Is the Grand Saying, Who Is It Value?

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

Dackins is interesting in this way, cause he's not a moral relativeist. He has no qualms about criticizing islam and say, female genital mutilation is being objectively wrong. O clearly, even he with that famous quiletbut that implies that female persons are valuable. And th begs a question. The grand says, who is it value? Are they valuable only to the female persons who are being mutilated, or only to richard dawkins? Or are there objective principles above us all to which we can appeal that reflect a a valuation that is not derivative of our subjective opinions? Ye, whell i say the laughing theism says, yes, there is

Beginning in the late 19th century, many intellectuals began to insist that scientific knowledge conflicts with traditional theistic belief — that science and belief in God are “at war.” Philosopher of science Stephen Meyer challenges this view by examining three scientific discoveries with decidedly theistic implications. Building on the case for the intelligent design of life that he developed in Signature in the Cell and Darwin’s Doubt, Meyer claims that discoveries in cosmology and physics coupled with those in biology help to establish the identity of the designing intelligence behind life and the universe. Previously Meyer refrained from attempting to answer questions about “who” might have designed life. Now he provides an evidence-based answer to perhaps the ultimate mystery of the universe.

Shermer responds to each claim and a stimulating and enlightening conversation ensues.

Note: It is Dr. Shermer’s intention in his podcast to periodically talk to people with whom skeptics and scientists may disagree. In some episodes Dr. Shermer tries to “steel man” a position held by someone with differing views — that is, he says in his own words what he thinks the other person is arguing — but in this case the other person is in the conversation and can represent his own position clearly, which is what happens. As well, such conversations enable principles of skepticism to be employed in ways constructive to those who hold views not necessarily embraced by skeptics and scientists. Such principles should be embraced by all seekers of truth, and that is why we want to talk to people with whom we may disagree.