The Explanatory Conundrum

4min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

I haven't seen anything close to a good explanation for how we take that final jump from a peaceable social life as a group to understanding what morality's about. I think o if i'm honest about what the moral life is like, it really is because these other, these other individuals are valuable humans who can't treat me any way they like. We have muc enuine stions and dutiesand, but why? What? The anstere would be a, there is something fantastic about being able to experience the world of this level in a way that we have no reason to think that ants can,. maybe kill or whales, maybe some dogs, but most, most creatures can't

In their book Science and the Good, professional philosophers James Hunter and Paul Nedelisky trace the origins and development of the centuries-long, passionate, but ultimately failed quest to discover a scientific foundation for morality. The conversation takes a decidedly interesting turn when Drs. Hunter and Nedelisky reveal that they are both theists and that their Christian worldview informs their thinking on moral issues. The three then dig into the weeds of the difference between religious and secular moral systems, the nature of God and morality, why a purely naturalistic approach to morality does not negate religion or even the existence of God (natural law could be God’s way of creating moral values), natural rights and rights theory, consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics, progress in philosophy, why philosophers never seem to reach consensus on important subjects like morality, how to think about issues like abortion, why they believe in God and follow the Christian religion and yet reject Divine Command Theory, and much more.