1 00:00:02,720 --> 00:00:03,640 Speaker 1: Life Audio. 2 00:00:05,040 --> 00:00:09,200 Speaker 2: When it comes to marriage, it's one or it's the other. 3 00:00:09,400 --> 00:00:13,680 Speaker 2: It's not like you're expanding marriage to include same sex marriage, 4 00:00:13,760 --> 00:00:17,000 Speaker 2: but that if we shift towards adopting same sex marriage, 5 00:00:17,040 --> 00:00:17,799 Speaker 2: we're not neutral. 6 00:00:17,880 --> 00:00:18,920 Speaker 1: We're not expanding it. 7 00:00:18,960 --> 00:00:23,119 Speaker 2: We are taking a biased or worldview latent approach to 8 00:00:23,360 --> 00:00:25,800 Speaker 2: what marriage is and the role of the state. 9 00:00:26,320 --> 00:00:28,560 Speaker 1: Science can tell us what is right. 10 00:00:28,480 --> 00:00:31,840 Speaker 3: And wrong, absolutely not. Science can tell us how things work. 11 00:00:31,880 --> 00:00:33,880 Speaker 3: It can't tell us how things ought to work. 12 00:00:34,200 --> 00:00:37,160 Speaker 2: Religious views don't belong in politics. 13 00:00:37,320 --> 00:00:39,920 Speaker 3: That's a violation of the first time violation of religious 14 00:00:39,920 --> 00:00:44,080 Speaker 3: freedom because you are forcing religious views to be kept private. 15 00:00:44,640 --> 00:00:49,159 Speaker 2: Religious views don't belong in politics. Jesus said never judge, 16 00:00:49,520 --> 00:00:53,080 Speaker 2: so don't. You can't legislate morality. 17 00:00:53,479 --> 00:00:54,080 Speaker 1: These are some of. 18 00:00:54,080 --> 00:00:56,880 Speaker 2: The most common moral slogans you have heard and maybe 19 00:00:56,960 --> 00:01:00,320 Speaker 2: even spoken at times. But they are, as you will 20 00:01:00,320 --> 00:01:05,040 Speaker 2: see today, deeply misguided. Today I get to interview my friend, 21 00:01:05,360 --> 00:01:08,520 Speaker 2: colleague and co host, doctor Scott Ray, who, by the way, 22 00:01:08,760 --> 00:01:12,440 Speaker 2: is arguably one of the leading Christian ethicists in the 23 00:01:12,480 --> 00:01:17,000 Speaker 2: world today. Giving your publications, your conversations, your consulting, that 24 00:01:17,080 --> 00:01:19,759 Speaker 2: you've done your professional work, We're going to talk about 25 00:01:19,760 --> 00:01:24,240 Speaker 2: the top ten misguided moral claims that need to be debunked. 26 00:01:24,360 --> 00:01:24,560 Speaker 3: Now. 27 00:01:24,600 --> 00:01:27,160 Speaker 2: You deal with all of these in the fifth edition 28 00:01:27,280 --> 00:01:30,800 Speaker 2: of your book Moral Choices, which we'll get to kind 29 00:01:30,800 --> 00:01:36,360 Speaker 2: of framing deeper conversations on reproductive technology and of life, war, etc. 30 00:01:36,920 --> 00:01:39,240 Speaker 2: But I thought this would be a helpful and interesting 31 00:01:39,280 --> 00:01:41,320 Speaker 2: way to kind of get into the conversation. 32 00:01:42,000 --> 00:01:43,240 Speaker 1: I'd love your take. 33 00:01:43,040 --> 00:01:45,600 Speaker 2: On these, So I'm just gonna state it the way 34 00:01:45,640 --> 00:01:47,920 Speaker 2: I often heard it said, and then you can give 35 00:01:47,960 --> 00:01:48,640 Speaker 2: your response. 36 00:01:48,680 --> 00:01:49,360 Speaker 1: How does that sound? 37 00:01:49,440 --> 00:01:51,720 Speaker 3: That sounds great. But we've been dealing with these since 38 00:01:51,760 --> 00:01:55,440 Speaker 3: the first edition of Moral Choices, fair enough, and they've 39 00:01:55,440 --> 00:01:56,960 Speaker 3: been refined over the years. 40 00:01:57,080 --> 00:01:59,320 Speaker 2: Okay, okay, good bring that out at times. If this 41 00:01:59,440 --> 00:02:02,360 Speaker 2: is shift didn't become more pressing or less would be great, 42 00:02:02,760 --> 00:02:07,520 Speaker 2: all right. So Number one, you can't legislate morality. 43 00:02:07,280 --> 00:02:14,080 Speaker 3: Categorically false, Okay, because the lawmakers in most countries do 44 00:02:14,160 --> 00:02:18,720 Speaker 3: it on an almost daily basis. Every law is the 45 00:02:18,720 --> 00:02:25,200 Speaker 3: imposition of somebody's morality, even even things as seemingly morally 46 00:02:25,240 --> 00:02:27,880 Speaker 3: neutral as driving on the correct side of the road 47 00:02:28,639 --> 00:02:32,920 Speaker 3: presumes respect for life and property, because if we see 48 00:02:32,919 --> 00:02:35,519 Speaker 3: somebody driving down the freeway at eighty miles an hour 49 00:02:35,560 --> 00:02:37,760 Speaker 3: in the wrong direction. We assume that they have respect 50 00:02:37,760 --> 00:02:40,359 Speaker 3: for neither of those things, and in most cases, I 51 00:02:40,360 --> 00:02:45,200 Speaker 3: think justifiably so. Martin Luther King was well known for saying, 52 00:02:46,400 --> 00:02:49,680 Speaker 3: you know, you, you know, the law can't prevent people 53 00:02:49,720 --> 00:02:52,120 Speaker 3: from hating me, but it can't stop them from lynching me. 54 00:02:53,240 --> 00:02:56,399 Speaker 3: And so if you were talking about a moral intent, 55 00:02:57,880 --> 00:03:01,960 Speaker 3: that's true. You can't legislate a moral intent, but you 56 00:03:02,160 --> 00:03:06,560 Speaker 3: we legislate moral behavior. In versely, every law that's passed 57 00:03:06,760 --> 00:03:10,400 Speaker 3: today because almost different. Now there are some exceptions to this, 58 00:03:10,440 --> 00:03:14,000 Speaker 3: but almost every law presumes some sort of moral foundation 59 00:03:14,600 --> 00:03:17,760 Speaker 3: on which it's based. And if that's the case, then 60 00:03:17,880 --> 00:03:22,160 Speaker 3: we legislate moral behavior on a regular basis. 61 00:03:22,520 --> 00:03:25,040 Speaker 2: Okay, So is it fair to say that some moral 62 00:03:25,080 --> 00:03:29,120 Speaker 2: laws like don't steal and don't murder. It's not like 63 00:03:29,200 --> 00:03:31,880 Speaker 2: we could have done it differently or we should have 64 00:03:31,919 --> 00:03:34,440 Speaker 2: done it differently, as opposed to like the street, that 65 00:03:34,520 --> 00:03:36,760 Speaker 2: you drive on the side of the road, it doesn't 66 00:03:36,800 --> 00:03:38,920 Speaker 2: really matter if it's the right or the left, but 67 00:03:38,960 --> 00:03:44,280 Speaker 2: that you just legislate some consistent side that people drive on. 68 00:03:44,600 --> 00:03:46,400 Speaker 3: And that's why that's why I said, driving on the 69 00:03:46,480 --> 00:03:50,520 Speaker 3: correct side of the road Okay, regardless, you know, because 70 00:03:50,520 --> 00:03:53,119 Speaker 3: then if you know, if you're in the UK, it's 71 00:03:53,160 --> 00:03:56,920 Speaker 3: going to be different. But if you if you don't 72 00:03:57,000 --> 00:03:59,120 Speaker 3: drive on the correct side of the road in the UK, 73 00:04:00,360 --> 00:04:03,720 Speaker 3: maybe you don't, maybe you don't presume a lack of 74 00:04:03,760 --> 00:04:07,280 Speaker 3: respect for life and property, but you're gonna you're gonna 75 00:04:07,280 --> 00:04:11,120 Speaker 3: engage in behavior that will soon get you arrested. Okay. 76 00:04:11,160 --> 00:04:15,040 Speaker 2: So even some of these smaller rules or laws, like 77 00:04:15,120 --> 00:04:17,120 Speaker 2: the side of the road you drive on, which doesn't 78 00:04:17,200 --> 00:04:23,400 Speaker 2: really matter in itself, are they can vary according to culture, 79 00:04:23,600 --> 00:04:29,240 Speaker 2: but beneath them are moral values and commitments we can't escape. 80 00:04:29,360 --> 00:04:30,080 Speaker 1: And that's the point. 81 00:04:30,120 --> 00:04:32,320 Speaker 3: It's the application. It's the application of that that can 82 00:04:32,400 --> 00:04:33,480 Speaker 3: change with context. 83 00:04:33,960 --> 00:04:36,640 Speaker 1: Gotcha. Okay, excellent, good response. All right. 84 00:04:36,720 --> 00:04:42,960 Speaker 2: Second one, secular ethics is neutral, but religious ethics is biased. 85 00:04:44,760 --> 00:04:49,680 Speaker 3: I'd say part partially true. Okay, I say both are biased, 86 00:04:51,040 --> 00:04:55,400 Speaker 3: but both have built in biases, which is not not 87 00:04:55,480 --> 00:04:58,960 Speaker 3: necessarily a negative thing, but they have they have perspectives. 88 00:04:59,720 --> 00:05:02,360 Speaker 3: And just because something is secular doesn't mean that it's 89 00:05:02,440 --> 00:05:07,680 Speaker 3: unbiased because sex secular and neutral are not the same thing, 90 00:05:09,160 --> 00:05:14,000 Speaker 3: because sex secularism is just as much a set a 91 00:05:14,120 --> 00:05:16,560 Speaker 3: world view, it's just as much a set of religious 92 00:05:16,680 --> 00:05:20,719 Speaker 3: views as any religion is. And so to be secular, 93 00:05:20,760 --> 00:05:24,400 Speaker 3: I think, is to that. I think that's to to 94 00:05:24,440 --> 00:05:28,280 Speaker 3: sort of live under the illusion of neutrality when in 95 00:05:28,320 --> 00:05:30,760 Speaker 3: reality nothing of the sort is the case. 96 00:05:31,200 --> 00:05:35,120 Speaker 2: The illusion of neutrality I appreciate. We said that both 97 00:05:35,680 --> 00:05:41,120 Speaker 2: religious and secular individuals and belief systems have a bias. 98 00:05:41,240 --> 00:05:44,320 Speaker 2: It's not like one is neutral and the other is biased, whichever. 99 00:05:44,360 --> 00:05:46,320 Speaker 3: You know what I mean by that they have They 100 00:05:46,360 --> 00:05:50,799 Speaker 3: have their own distinct way of framing moral questions. That's 101 00:05:50,839 --> 00:05:54,000 Speaker 3: that is dramatically different. They're dramatically different from each other. 102 00:05:54,600 --> 00:05:58,120 Speaker 3: So they have a perspective. And I mean, if you 103 00:05:58,160 --> 00:06:01,240 Speaker 3: want to call that a bias, I think that that's fine, okay, 104 00:06:01,240 --> 00:06:04,800 Speaker 3: because and I would say not every bias is problematic. 105 00:06:05,000 --> 00:06:05,800 Speaker 1: Sure, Okay. 106 00:06:06,360 --> 00:06:09,640 Speaker 2: So I had a debate maybe seventy years ago with 107 00:06:09,720 --> 00:06:11,840 Speaker 2: an atheist and one of things he argued was that 108 00:06:11,960 --> 00:06:15,960 Speaker 2: secularism is neutral, and they're not trying to make the 109 00:06:16,040 --> 00:06:21,640 Speaker 2: state secular, but just secular one option aside Christian options. 110 00:06:22,200 --> 00:06:24,040 Speaker 2: And the example I brought up, I said, well, when 111 00:06:24,080 --> 00:06:28,040 Speaker 2: it comes to marriage, it's one or it's the other. 112 00:06:28,640 --> 00:06:32,880 Speaker 2: It's not like you're expanding marriage to include same sex marriage, 113 00:06:33,240 --> 00:06:37,120 Speaker 2: we are changing the nature of marriage and saying that 114 00:06:37,800 --> 00:06:43,480 Speaker 2: being our sex bodies are irrelevant to what marriage is. 115 00:06:44,320 --> 00:06:47,640 Speaker 2: So my point was not to argue that a biblical 116 00:06:47,760 --> 00:06:50,760 Speaker 2: view of marriage is right, but that if we shift 117 00:06:50,960 --> 00:06:54,400 Speaker 2: towards adopting same sex marriage, we're not neutral, We're not 118 00:06:54,480 --> 00:06:58,960 Speaker 2: expanding it. We are taking a biased or worldview latent 119 00:06:59,080 --> 00:07:02,359 Speaker 2: approach to what marriage is and the role of the state. 120 00:07:03,120 --> 00:07:04,839 Speaker 1: That was my point. You grew that example. 121 00:07:04,920 --> 00:07:09,880 Speaker 3: I do, and I think what secular what secularism does 122 00:07:10,080 --> 00:07:15,800 Speaker 3: to religion is it forces it to be private. Secularism 123 00:07:16,360 --> 00:07:20,679 Speaker 3: takes religion out of the public theology and the public 124 00:07:20,800 --> 00:07:25,120 Speaker 3: morality business, and it does so intentionally and by design. 125 00:07:25,840 --> 00:07:30,480 Speaker 3: I remember years ago when human cloning was first being 126 00:07:30,880 --> 00:07:36,200 Speaker 3: debated and the commission this was I think this was 127 00:07:36,320 --> 00:07:41,920 Speaker 3: President Clinton's National Bioethics Commission, that they created this big 128 00:07:41,960 --> 00:07:44,960 Speaker 3: set of hearings, invited experts from all over all over 129 00:07:45,000 --> 00:07:47,840 Speaker 3: the world to come in, and they had a section 130 00:07:48,000 --> 00:07:52,760 Speaker 3: of the final report called ethics and I don't think 131 00:07:52,800 --> 00:07:55,760 Speaker 3: they said religious, but maybe maybe the ethics and religious 132 00:07:55,880 --> 00:07:59,640 Speaker 3: views of human cloning, And it was really well done. 133 00:07:59,640 --> 00:08:02,360 Speaker 3: Section lots of insight on it, but in their final 134 00:08:02,400 --> 00:08:07,680 Speaker 3: recommendations they completely marginalized it and said that when it 135 00:08:07,720 --> 00:08:13,640 Speaker 3: comes to public policy, religious claims can't be the basis 136 00:08:13,840 --> 00:08:17,920 Speaker 3: for any kind of public policy in a pluralistic culture. 137 00:08:19,040 --> 00:08:22,040 Speaker 3: And so what they were essentially doing is they were 138 00:08:22,080 --> 00:08:26,960 Speaker 3: secularizing the discussion by forcing the religious contribution of that 139 00:08:27,480 --> 00:08:30,400 Speaker 3: back into the private sphere where it's out of reach 140 00:08:30,920 --> 00:08:34,120 Speaker 3: of public policy, and in my view as a perfect 141 00:08:34,200 --> 00:08:40,240 Speaker 3: example of how secularism forces religious views and religious morality 142 00:08:40,840 --> 00:08:44,640 Speaker 3: back into the private sphere where it will basically leave 143 00:08:44,679 --> 00:08:45,559 Speaker 3: the culture alone. 144 00:08:46,120 --> 00:08:47,000 Speaker 1: That sets us up. 145 00:08:47,040 --> 00:08:51,640 Speaker 2: We have another slogan that matches that, but first one 146 00:08:51,920 --> 00:08:56,959 Speaker 2: is our third misguided slogan is you shouldn't force your 147 00:08:57,080 --> 00:08:58,959 Speaker 2: morals on others. 148 00:09:00,120 --> 00:09:04,520 Speaker 3: That works only until you're the victim of injustice or 149 00:09:04,559 --> 00:09:09,840 Speaker 3: until somebody clearly wrongs you. Then we become, in my view, 150 00:09:09,880 --> 00:09:12,840 Speaker 3: we become passionate absolutists who were forcing our view of 151 00:09:13,000 --> 00:09:16,679 Speaker 3: justice on the person who we believe has done us 152 00:09:16,720 --> 00:09:21,360 Speaker 3: an injustice. So that sounds nice in theory, but nobody 153 00:09:21,440 --> 00:09:24,880 Speaker 3: can live with that consistently. I remember, Sean, I was 154 00:09:24,920 --> 00:09:28,480 Speaker 3: Abysius years ago when the stem cell debate was first 155 00:09:28,600 --> 00:09:31,440 Speaker 3: getting rolling, and I was invited to by one of 156 00:09:31,480 --> 00:09:34,160 Speaker 3: our students who was the pastor of a church in 157 00:09:34,200 --> 00:09:36,960 Speaker 3: the area, and was invited to a debate in a 158 00:09:37,000 --> 00:09:40,920 Speaker 3: healthcare system on the ethics of using embryonic stem cells 159 00:09:40,960 --> 00:09:45,320 Speaker 3: for research and treatment. Interesting, and I remember about halfway 160 00:09:45,320 --> 00:09:48,720 Speaker 3: through the debate, some crusty old physician and the audits 161 00:09:48,800 --> 00:09:50,800 Speaker 3: raised his hands said I am so sick of you 162 00:09:50,880 --> 00:09:53,680 Speaker 3: religious people forcing your views on the rest of us. 163 00:09:55,280 --> 00:09:56,840 Speaker 3: And he had come at me with a little horse 164 00:09:56,920 --> 00:09:59,360 Speaker 3: radish on that comman so I felt the freedom to 165 00:09:59,360 --> 00:10:02,800 Speaker 3: come back at it with a similar dose. And I said, 166 00:10:02,840 --> 00:10:05,760 Speaker 3: first we should get rid of the silly notion that 167 00:10:05,840 --> 00:10:08,360 Speaker 3: it's only religious people who are forcing the morality on 168 00:10:08,400 --> 00:10:12,160 Speaker 3: everybody else. And that's why, back to the first question, 169 00:10:12,400 --> 00:10:15,839 Speaker 3: that's why every law is the imposition of somebody's morality 170 00:10:16,320 --> 00:10:21,000 Speaker 3: on somebody else. And I said, you are forcing a 171 00:10:21,160 --> 00:10:26,040 Speaker 3: view of a human person on me by saying that embryos, 172 00:10:26,080 --> 00:10:28,760 Speaker 3: who I considered to be full of human persons, should 173 00:10:28,760 --> 00:10:33,080 Speaker 3: be subject to destruction or to experimentation that will lead 174 00:10:33,120 --> 00:10:37,240 Speaker 3: to their destruction. Eventually, I said that, I said, basically, 175 00:10:37,280 --> 00:10:40,320 Speaker 3: I called him a hypocrite. I didn't use those terms, 176 00:10:40,360 --> 00:10:43,520 Speaker 3: but I said you should stop doing what you were 177 00:10:43,559 --> 00:10:45,400 Speaker 3: accusing me of doing. 178 00:10:46,600 --> 00:10:49,720 Speaker 2: I'm really thankful that Martin Luther King Junior didn't get 179 00:10:49,760 --> 00:10:53,400 Speaker 2: the memo you shouldn't force your morals on others. Now, 180 00:10:53,760 --> 00:10:57,000 Speaker 2: obviously he was trying to persuade that, which is one 181 00:10:57,000 --> 00:11:00,360 Speaker 2: of the strengths of our political system today. The same 182 00:11:00,400 --> 00:11:03,679 Speaker 2: thing you are trying to do is we all can persuade. 183 00:11:04,200 --> 00:11:06,600 Speaker 2: But of course I think the vast majority of people 184 00:11:06,600 --> 00:11:09,079 Speaker 2: today are going to say thankfully. Then, when it came 185 00:11:09,080 --> 00:11:12,600 Speaker 2: to the civil rights movement, we had laws put in 186 00:11:12,920 --> 00:11:17,600 Speaker 2: to protect African Americans and other minorities that were shaped 187 00:11:17,640 --> 00:11:21,160 Speaker 2: deeply by Jeremiah and Amos and the teachings of Jesus. 188 00:11:21,800 --> 00:11:23,120 Speaker 1: But you're right, it's contradictory. 189 00:11:23,160 --> 00:11:25,520 Speaker 2: I heard Greg Cochley used to tell a story about 190 00:11:25,520 --> 00:11:28,240 Speaker 2: how somebody said to him, you shouldn't force your morals 191 00:11:28,280 --> 00:11:30,560 Speaker 2: on others, and he just asked him a question, back, 192 00:11:31,160 --> 00:11:32,559 Speaker 2: is that your morality? 193 00:11:33,240 --> 00:11:33,640 Speaker 3: Exactly? 194 00:11:33,720 --> 00:11:36,040 Speaker 2: Yes, Well, if you shouldn't force you morals on others, 195 00:11:36,440 --> 00:11:39,360 Speaker 2: and this is your morality, then why are you trying 196 00:11:39,400 --> 00:11:44,360 Speaker 2: to force it on me? And the words force in 197 00:11:44,480 --> 00:11:47,920 Speaker 2: one sense we shouldn't force our morals on others. Unless 198 00:11:47,920 --> 00:11:50,440 Speaker 2: somebody is getting attacked, then I'm going to force my 199 00:11:50,520 --> 00:11:51,520 Speaker 2: morality and. 200 00:11:51,520 --> 00:11:52,440 Speaker 1: Protect that person. 201 00:11:52,760 --> 00:11:55,200 Speaker 2: But the primary means that Christians are called to do 202 00:11:55,320 --> 00:11:59,920 Speaker 2: are to persuade people with argument and reasons, and people 203 00:12:00,120 --> 00:12:03,480 Speaker 2: confuse given an argument for something with forcing somebody. 204 00:12:03,600 --> 00:12:06,400 Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm glad that the women who were at the 205 00:12:06,440 --> 00:12:09,400 Speaker 3: forefront of the me too movement exactly also didn't get 206 00:12:09,400 --> 00:12:09,880 Speaker 3: that memo. 207 00:12:10,120 --> 00:12:11,719 Speaker 1: Yep, good, good stuff, all right. 208 00:12:12,240 --> 00:12:16,560 Speaker 2: Fourth misguided slogan that we often hear about morality, is 209 00:12:16,559 --> 00:12:20,880 Speaker 2: it right and wrong? Are products of evolution nothing more. 210 00:12:23,320 --> 00:12:27,200 Speaker 3: I think if if morality arose out of evolution, then 211 00:12:27,520 --> 00:12:33,120 Speaker 3: we have some really odd moral values that have almost 212 00:12:33,240 --> 00:12:39,079 Speaker 3: universal acceptance today. We have we have the moral value 213 00:12:39,160 --> 00:12:43,400 Speaker 3: of self sacrifice. We view people, we view people who 214 00:12:43,480 --> 00:12:47,720 Speaker 3: sacrifice for the benefit of others to be heroes. You know, 215 00:12:47,840 --> 00:12:50,800 Speaker 3: the soldier who falls on a grenade is an idiot 216 00:12:51,280 --> 00:12:54,240 Speaker 3: in the evolutionary scheme of things, but we routinely hold 217 00:12:54,320 --> 00:12:57,840 Speaker 3: them up as heroic. That tells me that there's something 218 00:12:58,360 --> 00:13:02,800 Speaker 3: about morality that's deep and intrinsic and a part of 219 00:13:02,840 --> 00:13:04,800 Speaker 3: how we are wired. We have a moral sense that 220 00:13:04,920 --> 00:13:09,280 Speaker 3: Romans two fourteen tells us that God has implanted his 221 00:13:09,520 --> 00:13:13,640 Speaker 3: law in us, and though it's been skewed as a 222 00:13:13,640 --> 00:13:17,079 Speaker 3: result of the fall, that hasn't erased the moral sense 223 00:13:17,120 --> 00:13:20,880 Speaker 3: that God's deeply implanted in all of us. And I think, 224 00:13:21,320 --> 00:13:28,640 Speaker 3: you know, there's the survival mode of evolution can actually 225 00:13:28,720 --> 00:13:31,840 Speaker 3: lead to It doesn't really, This is are what our 226 00:13:31,880 --> 00:13:35,280 Speaker 3: friend Alvin Plantago has pointed out. It doesn't necessarily lead 227 00:13:35,520 --> 00:13:41,440 Speaker 3: to an appreciation for truth because adaptive measures can be 228 00:13:41,559 --> 00:13:45,360 Speaker 3: demonstrably false and still be adaptive. That's right, right, You know, 229 00:13:45,440 --> 00:13:49,160 Speaker 3: I can believe that the wild animal who's staring at 230 00:13:49,160 --> 00:13:52,920 Speaker 3: me across the canyon will not attack me if I 231 00:13:53,040 --> 00:13:57,600 Speaker 3: sing sweetly to this animal from a distance. Now that's 232 00:13:57,640 --> 00:14:00,640 Speaker 3: categorically false. But as long as I do that from 233 00:14:00,679 --> 00:14:04,760 Speaker 3: a distance, that that adaptive value will will still work. 234 00:14:06,520 --> 00:14:12,199 Speaker 3: And so there's nothing there's nothing necessarily intrinsic about an 235 00:14:12,200 --> 00:14:17,680 Speaker 3: evolutionary process that that is based on adaptive value that 236 00:14:17,840 --> 00:14:23,040 Speaker 3: leads us to to the truth of an assertion. So 237 00:14:23,200 --> 00:14:26,480 Speaker 3: and I think that that stands for reality as well. Now, 238 00:14:26,520 --> 00:14:28,680 Speaker 3: I think some of the things you know, you can 239 00:14:28,720 --> 00:14:34,600 Speaker 3: explain adaptively, like like the value of community that we 240 00:14:34,600 --> 00:14:38,360 Speaker 3: were better off. We survive better in community than we 241 00:14:38,400 --> 00:14:42,360 Speaker 3: do in individually. But I think there there are others 242 00:14:42,880 --> 00:14:45,920 Speaker 3: that I think are really tough to explain on an 243 00:14:45,960 --> 00:14:47,920 Speaker 3: evolutionary scheme that's well said. 244 00:14:47,960 --> 00:14:49,040 Speaker 1: I've got a couple objections. 245 00:14:49,080 --> 00:14:52,920 Speaker 2: Number one, I can understand how an evolutionary process could 246 00:14:53,000 --> 00:14:57,640 Speaker 2: generate better bone density or elongation and strength of muscles. 247 00:14:58,040 --> 00:15:02,360 Speaker 2: But right and wrong and moral values which aren't physical, 248 00:15:03,120 --> 00:15:07,480 Speaker 2: how does a physical process even develop or generate them? 249 00:15:07,480 --> 00:15:09,080 Speaker 2: And you say, well, it's just a belief in them. 250 00:15:09,080 --> 00:15:12,640 Speaker 2: And then I say, well, that's a belief that's not physical. 251 00:15:12,760 --> 00:15:15,960 Speaker 2: Where are these coming from you? It's almost example, getting 252 00:15:16,000 --> 00:15:21,480 Speaker 2: something from nothing. That's a philosophical problem. The other objection, 253 00:15:21,560 --> 00:15:23,480 Speaker 2: I think that's fair to say, and this is to 254 00:15:23,560 --> 00:15:26,640 Speaker 2: expand on your second one, is that if right and 255 00:15:26,680 --> 00:15:30,200 Speaker 2: wrong are products of evolution nothing more, then there really 256 00:15:30,320 --> 00:15:33,120 Speaker 2: is no right and wrong. There really is no human value, 257 00:15:33,440 --> 00:15:37,680 Speaker 2: There really is no equality, and evolution has tricked us 258 00:15:38,080 --> 00:15:40,960 Speaker 2: to follow these things to survive. 259 00:15:40,800 --> 00:15:42,960 Speaker 3: And we could eventually evolve out of those. 260 00:15:43,040 --> 00:15:45,359 Speaker 2: We could evolve out of those things. True, it's contingent, 261 00:15:45,840 --> 00:15:49,320 Speaker 2: but also raise a question. I have this feeling of obligation, 262 00:15:49,880 --> 00:15:52,360 Speaker 2: but that's just a product of evolution. I don't actually 263 00:15:52,400 --> 00:15:55,400 Speaker 2: have that obligation. You don't have human value, men and 264 00:15:55,440 --> 00:15:59,680 Speaker 2: women and other races don't have equality. So I'm under 265 00:15:59,800 --> 00:16:05,200 Speaker 2: no obligation to actually live that way, at least moral obligation, 266 00:16:05,800 --> 00:16:10,440 Speaker 2: which undermines the entire moral project. And I don't and 267 00:16:10,480 --> 00:16:13,680 Speaker 2: I don't see people going, Okay, that's true, it's all illusion. Well, 268 00:16:13,720 --> 00:16:17,240 Speaker 2: then live out that nihilism as in nietzsch She said, 269 00:16:18,000 --> 00:16:21,680 Speaker 2: that's what nobody's actually doing. My final critique is C. S. 270 00:16:21,760 --> 00:16:26,600 Speaker 2: Lewis talked about how at best instinct, if morality is 271 00:16:26,640 --> 00:16:30,520 Speaker 2: just instinct, the problem is we have competing instincts, and 272 00:16:30,560 --> 00:16:32,640 Speaker 2: so how do we decide between the two of them. 273 00:16:32,840 --> 00:16:34,800 Speaker 2: It can't be a third instinct. It has to be 274 00:16:34,880 --> 00:16:39,320 Speaker 2: something outside of the instinct, which evolution can't explain. Now, 275 00:16:39,320 --> 00:16:42,120 Speaker 2: on fairness, there are other ethical theories. You go through 276 00:16:42,160 --> 00:16:46,760 Speaker 2: them in Moral Choices, very thoroughly, very fairly offer critique. 277 00:16:46,760 --> 00:16:49,440 Speaker 1: This is just one. Let's move on. 278 00:16:49,360 --> 00:16:55,400 Speaker 3: To which I do have a fair length section. 279 00:16:54,000 --> 00:16:57,080 Speaker 2: On this one because it's so prominent. Good, Okay, fifth 280 00:16:57,520 --> 00:17:01,600 Speaker 2: misguided slogan. Religion is just a private matter and has 281 00:17:01,680 --> 00:17:07,080 Speaker 2: no place in public ethics. 282 00:17:05,240 --> 00:17:10,080 Speaker 3: False, kay, And the script the Scripture, I think is 283 00:17:10,160 --> 00:17:14,119 Speaker 3: very is very good at least. Christianity was never intended 284 00:17:14,280 --> 00:17:17,960 Speaker 3: to be simply a private matter, even in the Early Church. 285 00:17:18,080 --> 00:17:21,760 Speaker 3: Even the statement Jesus's Lord in the early Church was 286 00:17:21,800 --> 00:17:26,320 Speaker 3: a profoundly political statement because it was saying that Jesus 287 00:17:26,359 --> 00:17:30,600 Speaker 3: is Lord and Caesar is not, and that had that 288 00:17:30,640 --> 00:17:34,159 Speaker 3: could have disastrous consequences if you said that in the 289 00:17:34,160 --> 00:17:38,160 Speaker 3: wrong company. And you know, when the when the scripture 290 00:17:38,200 --> 00:17:42,959 Speaker 3: talks about God's the Kingdom of God coming in its fullness, 291 00:17:43,480 --> 00:17:47,040 Speaker 3: it's true. There is there is an individual component to that, 292 00:17:47,400 --> 00:17:50,119 Speaker 3: where individuals are rightly related to God and every knee 293 00:17:50,119 --> 00:17:53,040 Speaker 3: bows at the name of Christ. But there's also a 294 00:17:53,080 --> 00:17:58,080 Speaker 3: social component to that, and that justice will rule when 295 00:17:58,119 --> 00:18:00,920 Speaker 3: in Isaiah forty two, for example, when the servantive Yahweh 296 00:18:01,000 --> 00:18:04,240 Speaker 3: is coming to bring his kingdom, he brings he comes 297 00:18:04,240 --> 00:18:09,119 Speaker 3: to bring justice to the nations and the islands and 298 00:18:09,160 --> 00:18:13,000 Speaker 3: the coastlands. Hope in his justice that will become. That 299 00:18:13,040 --> 00:18:16,399 Speaker 3: will becoming and it's a proper ordering of society. Now, 300 00:18:16,480 --> 00:18:19,080 Speaker 3: I admit I'm not exactly sure what that's going to 301 00:18:19,119 --> 00:18:22,000 Speaker 3: look like, but it will mean that at the least 302 00:18:22,000 --> 00:18:25,119 Speaker 3: that culture will be free from sin and corruption in 303 00:18:25,240 --> 00:18:30,040 Speaker 3: ways that I think will be revolutionary. So I say, 304 00:18:30,119 --> 00:18:34,639 Speaker 3: Christianity is an intrinsically public faith, and to say that 305 00:18:34,680 --> 00:18:37,560 Speaker 3: it's a private matter is actually a violation of a 306 00:18:37,640 --> 00:18:40,960 Speaker 3: Christian's religious freedom. So to say that it has no 307 00:18:41,000 --> 00:18:45,479 Speaker 3: place in public ethics is essentially to say that the 308 00:18:45,520 --> 00:18:50,480 Speaker 3: First Amendment that guarantees freedom of religion only applies to 309 00:18:50,720 --> 00:18:54,439 Speaker 3: what you do in private, not in public. And so 310 00:18:54,520 --> 00:18:57,040 Speaker 3: it's a trunk. It's a truncated view of Christian faith 311 00:18:57,320 --> 00:19:00,560 Speaker 3: and a truncated view of what religious freedom is now. 312 00:19:00,560 --> 00:19:03,440 Speaker 2: And I hear religion is just a private matter. Part 313 00:19:03,440 --> 00:19:05,920 Speaker 2: of me wants to go, what do we mean by religion? 314 00:19:06,680 --> 00:19:09,840 Speaker 2: It's not just those who have a Christian or Jewish 315 00:19:09,960 --> 00:19:11,320 Speaker 2: or Muslim faith. 316 00:19:11,440 --> 00:19:13,680 Speaker 3: Yeah, and I'm saying the Muslim faith is much more 317 00:19:13,720 --> 00:19:14,880 Speaker 3: public than Christian faith. 318 00:19:15,080 --> 00:19:18,240 Speaker 2: By its very nature it is, and they're in public, 319 00:19:18,400 --> 00:19:19,359 Speaker 2: top down. 320 00:19:19,240 --> 00:19:22,119 Speaker 3: Both, I mean for both. That's intrinsic to them, and 321 00:19:22,160 --> 00:19:24,240 Speaker 3: what it looks like in Islam is entirely different. 322 00:19:24,400 --> 00:19:27,119 Speaker 1: Yes, I agree, fair enough, but it raises the question. 323 00:19:27,160 --> 00:19:29,840 Speaker 2: And Frank Beckwith had a book probably twenty twenty five 324 00:19:29,920 --> 00:19:34,080 Speaker 2: years ago on kind of law and related to Darwinism, 325 00:19:34,720 --> 00:19:36,800 Speaker 2: and you see the same kind of debate like keep 326 00:19:36,800 --> 00:19:39,920 Speaker 2: intelligent design and religion out of the classroom. Yeah, it's 327 00:19:39,960 --> 00:19:43,000 Speaker 2: a section saying, well, what is religion. You don't have 328 00:19:43,040 --> 00:19:44,960 Speaker 2: to believe in a god to be a religion because 329 00:19:45,200 --> 00:19:48,560 Speaker 2: Buddhism is religious, there's no God, doesn't have to be 330 00:19:48,600 --> 00:19:51,399 Speaker 2: an afterlife. I mean, the Sadducees were religious, but they 331 00:19:51,400 --> 00:19:53,920 Speaker 2: don't believe it and at least a resurrection in the 332 00:19:53,960 --> 00:19:55,720 Speaker 2: way that you and I do. In the Pharisees did 333 00:19:56,080 --> 00:19:58,840 Speaker 2: and he actually makes a case that like secularism could 334 00:19:58,880 --> 00:20:03,119 Speaker 2: be a kind of religion because there's metaphysical commitments beliefs 335 00:20:03,119 --> 00:20:05,760 Speaker 2: about what it means to be human are placed in society. 336 00:20:06,200 --> 00:20:10,280 Speaker 2: So I don't think this is often taken selectively to 337 00:20:10,359 --> 00:20:16,760 Speaker 2: disqualify certain religious beliefs, not applied consistently. That's one area 338 00:20:16,800 --> 00:20:20,840 Speaker 2: we could discuss further. But I also know you're not 339 00:20:21,000 --> 00:20:24,639 Speaker 2: saying Christians should just say and make their case, well, 340 00:20:24,680 --> 00:20:26,400 Speaker 2: you should be in fair of the death penalty, because 341 00:20:26,480 --> 00:20:30,479 Speaker 2: Genesis nine to six says this connect the fact that 342 00:20:30,520 --> 00:20:33,800 Speaker 2: religion is not private to how we as Christians argue 343 00:20:33,840 --> 00:20:35,960 Speaker 2: publicly in a pluralistic society. 344 00:20:36,359 --> 00:20:38,639 Speaker 3: Yeah, that's a that's a great point. And there's I 345 00:20:38,640 --> 00:20:46,960 Speaker 3: would say, there's there's nothing necessarily follows from Christian morality 346 00:20:47,480 --> 00:20:53,720 Speaker 3: to the law without further argument. So why should certain 347 00:20:53,800 --> 00:20:56,679 Speaker 3: things be a matter of law as opposed to just 348 00:20:56,720 --> 00:21:00,280 Speaker 3: a matter of morality? That at the least that requires 349 00:21:00,320 --> 00:21:04,600 Speaker 3: an additional argument. Now, for example, we believest suicide is 350 00:21:04,680 --> 00:21:10,520 Speaker 3: morally wrong, but why that should be legally restricted doesn't 351 00:21:10,680 --> 00:21:13,840 Speaker 3: follow automatically from the fact that we believe it's a 352 00:21:13,920 --> 00:21:18,159 Speaker 3: moral It requires an additional argument, which I've made at length. 353 00:21:18,640 --> 00:21:21,960 Speaker 3: You have in every edition of Moral Choices on that. 354 00:21:22,000 --> 00:21:24,280 Speaker 3: And I think there are good reasons to think that 355 00:21:24,280 --> 00:21:28,280 Speaker 3: that ought not be legalized. But it's not because that 356 00:21:29,160 --> 00:21:33,959 Speaker 3: it's a religious view. It's consistent with the religion, with 357 00:21:34,160 --> 00:21:38,880 Speaker 3: Christian ethics, but not derivative from Christian ethics. 358 00:21:38,520 --> 00:21:41,280 Speaker 2: Fair enough, And this is where natural law comes into play. 359 00:21:41,480 --> 00:21:44,919 Speaker 2: And what Jesus taught about something is a piece of 360 00:21:45,000 --> 00:21:47,600 Speaker 2: an argument, but it needs to be much broader well. 361 00:21:47,600 --> 00:21:50,000 Speaker 3: And usually when people say religion is just a private matter, 362 00:21:50,080 --> 00:21:55,960 Speaker 3: what they mean by religion is worship. And when, for example, 363 00:21:55,960 --> 00:22:00,600 Speaker 3: when the Obama administration tried to restrict religious freedom back 364 00:22:00,680 --> 00:22:06,400 Speaker 3: during his administration, he's specifically defined or limited the freedom 365 00:22:06,440 --> 00:22:09,280 Speaker 3: of religion to what takes place, this in the houses 366 00:22:09,320 --> 00:22:13,520 Speaker 3: of worship, in church's synagogues, moss and things like that. 367 00:22:13,800 --> 00:22:18,520 Speaker 3: It specifically eliminated the public dimension of that. 368 00:22:18,480 --> 00:22:21,199 Speaker 2: Christians should not accept that. And also historically in our 369 00:22:21,240 --> 00:22:24,399 Speaker 2: country we have not accepted that. Okay, let's shift to 370 00:22:24,560 --> 00:22:28,080 Speaker 2: misguided moral slogan number six. Morality is a matter of 371 00:22:28,200 --> 00:22:31,840 Speaker 2: subjective taste, not objective truth. 372 00:22:32,200 --> 00:22:35,159 Speaker 3: This is one of my favorite ones, okay, to deal with. 373 00:22:35,480 --> 00:22:37,600 Speaker 3: And I'll give you an example of Chris. I was 374 00:22:37,600 --> 00:22:42,520 Speaker 3: speaking at a public high school years ago on the 375 00:22:43,080 --> 00:22:48,119 Speaker 3: note the subject of relativism and morality, and there was 376 00:22:48,160 --> 00:22:50,080 Speaker 3: a young woman who was sitting right in the front row, 377 00:22:51,040 --> 00:22:54,280 Speaker 3: and she was making this passionate point that I think 378 00:22:54,320 --> 00:22:55,720 Speaker 3: we ought to be able to make up our own 379 00:22:55,760 --> 00:23:00,199 Speaker 3: moral rules for ourselves, and that basically my moralules her 380 00:23:00,240 --> 00:23:03,040 Speaker 3: mind and yours or yours. And she had a brand 381 00:23:03,080 --> 00:23:06,160 Speaker 3: new iPhone on her desk. See you can see where 382 00:23:06,160 --> 00:23:08,360 Speaker 3: this is going. I can, And as I was sort 383 00:23:08,400 --> 00:23:11,840 Speaker 3: of casually making my way through through the presentation, I 384 00:23:11,920 --> 00:23:13,560 Speaker 3: just walked over to her desk and picked up her 385 00:23:13,600 --> 00:23:15,720 Speaker 3: iPhone and put it actually and put it put it 386 00:23:15,720 --> 00:23:19,200 Speaker 3: in my pocket. Wow. OK. And she was too polite. 387 00:23:19,680 --> 00:23:22,159 Speaker 3: She had some semblance of morality. I think that she 388 00:23:22,280 --> 00:23:25,280 Speaker 3: was too polite to object right on the spot. But 389 00:23:25,560 --> 00:23:28,120 Speaker 3: I went one and went off for another, like twenty minutes. 390 00:23:28,920 --> 00:23:31,080 Speaker 3: I had her iPhone right in my pocket, and so 391 00:23:31,200 --> 00:23:32,840 Speaker 3: she said, came it to me afterwards and said, well, 392 00:23:32,880 --> 00:23:35,800 Speaker 3: can I have my phone back? I said no, sorry, 393 00:23:35,800 --> 00:23:40,119 Speaker 3: you can't. And she said, well, well why not? And 394 00:23:40,160 --> 00:23:42,000 Speaker 3: I said, well, you said that we ought to be 395 00:23:42,000 --> 00:23:44,359 Speaker 3: able to make up our own moral rules for ourselves. 396 00:23:44,880 --> 00:23:47,760 Speaker 3: And my moral rules are that the people who are older, wiser, 397 00:23:47,800 --> 00:23:50,280 Speaker 3: and more experienced are entitled to the stuff of people 398 00:23:50,280 --> 00:23:53,080 Speaker 3: who are younger, dumber, and less experienced. I don't think 399 00:23:53,119 --> 00:23:55,479 Speaker 3: I said it quite that bluntly. Sure, and so but 400 00:23:55,560 --> 00:23:58,480 Speaker 3: she but she could tell she was sort of fluming. 401 00:23:58,560 --> 00:24:00,600 Speaker 3: But and she finally just blurted out, she said, but 402 00:24:01,480 --> 00:24:07,280 Speaker 3: that's wrong. And I said, well, tell me why that's wrong. 403 00:24:07,520 --> 00:24:09,960 Speaker 3: Good question, And you know, then I gave her a 404 00:24:09,960 --> 00:24:12,040 Speaker 3: phone back. Of course, we left on good terms. But 405 00:24:13,640 --> 00:24:16,479 Speaker 3: you know, I think we shown we commonly think of 406 00:24:16,600 --> 00:24:20,840 Speaker 3: morality the same way we do religious belief and philosophical 407 00:24:21,720 --> 00:24:26,520 Speaker 3: philosophical positions that we hold as being matters of belief 408 00:24:26,600 --> 00:24:30,520 Speaker 3: instead of matters of fact. But I think I think 409 00:24:30,520 --> 00:24:35,159 Speaker 3: we can actually know that racial discrimination is wrong and 410 00:24:35,200 --> 00:24:37,719 Speaker 3: that sexual assault is wrong. I love what our colleague 411 00:24:37,760 --> 00:24:40,679 Speaker 3: Bill Craig says about that is, if you think sexual 412 00:24:40,680 --> 00:24:43,760 Speaker 3: assault is okay, you need a therapist, not an argument. 413 00:24:43,920 --> 00:24:46,719 Speaker 3: I think he's absolutely right about that. Now, there are 414 00:24:46,720 --> 00:24:50,919 Speaker 3: some things that we disagree about, but disagreement does not 415 00:24:51,040 --> 00:24:56,120 Speaker 3: make them subjective. Good disagreement just means that we're we 416 00:24:56,160 --> 00:24:59,840 Speaker 3: have we have a disagreement about what the objective truth 417 00:24:59,920 --> 00:25:03,480 Speaker 3: is is in morality, and so I think you know, 418 00:25:03,520 --> 00:25:06,639 Speaker 3: our culture I think sometimes doesn't doesn't really understand the 419 00:25:06,640 --> 00:25:11,760 Speaker 3: difference between objective and subjective statements. Where an objective statement 420 00:25:11,800 --> 00:25:13,800 Speaker 3: is something that is true regardless of how you feel 421 00:25:13,800 --> 00:25:17,400 Speaker 3: about it. That's right. Subjective statement, what is true determined 422 00:25:17,880 --> 00:25:20,399 Speaker 3: by what you feel about it, Like my preference for 423 00:25:20,480 --> 00:25:23,080 Speaker 3: ice cream or the thinking my kid, my kid is 424 00:25:23,119 --> 00:25:26,199 Speaker 3: just the cutest kid in the neighborhood. Obviously, those are 425 00:25:26,280 --> 00:25:30,399 Speaker 3: subjective things, and there are some there's some objective things 426 00:25:31,119 --> 00:25:34,040 Speaker 3: that we can disagree about. Some objective things that we're 427 00:25:34,119 --> 00:25:37,159 Speaker 3: not sure about. Like I believe the Los Angeles Dodgers 428 00:25:37,160 --> 00:25:39,480 Speaker 3: will win the World Series this year, but we won't 429 00:25:39,520 --> 00:25:43,040 Speaker 3: know about that. And some things that are objective that 430 00:25:43,119 --> 00:25:46,320 Speaker 3: are false, like the statement that I can bench press 431 00:25:46,320 --> 00:25:50,560 Speaker 3: three hundred pounds is it is clearly false and I've 432 00:25:50,680 --> 00:25:54,120 Speaker 3: never been able to do that and never will. So 433 00:25:54,480 --> 00:25:56,199 Speaker 3: I think we have we just have to, you know, 434 00:25:56,359 --> 00:25:58,920 Speaker 3: we have to be careful how we look at the 435 00:25:58,960 --> 00:26:03,560 Speaker 3: notion of objective, because it's those things that are that 436 00:26:03,960 --> 00:26:07,880 Speaker 3: the truth of which are determined independent of my own 437 00:26:08,359 --> 00:26:09,560 Speaker 3: feelings about them. 438 00:26:10,000 --> 00:26:12,120 Speaker 2: It's a great answer, and I want to point out 439 00:26:12,160 --> 00:26:15,080 Speaker 2: what your example of taking the iPhone implied is that 440 00:26:15,720 --> 00:26:20,000 Speaker 2: she was spouting off that morality's subjective but deeply knew 441 00:26:20,680 --> 00:26:24,639 Speaker 2: that it's actually objective, and so your exercise was to 442 00:26:24,840 --> 00:26:29,400 Speaker 2: illustrate what she really knew and show the inconsistency. 443 00:26:29,520 --> 00:26:31,879 Speaker 1: And so we know it and we also don't. 444 00:26:31,800 --> 00:26:35,800 Speaker 2: Live like it's really true. So morality is not something 445 00:26:35,800 --> 00:26:40,160 Speaker 2: that you prove like math or history or science. It's 446 00:26:40,200 --> 00:26:43,760 Speaker 2: something like our declaration of independence. We know these things 447 00:26:43,880 --> 00:26:49,239 Speaker 2: because they are self evident. That's how morality works, and 448 00:26:49,280 --> 00:26:54,040 Speaker 2: your illustration brought that out all right. Seventh misguided claim 449 00:26:54,359 --> 00:26:56,960 Speaker 2: science can tell us what is right and wrong. 450 00:26:57,880 --> 00:27:04,119 Speaker 3: Uh, absolutely not science. I think science can tell us 451 00:27:04,600 --> 00:27:07,760 Speaker 3: how things work. It can't tell us how things ought 452 00:27:07,800 --> 00:27:12,080 Speaker 3: to work, good distinction. Can it can tell us, you know, 453 00:27:12,160 --> 00:27:14,639 Speaker 3: how things function, but it cannot it can't tell us 454 00:27:14,680 --> 00:27:20,040 Speaker 3: the ends for which they were designed to function. And 455 00:27:20,080 --> 00:27:23,000 Speaker 3: I think that the notion that science that this sort 456 00:27:23,000 --> 00:27:27,320 Speaker 3: of morality is a is a science, I think. I 457 00:27:27,320 --> 00:27:29,560 Speaker 3: think what people mean by that is they want it 458 00:27:29,600 --> 00:27:32,720 Speaker 3: to be more than just a gut intuition. And I 459 00:27:32,800 --> 00:27:36,480 Speaker 3: think that's a it's a plea for good reasons, and 460 00:27:37,160 --> 00:27:39,760 Speaker 3: just we can have we can have disagreements, and yeah, 461 00:27:39,800 --> 00:27:42,480 Speaker 3: we have disagree We can have disagreements in science, but 462 00:27:42,560 --> 00:27:47,880 Speaker 3: that doesn't render science null avoid for what it's designed 463 00:27:47,880 --> 00:27:51,119 Speaker 3: to do. And just because we have moral disagreements doesn't 464 00:27:51,160 --> 00:27:55,360 Speaker 3: mean that the whole exercise of morality is useless. We 465 00:27:55,440 --> 00:27:58,560 Speaker 3: just had we have disagreements about what the moral thing is, 466 00:27:58,600 --> 00:28:01,920 Speaker 3: which we should expect since the lenses through which we 467 00:28:01,960 --> 00:28:05,119 Speaker 3: see morality in a fallen world are not not one 468 00:28:05,160 --> 00:28:08,679 Speaker 3: hundred percent clear, right, And this, I think this is 469 00:28:08,680 --> 00:28:11,399 Speaker 3: why we can have people who say that, you know, 470 00:28:11,440 --> 00:28:14,800 Speaker 3: abortion is justifiable for nine months of pregnancy, you know, 471 00:28:15,640 --> 00:28:18,560 Speaker 3: and we can we can disagree profoundly on that. And 472 00:28:18,640 --> 00:28:21,719 Speaker 3: because of the fall of our fallen nature, people can 473 00:28:21,760 --> 00:28:25,040 Speaker 3: have all sorts of different motives for holding the moral 474 00:28:25,080 --> 00:28:29,240 Speaker 3: beliefs that they do. Right, I think people can hope, 475 00:28:29,240 --> 00:28:32,840 Speaker 3: people can hold beliefs about abortion because perhaps because some 476 00:28:33,000 --> 00:28:37,080 Speaker 3: experience in their life with you know, with abortion has 477 00:28:37,680 --> 00:28:40,440 Speaker 3: you know, has has tempered, has tempered some of their 478 00:28:40,480 --> 00:28:43,280 Speaker 3: what they would otherwise say about it if we were 479 00:28:43,360 --> 00:28:47,520 Speaker 3: just a purely objective moral analysis. So I think there's 480 00:28:47,800 --> 00:28:53,680 Speaker 3: science science ill equipped to tell us about morality. I 481 00:28:53,680 --> 00:28:56,920 Speaker 3: remember that that same stem cell debate. I remember I 482 00:28:56,920 --> 00:28:59,160 Speaker 3: was sitting. One of the panelists was it was a 483 00:28:59,160 --> 00:29:03,480 Speaker 3: biology profit at the local university, and I remember him 484 00:29:03,520 --> 00:29:06,200 Speaker 3: saying that, you know, when I said that science can't 485 00:29:06,240 --> 00:29:09,160 Speaker 3: tell us what kind of a thing an embryo actually is. 486 00:29:09,280 --> 00:29:11,560 Speaker 3: It can tell us how it functions, but it can't 487 00:29:11,560 --> 00:29:13,360 Speaker 3: tell us if it's if it's a person or not, 488 00:29:13,760 --> 00:29:16,120 Speaker 3: and he conceded that I was right about that. I 489 00:29:16,200 --> 00:29:18,920 Speaker 3: nearly fell out of my chair. I thought, I can't 490 00:29:18,920 --> 00:29:22,640 Speaker 3: believe a science is actually conceding that science has limits 491 00:29:22,640 --> 00:29:25,480 Speaker 3: when it comes to metaphysics and morality. 492 00:29:25,680 --> 00:29:26,160 Speaker 1: That's great. 493 00:29:26,520 --> 00:29:29,080 Speaker 2: Your distinction, I think is helpful between science and morality. 494 00:29:29,120 --> 00:29:31,120 Speaker 2: The way I would phrase it is science is a 495 00:29:31,280 --> 00:29:37,520 Speaker 2: descriptive discipline. It describes cell division, it describes geological formation, 496 00:29:38,240 --> 00:29:42,320 Speaker 2: it describes processes in physics where there's an action and 497 00:29:42,400 --> 00:29:46,800 Speaker 2: a reaction. Morality is not descriptive. It's prescriptive. It says 498 00:29:46,880 --> 00:29:48,440 Speaker 2: you ought to do this. 499 00:29:48,720 --> 00:29:49,560 Speaker 3: It's a normative. 500 00:29:49,800 --> 00:29:53,280 Speaker 2: Normative you ought to do this, you should not do that. 501 00:29:53,880 --> 00:29:57,720 Speaker 2: And so it's a category fallacy to apply science and morality. Now. 502 00:29:57,760 --> 00:29:59,680 Speaker 2: Sam Harris, I think his book is called The Moral 503 00:29:59,760 --> 00:30:02,800 Speaker 2: land Escape, where he argues that science can help understand 504 00:30:02,840 --> 00:30:05,880 Speaker 2: right and wrong. Now, science can help adjudicate between what 505 00:30:06,400 --> 00:30:10,560 Speaker 2: beliefs and behaviors, help us let better flourish, Like we 506 00:30:10,600 --> 00:30:13,800 Speaker 2: could objectively study that. You can only get that off 507 00:30:13,840 --> 00:30:17,440 Speaker 2: the ground. And Sam Harris concedes his point if we 508 00:30:17,560 --> 00:30:21,960 Speaker 2: kind of muzzle in this commitment to the objective flourishing 509 00:30:22,080 --> 00:30:25,680 Speaker 2: of others and society, which is the very thing science 510 00:30:25,840 --> 00:30:30,560 Speaker 2: and atheism cannot provide. All right, we got three more 511 00:30:30,720 --> 00:30:33,800 Speaker 2: misguided notions, and this one relates to something you said earlier. 512 00:30:34,520 --> 00:30:38,520 Speaker 2: Cultural disagreement proves there's no moral truth. 513 00:30:39,640 --> 00:30:43,000 Speaker 3: No cultural disagreement just proves that we disagree on what 514 00:30:43,160 --> 00:30:47,640 Speaker 3: the moral truth of a specific issue actually is. Okay, 515 00:30:47,680 --> 00:30:52,320 Speaker 3: nothing more. And if that, if that were true, then 516 00:30:52,600 --> 00:30:56,800 Speaker 3: science goes out the window too, because sciences disagree on 517 00:30:56,960 --> 00:31:00,920 Speaker 3: all sorts of things all the time. But yet nobody, 518 00:31:01,320 --> 00:31:05,640 Speaker 3: nobody dismisses science as being this inherently subjective thing just 519 00:31:05,720 --> 00:31:10,120 Speaker 3: because there's a disagreement about you know what, you know 520 00:31:10,200 --> 00:31:13,440 Speaker 3: what certain you know, certain actioms of science are are 521 00:31:13,520 --> 00:31:18,520 Speaker 3: to be believed. So I'm not willing to throw science out, 522 00:31:18,880 --> 00:31:21,800 Speaker 3: and neither should the sciences be willing to throw morality 523 00:31:21,800 --> 00:31:23,320 Speaker 3: out for the same reason. 524 00:31:23,520 --> 00:31:23,960 Speaker 1: That's great. 525 00:31:23,960 --> 00:31:25,280 Speaker 2: I see the same thing when I talk to my 526 00:31:25,280 --> 00:31:27,080 Speaker 2: students about objective beauty. 527 00:31:27,600 --> 00:31:29,360 Speaker 1: I'll say a rose is beautiful. 528 00:31:29,400 --> 00:31:32,520 Speaker 2: If you don't think it's beautiful, you're just as wrong 529 00:31:32,560 --> 00:31:35,120 Speaker 2: as if you don't think two plus two equals four. 530 00:31:35,800 --> 00:31:38,920 Speaker 2: And the most common objection is, well, what about people 531 00:31:39,200 --> 00:31:43,040 Speaker 2: differ over what is beautiful? And I make the same point. 532 00:31:43,080 --> 00:31:46,360 Speaker 2: I say, if people differ over scientific claim, it doesn't 533 00:31:46,360 --> 00:31:49,800 Speaker 2: mean there's no truth. If people differ over a historical 534 00:31:50,560 --> 00:31:53,280 Speaker 2: theory to explain the origin of World War One doesn't 535 00:31:53,320 --> 00:31:57,640 Speaker 2: mean there's no truth. So the same applies to beauty, 536 00:31:57,680 --> 00:32:01,200 Speaker 2: the same applies to morality. All agreement shows is that 537 00:32:01,240 --> 00:32:05,280 Speaker 2: people differ. It doesn't follow that therefore there's no truth. 538 00:32:05,600 --> 00:32:07,640 Speaker 2: The only way it would is if we assume from 539 00:32:07,640 --> 00:32:11,560 Speaker 2: the get go that we're talking about subjective claims, which 540 00:32:11,680 --> 00:32:14,400 Speaker 2: needs to be demonstrated, not assumed. 541 00:32:14,080 --> 00:32:19,240 Speaker 3: Right, and people don't usually get super passionate about subjective claims. 542 00:32:20,040 --> 00:32:22,560 Speaker 1: Usually is usually yes, I agree. 543 00:32:22,520 --> 00:32:24,840 Speaker 3: You know, I don't go to the steak for my 544 00:32:25,000 --> 00:32:28,880 Speaker 3: view that chocolate ice creams tastier than vanilla. 545 00:32:28,400 --> 00:32:32,280 Speaker 2: Chocolate peanut butter the steak. I agree though, for certain. 546 00:32:32,840 --> 00:32:36,760 Speaker 3: And I think the passion with which people disagree about 547 00:32:36,840 --> 00:32:41,000 Speaker 3: things reflects how much they believe that a truth is 548 00:32:41,000 --> 00:32:41,480 Speaker 3: at stake. 549 00:32:41,760 --> 00:32:44,160 Speaker 2: And that's Lewis's argument that he makes at the beginning 550 00:32:44,200 --> 00:32:46,600 Speaker 2: of Mere Christianity. If anybody watching this has not read 551 00:32:46,600 --> 00:32:49,800 Speaker 2: the first five books or short sections of Mere Christianity, 552 00:32:50,440 --> 00:32:54,360 Speaker 2: like hit pause on this, read it and then come back, 553 00:32:54,400 --> 00:32:58,000 Speaker 2: because he makes that very point, and I think it's compelling. Okay, 554 00:32:58,040 --> 00:33:01,200 Speaker 2: two more misguided moral notions, all right, Scott number nine. 555 00:33:01,480 --> 00:33:04,800 Speaker 2: Jesus said never judge, so don't. 556 00:33:05,480 --> 00:33:07,640 Speaker 3: He didn't And you should. 557 00:33:10,600 --> 00:33:11,600 Speaker 1: Like short question. 558 00:33:13,040 --> 00:33:17,600 Speaker 3: Jesus never said don't judge. Read the rest of the passage. 559 00:33:18,680 --> 00:33:21,120 Speaker 3: He says, judge not and you will not be judged. 560 00:33:21,400 --> 00:33:24,880 Speaker 3: But he goes on to say five verses later, be 561 00:33:24,960 --> 00:33:28,920 Speaker 3: careful when you take the spec out of your brother's eye, 562 00:33:29,000 --> 00:33:33,840 Speaker 3: which is a figure of speech for judgment. Don't mistake 563 00:33:33,880 --> 00:33:36,440 Speaker 3: the fact that you might have a log in your 564 00:33:36,480 --> 00:33:39,520 Speaker 3: own eye. When he says don't judge, he's saying don't 565 00:33:39,600 --> 00:33:44,000 Speaker 3: judge hypocritically, don't judge without looking in the mirror yourself. 566 00:33:44,880 --> 00:33:48,080 Speaker 3: And the reality is Sean, we make moral assessments all 567 00:33:48,160 --> 00:33:52,440 Speaker 3: the time. You know, every time we say that somebody 568 00:33:52,480 --> 00:33:56,320 Speaker 3: is acting out of character, we've just made a moral assessment. 569 00:33:57,320 --> 00:34:00,520 Speaker 3: Anytime you write a letter of recommendation for some you're 570 00:34:00,520 --> 00:34:05,000 Speaker 3: making a moral assessment of their character. Anytime you decide 571 00:34:05,040 --> 00:34:07,920 Speaker 3: not to do business with someone you don't trust, you're 572 00:34:07,920 --> 00:34:11,279 Speaker 3: making a moral assessment of their character. How going to 573 00:34:11,320 --> 00:34:12,799 Speaker 3: go on and on with examples of. 574 00:34:12,760 --> 00:34:14,480 Speaker 2: That, that's a great Now, By the way, not only 575 00:34:14,560 --> 00:34:18,280 Speaker 2: did Jesus not say to never judge, he will judge 576 00:34:18,320 --> 00:34:20,960 Speaker 2: all of us at the end of time, and he 577 00:34:21,000 --> 00:34:26,279 Speaker 2: made moral judgments about hypocrisy moral judgments about the Pharisees. 578 00:34:26,400 --> 00:34:29,799 Speaker 2: He made moral judgments and gave us an example to 579 00:34:29,880 --> 00:34:33,080 Speaker 2: do so, which I think you're right in Matthew five 580 00:34:33,120 --> 00:34:35,520 Speaker 2: through seven. In the Sermon of the Mount chapter seven, 581 00:34:36,000 --> 00:34:40,919 Speaker 2: it's about don't judge hypocritically. John chapter seven twenty four says, 582 00:34:40,920 --> 00:34:46,160 Speaker 2: stop judging by appearances. Make a righteous judgment. So if 583 00:34:46,160 --> 00:34:49,520 Speaker 2: we're not supposed to judge hypocritically, we are supposed to 584 00:34:49,640 --> 00:34:55,120 Speaker 2: judge according to a righteous judgment. First, judge ourselves. That's 585 00:34:55,160 --> 00:34:57,319 Speaker 2: the point of the Matthew seven is that if we 586 00:34:57,320 --> 00:35:00,160 Speaker 2: don't judge ourselves first, we won't be able to see clearly, 587 00:35:00,520 --> 00:35:03,040 Speaker 2: and we also will not have the right spirit and 588 00:35:03,239 --> 00:35:08,200 Speaker 2: attitude in approaching others, which of course is Matthew chapter eighteen. 589 00:35:08,480 --> 00:35:11,520 Speaker 3: Which presumes you're making a moral assessment. 590 00:35:11,719 --> 00:35:12,680 Speaker 1: That's exactly some way. 591 00:35:12,719 --> 00:35:15,680 Speaker 3: And Paul says that in Galatian six, you know, if 592 00:35:15,760 --> 00:35:18,279 Speaker 3: you see a brother caught in sin, you know you 593 00:35:18,400 --> 00:35:22,600 Speaker 3: go to him and confront him paraphrasing that, sure, but 594 00:35:22,719 --> 00:35:25,759 Speaker 3: you offer correction. You know the scripture is there to 595 00:35:25,800 --> 00:35:26,600 Speaker 3: offer correction. 596 00:35:27,360 --> 00:35:27,760 Speaker 1: Agreed. 597 00:35:27,840 --> 00:35:32,680 Speaker 2: And Paul also says one Corinthiana's five about judging outsiders 598 00:35:32,680 --> 00:35:35,920 Speaker 2: would be different than your example, correct of judging a 599 00:35:36,000 --> 00:35:40,319 Speaker 2: fellow brother. But the claim that Jesus said never judge though, 600 00:35:40,320 --> 00:35:42,759 Speaker 2: don't He didn't say that we're supposed to according to 601 00:35:42,800 --> 00:35:46,239 Speaker 2: scriptures in a righteous way, not hypocritically good. All right, 602 00:35:46,280 --> 00:35:47,759 Speaker 2: last one. We kind of dealt with this one before, 603 00:35:47,800 --> 00:35:49,640 Speaker 2: but it's so important and we live in such a 604 00:35:49,680 --> 00:35:53,040 Speaker 2: politicized age that I think we need to get this right. 605 00:35:53,520 --> 00:35:58,160 Speaker 2: So misguided slogan number ten, Scott, religious views don't belong 606 00:35:58,239 --> 00:36:00,600 Speaker 2: in politics. 607 00:36:00,640 --> 00:36:04,080 Speaker 3: That's a violation of the First Amendment, the violation of 608 00:36:04,120 --> 00:36:09,800 Speaker 3: religious freedom to say that, because you are forcing religious 609 00:36:09,880 --> 00:36:14,000 Speaker 3: views to be kept private and saying that the public 610 00:36:14,120 --> 00:36:19,880 Speaker 3: dimension of someone's religious faith has no place. Reality is 611 00:36:20,280 --> 00:36:27,000 Speaker 3: that religion has always infused politics, It's always infused public policy, 612 00:36:27,600 --> 00:36:31,200 Speaker 3: and the founders did not see any problem with that. 613 00:36:33,040 --> 00:36:37,360 Speaker 3: In fact, the founder's view was that the democracy couldn't 614 00:36:37,360 --> 00:36:44,120 Speaker 3: survive without a regular infusion of religion and morality. And 615 00:36:44,239 --> 00:36:47,799 Speaker 3: you know, Jefferson and Madison others, they were clear that 616 00:36:47,880 --> 00:36:52,080 Speaker 3: the laws need to be infused with the moral beliefs 617 00:36:52,080 --> 00:36:57,319 Speaker 3: that religion both in nurtures and inspires. So I think 618 00:36:57,360 --> 00:37:03,440 Speaker 3: even the debate over abolitionist slavery was fundamentally a moral debate. 619 00:37:03,840 --> 00:37:07,680 Speaker 3: I mean, Lincoln and Douglas debated for hours on this. 620 00:37:09,120 --> 00:37:11,680 Speaker 3: The civil rights movement, as you pointed out earlier, was 621 00:37:11,719 --> 00:37:16,759 Speaker 3: fundamentally a moral debate about the worth of African Americans. 622 00:37:17,280 --> 00:37:22,719 Speaker 3: Vietnam War, the New Deal around the time of the 623 00:37:22,719 --> 00:37:25,279 Speaker 3: Great Depression, the New Deal legislation, all of that was 624 00:37:25,880 --> 00:37:32,480 Speaker 3: morally based. What we've started hearing more recently is with 625 00:37:32,640 --> 00:37:35,440 Speaker 3: the rise of the religious right. Back in the seventies 626 00:37:35,480 --> 00:37:38,600 Speaker 3: and eighties, when you know, the pro life movement became 627 00:37:38,640 --> 00:37:41,719 Speaker 3: public there were just there were people who didn't like 628 00:37:41,800 --> 00:37:48,040 Speaker 3: that particular iteration of religion infusing public policy, but they 629 00:37:48,120 --> 00:37:51,160 Speaker 3: were part of a very rich and long tradition in 630 00:37:51,200 --> 00:37:52,040 Speaker 3: American history. 631 00:37:52,680 --> 00:37:55,160 Speaker 2: What I found is when people say religious views don't 632 00:37:55,200 --> 00:37:59,439 Speaker 2: belong in politics, they mean your exact religious views don't 633 00:37:59,440 --> 00:38:01,919 Speaker 2: belong in politics. And I see it from the right 634 00:38:01,960 --> 00:38:04,279 Speaker 2: to the left. I see it from the left to 635 00:38:04,360 --> 00:38:06,759 Speaker 2: the right, which is a reminder, if we're going to 636 00:38:06,760 --> 00:38:09,359 Speaker 2: bring our religious views into politics, we need to do 637 00:38:09,480 --> 00:38:14,359 Speaker 2: so consistently and faithfully to the text. And I can 638 00:38:14,400 --> 00:38:18,040 Speaker 2: think of our governor here, Newsom had I believe it 639 00:38:18,080 --> 00:38:20,480 Speaker 2: traced back to him. But there was some statements in 640 00:38:20,560 --> 00:38:26,040 Speaker 2: billboards around our state citing certain passages to justify moral 641 00:38:26,160 --> 00:38:30,640 Speaker 2: beliefs that you and I would differ strongly with. I 642 00:38:30,640 --> 00:38:33,239 Speaker 2: was like, wait a minute, if he takes that to 643 00:38:33,320 --> 00:38:36,799 Speaker 2: its logical conclusion, is going to actually be the opposite 644 00:38:36,840 --> 00:38:41,000 Speaker 2: of what he's arguing for. So it was selective. And 645 00:38:41,040 --> 00:38:42,960 Speaker 2: I've seen people do it on the right. I've seen 646 00:38:43,000 --> 00:38:45,120 Speaker 2: people do it on the left right. So we shouldn't 647 00:38:45,160 --> 00:38:47,960 Speaker 2: keep our religion out of politics. Number one, it violates 648 00:38:48,000 --> 00:38:51,560 Speaker 2: the First Amendment. Jesus didn't model doing this, by the way, 649 00:38:51,600 --> 00:38:56,520 Speaker 2: he was killed for political and religious reasons. 650 00:38:56,600 --> 00:38:57,120 Speaker 1: In that day. 651 00:38:57,160 --> 00:39:00,960 Speaker 2: They couldn't separate he was. There were political shoes taking place. 652 00:39:01,040 --> 00:39:02,680 Speaker 3: They were completely intergating. 653 00:39:02,280 --> 00:39:05,640 Speaker 2: And there were religious reasons, and they intertwined and we 654 00:39:05,719 --> 00:39:09,200 Speaker 2: couldn't untangle them that way, And that's often true today. 655 00:39:09,680 --> 00:39:12,320 Speaker 2: Let's just do it consistently, all right, Good job we 656 00:39:12,400 --> 00:39:15,000 Speaker 2: got through all ten of those. There were others that 657 00:39:15,120 --> 00:39:17,319 Speaker 2: came up. I'd love to know from folks if this 658 00:39:17,440 --> 00:39:20,880 Speaker 2: kind of like slogan and response is helpful kind of 659 00:39:20,920 --> 00:39:24,719 Speaker 2: doing what you might call popular apologetics and ethics. But 660 00:39:24,960 --> 00:39:26,920 Speaker 2: in your book, this is really just kind of some 661 00:39:27,000 --> 00:39:30,440 Speaker 2: of the preliminary material, and then you get into some 662 00:39:30,520 --> 00:39:33,759 Speaker 2: of these issues covered the first it's like this, I 663 00:39:33,760 --> 00:39:35,560 Speaker 2: mean we could, we could. We can actually do a 664 00:39:35,600 --> 00:39:38,480 Speaker 2: show on every single one of your chapters. Maybe at 665 00:39:38,480 --> 00:39:41,440 Speaker 2: some point we will. But tell us what's unique about 666 00:39:41,480 --> 00:39:43,040 Speaker 2: the fifth edition of Moral Choices. 667 00:39:43,280 --> 00:39:47,360 Speaker 3: Well, everything's been brought up to date. Okay, most of 668 00:39:47,400 --> 00:39:50,440 Speaker 3: the cases have been changed. They had a new material 669 00:39:50,560 --> 00:39:55,760 Speaker 3: on a theology of technology, great with h with underpinnings, 670 00:39:56,239 --> 00:39:59,000 Speaker 3: the theological underpinnings for how we treat things like AI, 671 00:39:59,120 --> 00:40:03,880 Speaker 3: robotics and social media screens and social media things like that. 672 00:40:04,400 --> 00:40:08,719 Speaker 3: There's an expanded section on criminal justice ethics and the 673 00:40:08,719 --> 00:40:11,759 Speaker 3: criminal justice system, not just the death penalty, which is 674 00:40:11,760 --> 00:40:15,040 Speaker 3: a part of that, but it's a broad expansion so 675 00:40:15,320 --> 00:40:18,920 Speaker 3: at all so at all levels of the criminal justice system. 676 00:40:19,480 --> 00:40:22,200 Speaker 3: What are the different ethical issues that have to be addressed. 677 00:40:23,400 --> 00:40:25,799 Speaker 3: That's a that's a big addition. I've said a lot 678 00:40:25,840 --> 00:40:30,000 Speaker 3: more about gender, transgender than I did in the fourth edition. 679 00:40:30,040 --> 00:40:32,920 Speaker 3: Was in twenty eighteen, before transgender was it was just 680 00:40:33,040 --> 00:40:37,680 Speaker 3: beginning to become a thing. And there's an expanded section 681 00:40:37,719 --> 00:40:44,760 Speaker 3: on race that I take up the topics of intersectionality, 682 00:40:45,480 --> 00:40:51,719 Speaker 3: white privilege, critical race theory. Have expanded section on all 683 00:40:51,760 --> 00:40:57,759 Speaker 3: of those things, expanded section on immigration, what else, and 684 00:40:58,080 --> 00:41:01,360 Speaker 3: this bringing things technolo logically up to date on the 685 00:41:01,520 --> 00:41:05,239 Speaker 3: on the debate on the Euthanasian system, suicide, reproductive technologies, 686 00:41:05,800 --> 00:41:09,600 Speaker 3: got new cases that reflect the new technologies. Gene editing 687 00:41:10,760 --> 00:41:13,560 Speaker 3: was wasn't the thing when the fourth edition came out. 688 00:41:13,640 --> 00:41:16,960 Speaker 3: So the ethical issues have to do with genetics and 689 00:41:17,080 --> 00:41:21,160 Speaker 3: genetics and biotechnology. That's all new stuff. And there are 690 00:41:21,200 --> 00:41:26,600 Speaker 3: probably one hundred or so sidebars which are examples from 691 00:41:26,880 --> 00:41:31,360 Speaker 3: popular media how ethical issues are being framed and being discussed. 692 00:41:32,760 --> 00:41:35,560 Speaker 3: Replaced over one hundred of those. Oh wow, so those 693 00:41:35,600 --> 00:41:38,600 Speaker 3: are all all from the last two years. 694 00:41:38,800 --> 00:41:41,759 Speaker 2: Good, Well, so we're going to have It's weird to 695 00:41:41,800 --> 00:41:44,680 Speaker 2: say we're going to have you back, but I I just. 696 00:41:44,640 --> 00:41:45,759 Speaker 1: Thought it out when I was saying it. 697 00:41:45,960 --> 00:41:49,319 Speaker 2: We will have a follow up conversation because I have 698 00:41:49,400 --> 00:41:53,080 Speaker 2: so many questions that the first version of Moral Choices, 699 00:41:53,120 --> 00:41:55,839 Speaker 2: first edition was the white cover right mid nineties. 700 00:41:55,560 --> 00:41:56,799 Speaker 3: Or so, over black cover. 701 00:41:56,880 --> 00:41:58,560 Speaker 1: That was the second Oh, that was the second edition. 702 00:41:58,640 --> 00:42:01,400 Speaker 2: Okay, so that's when I took your class in the nineties. 703 00:42:01,480 --> 00:42:03,840 Speaker 2: It's been my go to text since years and the 704 00:42:03,880 --> 00:42:06,680 Speaker 2: text by Ken Maguson are my two go to ethics 705 00:42:06,680 --> 00:42:07,840 Speaker 2: tests text. 706 00:42:07,880 --> 00:42:09,320 Speaker 1: But this is updated now. 707 00:42:09,760 --> 00:42:12,359 Speaker 2: So much has changed in that past seven to eight 708 00:42:12,480 --> 00:42:14,920 Speaker 2: years that it's a musket. We're going to come back 709 00:42:14,960 --> 00:42:17,280 Speaker 2: and talk about. You've been doing this for a while. 710 00:42:17,680 --> 00:42:21,320 Speaker 2: So how have the ethical questions changed in the church 711 00:42:21,680 --> 00:42:24,799 Speaker 2: outside of the church, How is technology changed? What have 712 00:42:24,880 --> 00:42:28,040 Speaker 2: you learned through this? Have you shifted on any issues? 713 00:42:28,520 --> 00:42:30,279 Speaker 2: We don't have to answer that now, we're going to 714 00:42:30,360 --> 00:42:30,960 Speaker 2: come back to that. 715 00:42:31,320 --> 00:42:33,400 Speaker 3: I'll just say that that's why there's five editions. 716 00:42:33,600 --> 00:42:37,400 Speaker 2: Okay, well, good, fair enough, fair enough. But if you 717 00:42:37,480 --> 00:42:41,160 Speaker 2: have questions specifically for Scott Ray, and I'm gonna say 718 00:42:40,719 --> 00:42:45,920 Speaker 2: one of the world's leading ethicists, certainly leading Christian ethicists, 719 00:42:46,440 --> 00:42:50,160 Speaker 2: send them into Think Biblically at Biola dot edu. Or 720 00:42:50,239 --> 00:42:52,680 Speaker 2: you can send them to Questions at Sean McDonnell, or 721 00:42:52,800 --> 00:42:54,920 Speaker 2: we will gather those and then we will bring you 722 00:42:54,960 --> 00:42:59,160 Speaker 2: better So on any of those topics that you just mentioned, 723 00:42:59,600 --> 00:43:03,520 Speaker 2: your dithical questions, even some of the toughest dilemmas, Like 724 00:43:03,560 --> 00:43:07,400 Speaker 2: if we could think of some of these impossibly difficult dilemmas, 725 00:43:07,760 --> 00:43:10,560 Speaker 2: would be fun maybe we'll take the top ten forty 726 00:43:10,680 --> 00:43:13,600 Speaker 2: difficult ones that would be really fun. But send those 727 00:43:13,680 --> 00:43:16,800 Speaker 2: questions in and before you click away, make sure you 728 00:43:16,880 --> 00:43:20,439 Speaker 2: hit subscribe to Think People a podcast and follow us 729 00:43:20,520 --> 00:43:21,680 Speaker 2: on YouTube. 730 00:43:21,880 --> 00:43:23,359 Speaker 1: There's a lot of fun. Scott will do it again. 731 00:43:23,680 --> 00:43:23,919 Speaker 3: Thanks. 732 00:43:23,920 --> 00:43:26,600 Speaker 2: Hey friends, if you enjoyed this show, please hit that 733 00:43:26,680 --> 00:43:29,600 Speaker 2: fall button on your podcast app. Most of you tuning 734 00:43:29,680 --> 00:43:32,000 Speaker 2: in haven't done this yet and it makes a huge 735 00:43:32,040 --> 00:43:34,799 Speaker 2: difference in helping us reach and equip more people and 736 00:43:34,800 --> 00:43:39,200 Speaker 2: build community. And please consider leaving a podcast review. Every 737 00:43:39,400 --> 00:43:42,520 Speaker 2: review helps. Thanks for listening to the Sean McDowell Show, 738 00:43:42,680 --> 00:43:46,480 Speaker 2: brought to you by Talbot School of Theology at Biola University, 739 00:43:46,520 --> 00:43:49,879 Speaker 2: where we have on campus and online programs and apologetic 740 00:43:49,880 --> 00:43:53,200 Speaker 2: spiritual firmation, marriage and family, Bible, and so much more. 741 00:43:53,280 --> 00:43:56,280 Speaker 2: We would love to train you to more effectively live, teach, 742 00:43:56,360 --> 00:43:59,160 Speaker 2: and defend the Christian faith today and we will see 743 00:43:59,200 --> 00:44:01,000 Speaker 2: you when the next episode drops. 744 00:44:03,000 --> 00:44:08,400 Speaker 3: Mhmm.