35276Ynhhdabhot228 Holy Dogma

Q&@

IN TRUTH,
IT IS NOT ALWAYS EASY
TO SEPARATE ETHICAL JUDGEMENTS
FROM FACTUAL STATEMENTS?

Religions have the nagging tendency
to turn factual statements into ethical judgements,
thereby creating serious confusion and obfuscating
what should have been relatively simple debates!

Thus the factual statement 'God wrote the Bible'
all too often mutates into the ethical injunction 'you ought to believe
that God wrote the Bible'. Merely believing in this factual statement becomes a virtue,
whereas doubting it becomes a dreadful sin. Conversely, ethical judgements often hide within them
factual statements that proponents don't bother to mention because they think
they have been proven beyond doubt.

Thus the ethical judgement 'human life is sacred'
(which science cannot test) may shroud the factual statement
'every human has an eternal soul' (which is open to scientific debate)! Similarly,
when American nationalists complain that 'the American nation is sacred', this seemingly ethical
judgement is in fact predicated on factual statements such as 'the USA has spearheaded
most of the moral, scientific & economic advances
of the last few centuries'.

Whereas it is impossible
to scientifically scrutinize the claim that the American nation is sacred,
once we unpack this judgement we may well examine scientifically whether the USA
has indeed been responsible for a disproportionate share of moral, scientific
& economic breakthroughs.

This has led some philosophers,
such as Sam Harris, to argue that science
can always resolve ethical dilemmas,
because human values always
conceal within them
some factual
statements?
29 jul 2019 - bewerkt op 31 jul 2019 - meld ongepast verhaal
Weet je zeker dat je dit verhaal wilt rapporteren? Ja | Nee
Profielfoto van Asih
Asih, man, 80 jaar
   
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen.   vorige volgende