourishing' and provide the empirical means to achieve it.
Pigliucci counters that science's role is limited to providing factual information, while the core of moral determination is a matter of philosophical reasoning and ethical frameworks.
The discussion uses examples like gay marriage, political ideology, and historical misuses of science (e.g., eugenics) to explore the complex relationship between empirical facts and moral values.
7 quotes
Concerns Raised
Over-reliance on science for moral guidance can lead to problematic historical outcomes like eugenics.
Defining and measuring 'human flourishing' universally is difficult due to cultural and individual differences.
The fundamental divide in moral values between political groups may be irreconcilable through purely empirical means.
Making the leap from scientific facts ('is') to moral imperatives ('ought') is a persistent philosophical challenge.
Opportunities Identified
Science can effectively debunk false factual claims used to support immoral positions (e.g., negative outcomes for children of gay parents).
Integrating scientific data with rigorous philosophical reasoning can lead to more robust and well-grounded social policies.
Understanding the different moral frameworks of political opponents can foster more productive dialogue.