Support the IEET




The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.



Search the IEET
Subscribe and Contribute to:


Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Quick overview of biopolitical points of view




whats new at ieet

Inequality: Are the rich cashing in?

#11: What is the Difference between Posthumanism and Transhumanism?

Wall Street Had a Merry Christmas. The New Year’s Still Up For Grabs.

#12: Enhancing Virtues: Self-Control and Mindfulness

#13: When Does Hindering Life Extension Science Become a Crime?

The Turing Church and Open Source Religion: Ben Goertzel Interviews Giulio Prisco


ieet books

Virtually Human: The Promise—-and the Peril—-of Digital Immortality
Author
Martine Rothblatt


comments

Michael Nuschke on 'Technoprogressive Declaration - Transvision 2014' (Dec 26, 2014)

Giulio Prisco on 'The Turing Church and Open Source Religion: Ben Goertzel Interviews Giulio Prisco' (Dec 26, 2014)

Infin8one on 'The Turing Church and Open Source Religion: Ben Goertzel Interviews Giulio Prisco' (Dec 25, 2014)

Giulio Prisco on 'The Turing Church and Open Source Religion: Ben Goertzel Interviews Giulio Prisco' (Dec 25, 2014)

Kris Notaro on 'The Turing Church and Open Source Religion: Ben Goertzel Interviews Giulio Prisco' (Dec 25, 2014)

Kris Notaro on 'Living in the Divided World of the Internet’s Future' (Dec 24, 2014)

Rick Searle on 'Living in the Divided World of the Internet’s Future' (Dec 24, 2014)







Subscribe to IEET News Lists

Daily News Feed

Longevity Dividend List

Catastrophic Risks List

Biopolitics of Popular Culture List

Technoprogressive List

Trans-Spirit List



JET

Enframing the Flesh: Heidegger, Transhumanism, and the Body as “Standing Reserve”

Moral Enhancement and Political Realism

Intelligent Technologies and Lost Life

Hottest Articles of the Last Month


2014 Was a Good Year: Better Than You Remember
Dec 22, 2014
(53908) Hits
(0) Comments

Review of Michio Kaku’s, Visions: How Science Will Revolutionize the 21st Century
Dec 15, 2014
(10696) Hits
(0) Comments

What Will Life Be Like Inside A Computer?
Dec 7, 2014
(8804) Hits
(0) Comments

Superintelligences Are Already Out There!
Dec 20, 2014
(6128) Hits
(1) Comments



Comment on this entry

Toward a Science of Morality


Massimo Pigliucci


rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com

February 19, 2013

An annotated response to Michael Shermer: Michael Shermer and I have been engaged in what I hope has been a productive discussion on the relationship between science and philosophy as it concerns the field of ethics. Roughly speaking, Michael contends that science has a lot to say about ethical questions (though he is not quite as reductive as Sam Harris, who contends that science is pretty much the only game in town when it comes to ethics). I respond that science provides informative background but grossly underdetermines ethical issues, which therefore require philosophical reflection. Michael’s opening salvo was followed by my response, with Shermer recently adding some thoughts, further articulating his position. The notes below are my point-by-point commentary on that third round. (Throughout, italics indicates Michael’s writing, with my comments immediately following.)


...

Complete entry


COMMENTS



Posted by b.  on  02/19  at  11:53 AM

Thank you for posting. While I’m not clear on the continuity (or lack thereof) between morality and ethics, I agree with the author that science as the defacto base of morality is problematic.

I think there is a false separation between cultural values and science. Science is inherently dependent on cultural values that influence what questions are worth asking and what properties are worth measuring. The products of science are communicated through cultural means (language) that is subjective and imprecise. Science can tell us the difference between X and Y, but can’t compare them ethically.

We know there are general differences between make and female humans (lets set aside the fact of many who biologically and socially fit somewhere in between those attractors), and those differences were exploited to “prove” that women are the “weaker sex” and therefore subject to different moral and ethical behaviours. Same goes for skin colour and religion.

We treat non-human animals in a totally non-compatible way (in particular in science) with human animals, yet there is little biological difference between non-human mammals and ourselves. (Why would we study them to understand ourselves if they were not highly biologically similar?)

It seems obvious that any moral position could be supported by empirical evidence simply by controlling the variables to be measured, and the definitions of the terms.

If the aim is only survival and reproduction, then those domesticated animals that many of us consume are being morally tortured. Its quite clear you can increase the survival of a creature at the same time as robbing him/her of any quality of life or dignity. Indeed survival != flourish.






Add your comment here:


Name:

Email:

Location:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

HOME | ABOUT | FELLOWS | STAFF | EVENTS | SUPPORT  | CONTACT US
SECURING THE FUTURE | LONGER HEALTHIER LIFE | RIGHTS OF THE PERSON | ENVISIONING THE FUTURE
CYBORG BUDDHA PROJECT | AFRICAN FUTURES PROJECT | JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION AND TECHNOLOGY

RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter |
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.

Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
56 Daleville School Rd., Willington CT 06279 USA 
Email: director @ ieet.org     phone: 860-297-2376