1
00:00:02,720 --> 00:00:03,560
Speaker 1: Life Audio.

2
00:00:05,760 --> 00:00:09,960
Speaker 2: All Right, welcome friends to our live debate review of

3
00:00:10,000 --> 00:00:13,160
Speaker 2: the conversation I had with bart erman Over's book Love

4
00:00:13,440 --> 00:00:16,560
Speaker 2: Thy Stranger. Now, technically it wasn't a debate, it was

5
00:00:16,560 --> 00:00:19,600
Speaker 2: a conversation, but we certainly what I would describe, had

6
00:00:19,600 --> 00:00:24,000
Speaker 2: a friendly debate back and forth, going really into the

7
00:00:24,079 --> 00:00:27,200
Speaker 2: question of his book. At the root of it, he

8
00:00:27,280 --> 00:00:30,040
Speaker 2: makes the case and the subtitle is how the teachings

9
00:00:30,080 --> 00:00:35,080
Speaker 2: of Jesus transformed the moral conscience of the West. So

10
00:00:35,640 --> 00:00:37,800
Speaker 2: I was stunned when I first read his book. He

11
00:00:37,840 --> 00:00:44,239
Speaker 2: says things like hospitals and orphanages and nursing homes and

12
00:00:44,360 --> 00:00:48,559
Speaker 2: charity and forgiveness existed in the ancient world, whether in

13
00:00:48,600 --> 00:00:53,400
Speaker 2: ancient Rome or in ancient Judaism, but it was never

14
00:00:54,000 --> 00:00:58,720
Speaker 2: universalized until the person of Jesus. Now there's a lot

15
00:00:58,760 --> 00:01:01,520
Speaker 2: more in his book than we cover, but a number

16
00:01:01,560 --> 00:01:04,880
Speaker 2: of times in the book he gives his account of

17
00:01:04,920 --> 00:01:09,759
Speaker 2: where moral values and duties come from. He dismisses the

18
00:01:09,800 --> 00:01:14,560
Speaker 2: moral argument, and so I was just really curious if

19
00:01:14,600 --> 00:01:17,320
Speaker 2: this transformation of the West, he would say, this is

20
00:01:17,360 --> 00:01:22,959
Speaker 2: an objectively good transformation, or it's just a change. Now,

21
00:01:22,959 --> 00:01:26,600
Speaker 2: if you haven't seen that discussion yet or listen to it.

22
00:01:27,120 --> 00:01:29,160
Speaker 2: You don't have to have heard it. I think to

23
00:01:29,240 --> 00:01:32,280
Speaker 2: benefit from our conversation. We'll try to represent that fairly.

24
00:01:32,720 --> 00:01:34,240
Speaker 1: But I would really encourage you to.

25
00:01:34,240 --> 00:01:37,399
Speaker 2: Go back and listen to it. I think minimally it

26
00:01:37,520 --> 00:01:40,280
Speaker 2: was a charitable exchange. It got spicy, I thought in

27
00:01:40,319 --> 00:01:42,200
Speaker 2: a good way in the sense we're both passionate and

28
00:01:42,280 --> 00:01:44,479
Speaker 2: what we care about. It ended on a great note,

29
00:01:44,520 --> 00:01:48,080
Speaker 2: and I think minimally there's clarity of where I think

30
00:01:48,200 --> 00:01:53,440
Speaker 2: best explains a theistic worldview, and Bart gives an atheist,

31
00:01:53,560 --> 00:01:57,400
Speaker 2: not the only atheist account of morality, and we both

32
00:01:57,440 --> 00:02:00,640
Speaker 2: criticize the others and argued why we think we're each

33
00:02:00,720 --> 00:02:04,160
Speaker 2: being inconsistent and we're wrong. So people can watch it

34
00:02:04,480 --> 00:02:07,880
Speaker 2: make up throwing minds our guest today, Doctor Dave Horner

35
00:02:08,400 --> 00:02:11,960
Speaker 2: has been a friend. Gosh, I got to think about this.

36
00:02:12,000 --> 00:02:15,239
Speaker 2: I gotta do the math. Almost twenty five years, twenty

37
00:02:15,280 --> 00:02:16,560
Speaker 2: three years. What year did you come to.

38
00:02:16,520 --> 00:02:19,240
Speaker 3: Talbot, by the way, twenty five years, twenty.

39
00:02:18,919 --> 00:02:20,440
Speaker 2: Five years, because I remember, I think it was in

40
00:02:20,480 --> 00:02:23,240
Speaker 2: your first class that you ever taught. I remember going

41
00:02:23,280 --> 00:02:26,000
Speaker 2: to office hours and you were a little overwhelmed as

42
00:02:26,000 --> 00:02:30,120
Speaker 2: you were shifting into Talbot, which is understandable. But I

43
00:02:30,160 --> 00:02:32,959
Speaker 2: want people to know that when I think of who

44
00:02:32,960 --> 00:02:35,640
Speaker 2: are ethicists literally in the world, that I would want

45
00:02:35,680 --> 00:02:38,639
Speaker 2: to make sense of this discussion. You're at the top

46
00:02:38,639 --> 00:02:42,400
Speaker 2: of my list. You got your doctorate, not at Cambridge.

47
00:02:42,480 --> 00:02:43,120
Speaker 3: Thank you for that.

48
00:02:43,200 --> 00:02:47,000
Speaker 2: I want to clarify that. But Oxford, you've written a

49
00:02:47,040 --> 00:02:50,840
Speaker 2: number of books. Your book Meta Ethics is fantastic. I

50
00:02:50,880 --> 00:02:53,880
Speaker 2: recommend it all the time. And you're also one of

51
00:02:53,880 --> 00:02:56,880
Speaker 2: the funniest people I know. So don't let us down today.

52
00:02:57,000 --> 00:02:59,960
Speaker 3: Oh I'll try hard nuts too. I'll try hard nuts.

53
00:03:00,080 --> 00:03:03,320
Speaker 2: You don't have to try to be funny everything, okay,

54
00:03:03,360 --> 00:03:06,480
Speaker 2: fair enough, just be yourself as a win. So we're

55
00:03:06,480 --> 00:03:09,520
Speaker 2: going to take some of your live questions, by the way,

56
00:03:10,360 --> 00:03:12,760
Speaker 2: but to get started, I'm really curious. I haven't asked

57
00:03:12,800 --> 00:03:16,840
Speaker 2: you this yet, sent you the video, you listened to it,

58
00:03:16,880 --> 00:03:20,440
Speaker 2: you read the transcript, give us your reaction, and I'm

59
00:03:20,520 --> 00:03:23,360
Speaker 2: still in some ways your students. You can say, McDowell,

60
00:03:23,440 --> 00:03:25,760
Speaker 2: let me give you a profess oreo critique, or you

61
00:03:25,760 --> 00:03:26,799
Speaker 2: want to know what you really think.

62
00:03:27,080 --> 00:03:30,200
Speaker 3: I appreciate that. Well, I'm not going to give you

63
00:03:30,280 --> 00:03:31,160
Speaker 3: much of a critique.

64
00:03:31,240 --> 00:03:33,519
Speaker 4: Because I thought it was great. I thought you did

65
00:03:33,639 --> 00:03:35,920
Speaker 4: really really well. But I think it was a I

66
00:03:35,920 --> 00:03:38,120
Speaker 4: thought it was a great exchange. I thought both of

67
00:03:38,160 --> 00:03:42,520
Speaker 4: you guys were gracious. As you say, there's a little

68
00:03:42,520 --> 00:03:45,240
Speaker 4: bit of spice there, but it was it was civil.

69
00:03:46,320 --> 00:03:50,440
Speaker 4: It's the way it should should be. So and you know,

70
00:03:50,640 --> 00:03:55,800
Speaker 4: I hadn't read the book. I only had a few days,

71
00:03:55,800 --> 00:03:59,040
Speaker 4: so I did get a kindle version of it and

72
00:03:59,080 --> 00:04:01,440
Speaker 4: skimmed over it, and I think it's a it's really

73
00:04:01,480 --> 00:04:05,080
Speaker 4: an excellent book. I love I love what he's arguing for,

74
00:04:06,600 --> 00:04:12,840
Speaker 4: as you you do. And so the you know, the

75
00:04:12,840 --> 00:04:16,520
Speaker 4: the sticking points that you were pushing. You know clearly

76
00:04:16,560 --> 00:04:21,760
Speaker 4: you guys were you were you were frust You're both frustrating, right,

77
00:04:22,360 --> 00:04:25,280
Speaker 4: because you weren't seeing it the way he was the

78
00:04:25,320 --> 00:04:28,720
Speaker 4: point he was trying to make about objective in particular, right,

79
00:04:29,200 --> 00:04:31,599
Speaker 4: and he wasn't getting the point that you were trying

80
00:04:31,640 --> 00:04:34,920
Speaker 4: to make about objective. And so you know, in terms

81
00:04:34,960 --> 00:04:37,840
Speaker 4: of diagnosis, we can we can kind of run with

82
00:04:37,839 --> 00:04:41,640
Speaker 4: that if you want, but uh that that really was

83
00:04:42,040 --> 00:04:47,120
Speaker 4: key and and uh so clarity on that is important.

84
00:04:47,200 --> 00:04:49,880
Speaker 4: I think you were you were speaking as a philosopher

85
00:04:51,160 --> 00:04:55,880
Speaker 4: trying to get philosophical conceptual clarity. I think he's approaching

86
00:04:55,920 --> 00:05:00,120
Speaker 4: it as a historian and from an anthropological point of view,

87
00:05:00,520 --> 00:05:04,360
Speaker 4: and has a kind of view of what objective means.

88
00:05:05,000 --> 00:05:09,040
Speaker 4: That he just filtered everything that you said, you know,

89
00:05:09,120 --> 00:05:13,400
Speaker 4: through that conception, and you weren't able to really, you know,

90
00:05:13,839 --> 00:05:17,280
Speaker 4: land either one of you, because you're operating in different conceptions.

91
00:05:17,320 --> 00:05:21,960
Speaker 4: I think you're right. The conception of objective that you

92
00:05:22,000 --> 00:05:25,800
Speaker 4: were operating with is the way philosophers think about it,

93
00:05:26,040 --> 00:05:29,840
Speaker 4: the way meta ethics, folks in meta ethics think about it.

94
00:05:31,080 --> 00:05:34,240
Speaker 4: I wish he would get that, but he was gracious,

95
00:05:34,440 --> 00:05:36,880
Speaker 4: and so I thought it was a great exchange.

96
00:05:37,120 --> 00:05:37,280
Speaker 3: Good.

97
00:05:37,360 --> 00:05:41,520
Speaker 2: That's interesting look at it historically versus say, philosophically, although

98
00:05:41,520 --> 00:05:44,640
Speaker 2: we were both weighing into each of those issues. I

99
00:05:44,680 --> 00:05:48,480
Speaker 2: also think he's looking at the issues somewhat pragmatically. And

100
00:05:48,520 --> 00:05:50,200
Speaker 2: I drew this out a little bit again, and we'll

101
00:05:50,200 --> 00:05:53,200
Speaker 2: come back to this. Is at the very beginning, he's

102
00:05:53,240 --> 00:05:56,760
Speaker 2: talking about how he lost his faith, went to Moody Wheaton,

103
00:05:56,800 --> 00:05:58,840
Speaker 2: grew up in the church. Real struggle for him. He

104
00:05:58,920 --> 00:06:03,159
Speaker 2: describes in his book On Suffering that it was not

105
00:06:03,320 --> 00:06:07,640
Speaker 2: something he took lightly but he describes here how he

106
00:06:07,800 --> 00:06:12,080
Speaker 2: was afraid somewhat that if he left his faith, he

107
00:06:12,080 --> 00:06:14,880
Speaker 2: would have no moral compass and he wouldn't be an

108
00:06:14,920 --> 00:06:15,719
Speaker 2: ethical person.

109
00:06:16,440 --> 00:06:18,040
Speaker 1: And he's like, I'm still ethical.

110
00:06:18,440 --> 00:06:18,839
Speaker 3: Yeah.

111
00:06:18,920 --> 00:06:21,000
Speaker 2: Well, what I was trying to get at is say,

112
00:06:21,279 --> 00:06:23,919
Speaker 2: of course you can be ethical without believing in God,

113
00:06:24,720 --> 00:06:29,360
Speaker 2: But what is the basis of what is a good life?

114
00:06:29,920 --> 00:06:33,720
Speaker 2: That deeper question is the philosophical one that I was

115
00:06:33,760 --> 00:06:36,440
Speaker 2: getting at. Yeah, we'll circle back to that. I'm curious

116
00:06:36,480 --> 00:06:37,720
Speaker 2: if you don't, we can move on the next one.

117
00:06:37,760 --> 00:06:40,640
Speaker 2: But did you have any questions for me from going

118
00:06:40,680 --> 00:06:42,320
Speaker 2: through this. I'm certainly not going to pretend to be

119
00:06:42,320 --> 00:06:44,800
Speaker 2: the expert on this. You've studied it more than I have.

120
00:06:45,000 --> 00:06:48,160
Speaker 4: Well, I mean I would just say one area we

121
00:06:48,200 --> 00:06:51,000
Speaker 4: need to talk about objective and try to land the

122
00:06:51,000 --> 00:06:55,039
Speaker 4: plane on that. But I think the word universal, I

123
00:06:55,040 --> 00:06:56,440
Speaker 4: think that's another term that.

124
00:06:56,480 --> 00:06:57,680
Speaker 3: Was probably okay.

125
00:06:58,000 --> 00:06:59,960
Speaker 4: There are two ways you can interpret the term universe.

126
00:07:00,920 --> 00:07:04,800
Speaker 4: One is it applies to everyone, and that's the way

127
00:07:04,839 --> 00:07:08,560
Speaker 4: you were using it. I think these are universal objective

128
00:07:08,600 --> 00:07:13,160
Speaker 4: moral values, that is that they apply to everyone. He

129
00:07:13,400 --> 00:07:17,560
Speaker 4: was I think interpreting universal as everyone agrees with it,

130
00:07:18,680 --> 00:07:22,480
Speaker 4: and so he saw well, Hey, you know, there are

131
00:07:22,560 --> 00:07:26,520
Speaker 4: cultures that don't agree with lots of things that you

132
00:07:26,560 --> 00:07:29,200
Speaker 4: hold morally and he holds morally.

133
00:07:29,040 --> 00:07:31,360
Speaker 3: So therefore it's not a universal Okay.

134
00:07:31,560 --> 00:07:36,000
Speaker 4: So you know, that's just one of those things that

135
00:07:36,800 --> 00:07:39,800
Speaker 4: I don't know if universal is worth dropping from the

136
00:07:39,880 --> 00:07:42,240
Speaker 4: vocabulary or with at least explaining.

137
00:07:42,560 --> 00:07:44,960
Speaker 1: But objective is the term we should use, is yeah?

138
00:07:45,120 --> 00:07:45,360
Speaker 4: Clear?

139
00:07:45,600 --> 00:07:48,600
Speaker 2: Okay, So let's come back to that. I think that's important.

140
00:07:48,600 --> 00:07:49,880
Speaker 2: I want to ask you to find it because you

141
00:07:49,920 --> 00:07:52,160
Speaker 2: do in your book on meta ethics. We're going to

142
00:07:52,240 --> 00:07:55,800
Speaker 2: take some questions if you have question type question in

143
00:07:55,920 --> 00:07:59,280
Speaker 2: caps stated as succinctly as you can. I already see

144
00:07:59,280 --> 00:08:02,480
Speaker 2: some popping up here. I see you a comment from

145
00:08:02,480 --> 00:08:04,920
Speaker 2: somebody says, someone like Sean claiming he has access to

146
00:08:05,000 --> 00:08:10,360
Speaker 2: objective morality from a source shows he suffers from delusions

147
00:08:10,440 --> 00:08:15,320
Speaker 2: of grandeur. Now, partly I'm not offended by this, remotely,

148
00:08:15,640 --> 00:08:19,280
Speaker 2: I goes there's something wrong with having delusions of grandeur?

149
00:08:20,000 --> 00:08:24,000
Speaker 2: Is that the way we shouldn't operate. At one point

150
00:08:24,040 --> 00:08:26,840
Speaker 2: there seems to be a criticism that I'm claiming to

151
00:08:26,840 --> 00:08:31,480
Speaker 2: have access to objective morality, and then there's a criticism

152
00:08:31,640 --> 00:08:34,520
Speaker 2: of me which seems to imply at least an objective,

153
00:08:34,520 --> 00:08:39,000
Speaker 2: standard and enormative way that we should live. Part of

154
00:08:39,000 --> 00:08:41,840
Speaker 2: what I'm trying to point out in this discussion is

155
00:08:41,840 --> 00:08:44,760
Speaker 2: that because people are made in the image of God

156
00:08:45,280 --> 00:08:50,439
Speaker 2: and we live in God's world, we can't escape awareness

157
00:08:50,480 --> 00:08:53,960
Speaker 2: that we do know right and wrong. Even those like

158
00:08:54,040 --> 00:08:57,640
Speaker 2: Bart who are atheists and agnostics. At some point they're

159
00:08:57,640 --> 00:09:00,480
Speaker 2: going to say things like, while I think my moray

160
00:09:00,600 --> 00:09:05,120
Speaker 2: is superior, well it's subjective. That makes no sense. At

161
00:09:05,120 --> 00:09:07,960
Speaker 2: some point they're going to criticize others for being racist

162
00:09:08,040 --> 00:09:10,920
Speaker 2: and sexist and fill in the blank, which, if it's

163
00:09:10,960 --> 00:09:14,800
Speaker 2: all preference, actually makes no sense. And so I think

164
00:09:14,840 --> 00:09:17,800
Speaker 2: this comment to me is pointing out that the person

165
00:09:17,920 --> 00:09:21,640
Speaker 2: is not understanding my point. And by the way, would

166
00:09:21,640 --> 00:09:24,760
Speaker 2: you agree with this that I'm not uniquely saying I

167
00:09:24,800 --> 00:09:29,360
Speaker 2: have access to objective morality. The vast majority people who

168
00:09:29,440 --> 00:09:34,440
Speaker 2: have ever lived either claim or function as if they

169
00:09:34,440 --> 00:09:38,760
Speaker 2: are moral realists and that we can know right and wrong.

170
00:09:39,440 --> 00:09:40,000
Speaker 1: Is that fair?

171
00:09:40,360 --> 00:09:43,520
Speaker 3: Yeah? It's In fact. J. L.

172
00:09:43,679 --> 00:09:48,520
Speaker 4: Mackie, who was an Oxford atheist philosopher, said that the

173
00:09:48,880 --> 00:09:53,480
Speaker 4: that is the common view our moral practices, our moral language,

174
00:09:53,520 --> 00:09:58,760
Speaker 4: our moral concepts all presuppose moral realism, That is that

175
00:09:58,800 --> 00:10:04,040
Speaker 4: there are a real moral facts, moral obligations, moral duties.

176
00:10:04,360 --> 00:10:08,400
Speaker 4: When we make moral judgments, they are objectively true or false.

177
00:10:09,360 --> 00:10:10,920
Speaker 3: That's how you know.

178
00:10:11,080 --> 00:10:14,840
Speaker 4: That's the common view, that's common sense morality. Now he

179
00:10:14,920 --> 00:10:18,240
Speaker 4: disagrees with it, but he understands, and he says, I

180
00:10:18,320 --> 00:10:19,560
Speaker 4: have a burden of proof here.

181
00:10:19,600 --> 00:10:20,520
Speaker 3: Then if I'm going.

182
00:10:20,520 --> 00:10:26,199
Speaker 4: To reject that, and all of our common moral experience

183
00:10:26,280 --> 00:10:28,880
Speaker 4: points to that, I'd better have a really good argument.

184
00:10:29,640 --> 00:10:31,320
Speaker 4: I don't think he has a very good argument, but

185
00:10:31,360 --> 00:10:32,800
Speaker 4: at least he recognizes that.

186
00:10:33,400 --> 00:10:34,000
Speaker 3: Okay, good.

187
00:10:34,040 --> 00:10:35,839
Speaker 2: So I think we're kind of dancing around with me

188
00:10:35,960 --> 00:10:40,040
Speaker 2: my moral realism and objective morality. So I could read

189
00:10:40,080 --> 00:10:44,160
Speaker 2: this from your book. Here's a quote that Bart says,

190
00:10:44,160 --> 00:10:46,360
Speaker 2: and that I like, we just clarify us at least

191
00:10:46,360 --> 00:10:50,520
Speaker 2: what we mean and what philosophers mean by objective morality.

192
00:10:51,160 --> 00:10:53,959
Speaker 2: But here's one thing Bart wrote. When I pressed him,

193
00:10:53,960 --> 00:10:56,000
Speaker 2: he said, direct quote, I would say some things are

194
00:10:56,040 --> 00:11:00,920
Speaker 2: objectively good in my opinion, I think it's good that

195
00:11:00,960 --> 00:11:05,320
Speaker 2: we have hospitals, it's good we have orphanages. These are

196
00:11:05,480 --> 00:11:08,520
Speaker 2: it's good that we have disaster relief programs. I think

197
00:11:08,520 --> 00:11:11,960
Speaker 2: these are a good thing. It's my this is my

198
00:11:12,120 --> 00:11:17,079
Speaker 2: personal opinion. Since it's my personal opinion, I don't think

199
00:11:17,120 --> 00:11:20,040
Speaker 2: it's objective. Now in some ways, I mean I could

200
00:11:20,080 --> 00:11:22,640
Speaker 2: nitpick here. I realize this is a transcript and we're

201
00:11:22,640 --> 00:11:25,080
Speaker 2: talking things tough. He goes it's objective, and that ends

202
00:11:25,280 --> 00:11:28,840
Speaker 2: by saying I don't think it's objective. On one hand,

203
00:11:28,880 --> 00:11:32,160
Speaker 2: he's like, oh, these are objectively good, but then says

204
00:11:32,160 --> 00:11:33,600
Speaker 2: they're his opinion.

205
00:11:34,320 --> 00:11:35,040
Speaker 1: So what do.

206
00:11:35,080 --> 00:11:40,679
Speaker 2: Philosophers mean by objective morality? Not even Christian philosophers? What

207
00:11:40,679 --> 00:11:42,080
Speaker 2: does that mean? Objective reality?

208
00:11:42,280 --> 00:11:45,160
Speaker 4: Well, objectivity in this sense, And we use the term

209
00:11:45,200 --> 00:11:48,680
Speaker 4: objectivity in different ways, right, you know, being objective when

210
00:11:48,679 --> 00:11:50,400
Speaker 4: we look at evidence and all that kind of stuff.

211
00:11:50,400 --> 00:11:55,520
Speaker 4: But when we talk about objective moral properties or objective

212
00:11:55,679 --> 00:11:57,920
Speaker 4: moral claims and judgments and so on.

213
00:11:58,679 --> 00:12:00,840
Speaker 3: We're talking about the status.

214
00:12:01,520 --> 00:12:04,880
Speaker 4: So if we're talking about facts, moral facts, we're talking

215
00:12:04,880 --> 00:12:09,120
Speaker 4: about the nature of those facts and the ontological status.

216
00:12:10,280 --> 00:12:13,640
Speaker 4: We're basically saying that that their existence doesn't depend on

217
00:12:13,760 --> 00:12:14,680
Speaker 4: might be leaving that.

218
00:12:14,600 --> 00:12:16,559
Speaker 3: They exists or approving that the exists.

219
00:12:16,880 --> 00:12:20,440
Speaker 4: And maybe it's easier to talk more about moral judgment.

220
00:12:20,600 --> 00:12:25,120
Speaker 4: Statements that refer to those moral facts like the one

221
00:12:25,160 --> 00:12:28,400
Speaker 4: you used in the well. Let's just take his that

222
00:12:28,480 --> 00:12:32,679
Speaker 4: it's good that there is there are hospitals. Let's say, Okay,

223
00:12:33,080 --> 00:12:39,280
Speaker 4: that's a that's a moral judgment, right, and it's an

224
00:12:39,320 --> 00:12:44,559
Speaker 4: objective moral judgment. H Most of us would say, all

225
00:12:44,600 --> 00:12:48,160
Speaker 4: that means is what makes it true or false is

226
00:12:48,200 --> 00:12:51,520
Speaker 4: not the person speaking, not the subject he is talking,

227
00:12:52,000 --> 00:12:55,559
Speaker 4: who believes it or approves of it or prefers it.

228
00:12:55,559 --> 00:12:58,600
Speaker 4: It's the object of the proposition. That's where we get

229
00:12:58,600 --> 00:13:01,480
Speaker 4: the word objective. That is to say, what makes it

230
00:13:01,520 --> 00:13:05,440
Speaker 4: true that hospitals are good? Are that hospitals are in

231
00:13:05,480 --> 00:13:08,640
Speaker 4: fact good, the goodness of hospitals, the goodness of the

232
00:13:09,440 --> 00:13:13,480
Speaker 4: existence of hospitals. Notice that doesn't that doesn't imply anything

233
00:13:13,559 --> 00:13:16,360
Speaker 4: about Hey, if I say that, if I believe that

234
00:13:16,400 --> 00:13:20,240
Speaker 4: to be the case, I am claiming omniscience or I

235
00:13:20,240 --> 00:13:23,000
Speaker 4: could never possibly be wrong, you.

236
00:13:22,920 --> 00:13:24,000
Speaker 3: Know, or anything like that.

237
00:13:24,400 --> 00:13:26,800
Speaker 4: I just think that the truth status of that.

238
00:13:26,720 --> 00:13:29,560
Speaker 3: Statement is something that's just It's not on me.

239
00:13:30,280 --> 00:13:34,080
Speaker 4: It's about the you know, the thing that I'm talking

240
00:13:34,080 --> 00:13:37,439
Speaker 4: about now. Of course, I as a subject am important.

241
00:13:37,760 --> 00:13:40,240
Speaker 4: You know, whether or not I believe it, that's an

242
00:13:40,280 --> 00:13:43,800
Speaker 4: important thing. But I'm not making it true by believing it,

243
00:13:43,840 --> 00:13:46,480
Speaker 4: and I'm not making it false by not believing it's

244
00:13:46,640 --> 00:13:47,840
Speaker 4: that's really the distinction.

245
00:13:48,280 --> 00:13:52,080
Speaker 2: Okay, So if I said, like, Kobe Bryant was six

246
00:13:52,120 --> 00:13:57,560
Speaker 2: foot seven, that's about the object Kobe Bryant. Yeah, Now

247
00:13:57,600 --> 00:14:00,480
Speaker 2: if you say, no, he's six foot five, he was

248
00:14:01,800 --> 00:14:05,640
Speaker 2: the fact that you think he's six foot five doesn't change.

249
00:14:05,200 --> 00:14:08,440
Speaker 1: The objective fact that he was six foot seven.

250
00:14:08,559 --> 00:14:09,000
Speaker 3: Yeah.

251
00:14:09,080 --> 00:14:11,280
Speaker 4: Well, in you saying that he was six of seven

252
00:14:11,360 --> 00:14:14,720
Speaker 4: doesn't make it true, right, makes it true or false?

253
00:14:14,880 --> 00:14:16,800
Speaker 4: Is the is the height of Kobe Bryant?

254
00:14:17,160 --> 00:14:20,240
Speaker 2: Okay, simply Now, if I said Kobe Bryant was fun

255
00:14:20,320 --> 00:14:25,040
Speaker 2: to watch, now that's more of that's more about me

256
00:14:25,360 --> 00:14:29,920
Speaker 2: the subject exactly whether I enjoy watching him player Lebron

257
00:14:30,160 --> 00:14:32,520
Speaker 2: or Jordan or I don't even like basketball. Now we're

258
00:14:32,520 --> 00:14:37,440
Speaker 2: talking about references that are subject dependent. Right, So the

259
00:14:37,480 --> 00:14:40,280
Speaker 2: first one you can be right or wrong based on

260
00:14:40,360 --> 00:14:43,240
Speaker 2: the object itself. The other one it's not really right

261
00:14:43,280 --> 00:14:45,240
Speaker 2: wrong because it's just if I enjoy it or not right.

262
00:14:45,280 --> 00:14:46,800
Speaker 4: Right again, if if we if we put it in

263
00:14:46,800 --> 00:14:49,840
Speaker 4: the language I was using before, what makes that statement true?

264
00:14:49,920 --> 00:14:50,080
Speaker 3: Yeah?

265
00:14:50,320 --> 00:14:55,760
Speaker 4: I like watching Michael Jordan or whoever, Kobe Bryant, whoever we.

266
00:14:55,640 --> 00:15:00,480
Speaker 3: Were talking about. Sorry, yeah, great, the we makes that

267
00:15:00,520 --> 00:15:02,240
Speaker 3: true just that you.

268
00:15:02,360 --> 00:15:07,120
Speaker 4: Like it, right, it's not Kobe Bryant that makes it true.

269
00:15:07,320 --> 00:15:09,120
Speaker 3: It's your preferences.

270
00:15:09,480 --> 00:15:12,880
Speaker 4: So that is a subjective claim, we might say, whereas

271
00:15:12,920 --> 00:15:16,600
Speaker 4: the claim that he is at whatever height, that's an

272
00:15:16,640 --> 00:15:20,240
Speaker 4: objective claim. It's about what makes it true or.

273
00:15:20,200 --> 00:15:24,320
Speaker 2: fALS, either the object versus the sububjects. And we do

274
00:15:24,400 --> 00:15:28,240
Speaker 2: this in science, we do this through history. We also

275
00:15:28,320 --> 00:15:32,120
Speaker 2: do this in morality. But the way we know science

276
00:15:32,680 --> 00:15:35,360
Speaker 2: is different than the way we know history, right, It's

277
00:15:35,400 --> 00:15:39,400
Speaker 2: different than the way we know moral claims exactly. Okay,

278
00:15:39,400 --> 00:15:41,440
Speaker 2: So there's not a lot of debate about how we

279
00:15:41,440 --> 00:15:44,200
Speaker 2: Well maybe there is, depends on how deep we get

280
00:15:44,240 --> 00:15:48,640
Speaker 2: in academics, but science very simply we can test things.

281
00:15:48,720 --> 00:15:53,360
Speaker 2: We can study things empirical analysis. History, we're looking at

282
00:15:53,360 --> 00:15:57,880
Speaker 2: some physical remains, documents, and we're assessing things, maybe not

283
00:15:57,960 --> 00:16:01,640
Speaker 2: with certainty, but probability. That's how we know things in

284
00:16:01,680 --> 00:16:05,120
Speaker 2: science and history. How do we know things when it

285
00:16:05,160 --> 00:16:09,080
Speaker 2: comes to morality because we don't assess them on probability

286
00:16:09,120 --> 00:16:12,040
Speaker 2: skills like we do history. For the past, we don't

287
00:16:12,040 --> 00:16:15,720
Speaker 2: study them and say a test tube like we do science.

288
00:16:16,560 --> 00:16:18,920
Speaker 1: How do we know things in morality?

289
00:16:19,640 --> 00:16:24,440
Speaker 4: The way we know things in morality is insight into

290
00:16:25,040 --> 00:16:29,239
Speaker 4: the moral structure of things that doesn't come from empirical

291
00:16:29,280 --> 00:16:33,240
Speaker 4: investigation or something like that. It's a good parallel would

292
00:16:33,240 --> 00:16:35,600
Speaker 4: be how do we know the laws of logic?

293
00:16:36,880 --> 00:16:40,360
Speaker 3: How do we know math? How do we.

294
00:16:41,760 --> 00:16:45,400
Speaker 4: Understand our own states of consciousness? None of those are

295
00:16:45,400 --> 00:16:49,360
Speaker 4: physical things. Truth is not a physical thing, but it's real.

296
00:16:50,200 --> 00:16:52,280
Speaker 4: So one of the problems that a lot of people

297
00:16:52,320 --> 00:16:55,280
Speaker 4: have is they think that the only thing that could

298
00:16:55,280 --> 00:17:01,200
Speaker 4: be objective is what is somehow empirically very fiable, you know.

299
00:17:02,480 --> 00:17:07,000
Speaker 4: But you know, we all holds things to be true

300
00:17:07,680 --> 00:17:11,280
Speaker 4: that aren't physical. As our friend Greg Kochel puts it,

301
00:17:11,600 --> 00:17:15,800
Speaker 4: you can't weigh truth, you know, you can't put truth

302
00:17:15,800 --> 00:17:18,960
Speaker 4: in a beaker or or weigh it with a yardstick or.

303
00:17:18,880 --> 00:17:19,320
Speaker 3: Something like that.

304
00:17:19,400 --> 00:17:20,960
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's that's a good way to put it.

305
00:17:21,000 --> 00:17:24,080
Speaker 4: But it's but but if we didn't have truth, we

306
00:17:24,119 --> 00:17:24,800
Speaker 4: couldn't operate.

307
00:17:25,000 --> 00:17:25,160
Speaker 3: Right.

308
00:17:25,280 --> 00:17:30,520
Speaker 4: We understand it's a relationship between a proposition and reality, Okay,

309
00:17:30,720 --> 00:17:36,240
Speaker 4: and relations are not physical things, but they're real, And

310
00:17:36,280 --> 00:17:38,919
Speaker 4: that's part of one of the things that we have

311
00:17:39,000 --> 00:17:41,920
Speaker 4: to kind of get over sometimes when it comes to morality.

312
00:17:42,080 --> 00:17:48,280
Speaker 4: So when we're talking about moral properties and moral duties

313
00:17:48,320 --> 00:17:53,200
Speaker 4: and so on, we're talking about non physical relations between things.

314
00:17:53,640 --> 00:17:57,760
Speaker 2: Okay, So I've heard someone compared to like, say, a

315
00:17:57,800 --> 00:18:02,040
Speaker 2: logical premise of like all men aretal sock cheese is man.

316
00:18:02,960 --> 00:18:08,119
Speaker 2: Therefore Socrates is moral. And somebody goes prove that, And

317
00:18:08,160 --> 00:18:10,159
Speaker 2: all I do is I say, well, look at it.

318
00:18:10,240 --> 00:18:15,439
Speaker 2: You can see it follows logically, if you think it's false,

319
00:18:15,600 --> 00:18:19,680
Speaker 2: you just can't see what it is. You can't prove

320
00:18:19,720 --> 00:18:23,320
Speaker 2: it beyond that other than make connections and you see

321
00:18:23,320 --> 00:18:28,080
Speaker 2: it or you don't. Our moral faculties are similar to this,

322
00:18:29,640 --> 00:18:31,760
Speaker 2: And that was a point I was raising, like if

323
00:18:31,800 --> 00:18:35,760
Speaker 2: you think it's is it morally wrong to burn a

324
00:18:35,880 --> 00:18:40,920
Speaker 2: child alive for adult entertainment? And some people have said

325
00:18:40,960 --> 00:18:42,920
Speaker 2: to me, Sean, why do you use such a graphic example,

326
00:18:42,960 --> 00:18:45,760
Speaker 2: because I want to use one that's clear that it's

327
00:18:45,800 --> 00:18:47,760
Speaker 2: really hard to wiggle out of, like is it okay

328
00:18:47,760 --> 00:18:49,640
Speaker 2: to torture? Someone's like, well, what if you have a

329
00:18:49,800 --> 00:18:52,679
Speaker 2: nuclear weapon? Maybe I don't want that nuance. I want what,

330
00:18:52,720 --> 00:18:55,720
Speaker 2: hopefully is a clear example. And this is where William

331
00:18:55,800 --> 00:18:58,359
Speaker 2: and Craig is like, if you don't think that's wrong,

332
00:18:59,200 --> 00:19:02,399
Speaker 2: you don't need an art. Gimmit, you need a therapist.

333
00:19:03,160 --> 00:19:05,280
Speaker 1: You're not seen exactly.

334
00:19:06,000 --> 00:19:06,199
Speaker 3: You know.

335
00:19:06,200 --> 00:19:11,520
Speaker 4: An Aristotle said, you know all arguments ultimately, you know,

336
00:19:12,200 --> 00:19:15,639
Speaker 4: you can't prove everything. There are things that are true

337
00:19:15,920 --> 00:19:19,399
Speaker 4: and necessarily true that don't need an argument. And you

338
00:19:19,440 --> 00:19:23,600
Speaker 4: can't give an argument for me. But you can pull

339
00:19:23,640 --> 00:19:28,480
Speaker 4: a you can pull away certain illusions that cloud it,

340
00:19:28,720 --> 00:19:31,639
Speaker 4: but you have to see it. So I think that

341
00:19:31,680 --> 00:19:35,320
Speaker 4: your example is great because that's what you're doing. You know, say, okay,

342
00:19:35,359 --> 00:19:38,600
Speaker 4: let's find a very vivid, clear example.

343
00:19:38,720 --> 00:19:39,520
Speaker 3: Do you see that?

344
00:19:40,800 --> 00:19:44,840
Speaker 4: And you know somebody doesn't, Well they don't.

345
00:19:45,440 --> 00:19:49,040
Speaker 3: You know, one hundred percent of people pretty much see it.

346
00:19:49,440 --> 00:19:49,760
Speaker 3: They do.

347
00:19:49,920 --> 00:19:52,399
Speaker 2: No, And again I don't want people to confuse. We

348
00:19:52,480 --> 00:19:57,240
Speaker 2: might differ over the particulars, is torture ever right for

349
00:19:57,400 --> 00:20:03,199
Speaker 2: particulars of immigration, gun control, whatever, But the underlying moral sense,

350
00:20:03,840 --> 00:20:09,200
Speaker 2: an expectation that we have real right and real wrong,

351
00:20:10,359 --> 00:20:11,879
Speaker 2: that's what's universal.

352
00:20:12,160 --> 00:20:13,160
Speaker 3: Yes, So I was trying to.

353
00:20:13,119 --> 00:20:19,280
Speaker 2: Argue that Jesus expanded our commitment to strangers, but he's

354
00:20:19,320 --> 00:20:23,399
Speaker 2: not introducing people who didn't believe an objective right and

355
00:20:23,440 --> 00:20:27,760
Speaker 2: wrong to objective right and wrong. He's expanding the way

356
00:20:27,800 --> 00:20:32,280
Speaker 2: they should live out that awareness of right and wrong.

357
00:20:32,320 --> 00:20:35,400
Speaker 2: And that's what Lewis argued, of course, an abolition of man,

358
00:20:35,760 --> 00:20:36,800
Speaker 2: that sense of the universe.

359
00:20:36,840 --> 00:20:39,600
Speaker 4: And I think that's a great way to do it.

360
00:20:40,400 --> 00:20:41,520
Speaker 3: That's exactly right.

361
00:20:41,640 --> 00:20:46,320
Speaker 4: So they're Another way to think about it is that

362
00:20:46,359 --> 00:20:50,359
Speaker 4: those things that are common that we find across the board,

363
00:20:50,560 --> 00:20:54,119
Speaker 4: you know, morally speaking, are general. There's sort of like

364
00:20:54,160 --> 00:20:55,240
Speaker 4: the general.

365
00:20:54,880 --> 00:20:56,120
Speaker 3: Structure of reality.

366
00:20:56,200 --> 00:21:00,480
Speaker 4: That's what philosophers call the natural moral law right. But

367
00:21:00,760 --> 00:21:04,639
Speaker 4: then there are more specific ways of living those things

368
00:21:04,680 --> 00:21:13,000
Speaker 4: out that are going to be much more sensitive to worldview, beliefs.

369
00:21:13,080 --> 00:21:13,520
Speaker 3: And so on.

370
00:21:13,600 --> 00:21:16,840
Speaker 4: They're going to start and cultural practices and things like that,

371
00:21:16,840 --> 00:21:17,320
Speaker 4: they're going.

372
00:21:17,240 --> 00:21:18,160
Speaker 3: To differ a bit.

373
00:21:19,200 --> 00:21:25,240
Speaker 4: So what Jesus did was fill out and specify in

374
00:21:25,600 --> 00:21:29,919
Speaker 4: a thicker way, a more specific way, something that was

375
00:21:30,320 --> 00:21:35,199
Speaker 4: there intuitively to everyone, but they would not apply it

376
00:21:35,200 --> 00:21:37,879
Speaker 4: that way without the specific content.

377
00:21:37,560 --> 00:21:38,680
Speaker 3: Of what Jesus was saying.

378
00:21:38,680 --> 00:21:41,720
Speaker 4: When he was saying look, because he wasn't just giving

379
00:21:42,440 --> 00:21:48,680
Speaker 4: you know, floating admonitions to love thy stranger. He was saying, No,

380
00:21:48,720 --> 00:21:52,600
Speaker 4: here's what God is like, and here's what human beings

381
00:21:52,640 --> 00:21:55,119
Speaker 4: are like. Every single human being is created in the

382
00:21:55,119 --> 00:21:58,320
Speaker 4: image of God and has worth and dignity, and therefore

383
00:21:58,359 --> 00:22:00,080
Speaker 4: we need to take care of him. It was a

384
00:22:00,720 --> 00:22:04,280
Speaker 4: you know, a new vision not just of morality, bit

385
00:22:04,320 --> 00:22:07,840
Speaker 4: of a vision of reality that built on what they

386
00:22:08,520 --> 00:22:10,359
Speaker 4: you know, some of the general things they had, but

387
00:22:10,400 --> 00:22:13,400
Speaker 4: it was more specific and it actually entailed these new

388
00:22:13,440 --> 00:22:16,920
Speaker 4: things that Bart is arguing came into the world. They're

389
00:22:16,960 --> 00:22:21,159
Speaker 4: not radically new, as you say, they're expansions or you know,

390
00:22:21,240 --> 00:22:23,800
Speaker 4: developments or specifications.

391
00:22:24,080 --> 00:22:27,199
Speaker 2: More that's good and that's kind of the heart of

392
00:22:27,240 --> 00:22:32,080
Speaker 2: what I'm getting at here is we can make a

393
00:22:32,119 --> 00:22:37,399
Speaker 2: case for objective morality historically, speaking as Lewis does, across

394
00:22:37,600 --> 00:22:43,120
Speaker 2: the different moral codes basic beneficence and justice and mercy

395
00:22:43,240 --> 00:22:46,320
Speaker 2: and care for elder We can get it through the

396
00:22:46,320 --> 00:22:51,080
Speaker 2: way that we actually live by introspection and awareness. And

397
00:22:51,080 --> 00:22:54,439
Speaker 2: I would also say by people who say there's no

398
00:22:54,520 --> 00:22:58,600
Speaker 2: such thing as rejector rality, at some point are going

399
00:22:58,720 --> 00:23:02,280
Speaker 2: to reveal that they're living as if they believe there's

400
00:23:02,320 --> 00:23:06,720
Speaker 2: an objective moral code and will contradict themselves.

401
00:23:07,160 --> 00:23:08,080
Speaker 1: That was my argument.

402
00:23:08,119 --> 00:23:10,280
Speaker 2: Now our viewers and listeners can decide if they think

403
00:23:10,320 --> 00:23:12,800
Speaker 2: bart is right and I contradicted. I think I'm right

404
00:23:12,840 --> 00:23:15,560
Speaker 2: and he contradicts, So of course I'm making my argument here.

405
00:23:16,119 --> 00:23:17,080
Speaker 1: They can decide that.

406
00:23:17,440 --> 00:23:22,359
Speaker 2: But that's where I think morality is inescapable, and so

407
00:23:22,720 --> 00:23:25,560
Speaker 2: in part of the book, he talks about morality being subjective,

408
00:23:26,240 --> 00:23:31,520
Speaker 2: but then makes very clear moral condemnations of certain behavior,

409
00:23:32,440 --> 00:23:36,400
Speaker 2: which if his ethic is actually taking to its logical

410
00:23:36,440 --> 00:23:41,080
Speaker 2: extreme or its natural conclusion, because he talked about having

411
00:23:41,240 --> 00:23:47,879
Speaker 2: certain inclinations for a drink and then certain inclinations for

412
00:23:48,000 --> 00:23:54,240
Speaker 2: moral behavior, then there really is no difference between racism

413
00:23:54,359 --> 00:23:58,280
Speaker 2: and sexism, giving to the poor, taking advantage of the poor,

414
00:23:59,040 --> 00:24:04,240
Speaker 2: but his life life doesn't reflect that. Hence he gave

415
00:24:04,280 --> 00:24:07,400
Speaker 2: away one and a half million dollars amazing, honest blog.

416
00:24:07,840 --> 00:24:10,640
Speaker 2: That's like I applaud him to that. I wish more

417
00:24:10,720 --> 00:24:14,320
Speaker 2: Christians would do that. We could take cues from that. Absolutely,

418
00:24:14,920 --> 00:24:20,399
Speaker 2: But if morality is just subjective, then why is he

419
00:24:20,480 --> 00:24:22,400
Speaker 2: doing that. We didn't get into this. I didn't want

420
00:24:22,400 --> 00:24:25,000
Speaker 2: to press it too much. But I think he's doing

421
00:24:25,040 --> 00:24:27,080
Speaker 2: it because in his heart he knows this is a

422
00:24:27,119 --> 00:24:31,919
Speaker 2: good thing to do and people have human value. I

423
00:24:31,920 --> 00:24:34,600
Speaker 2: don't think his worldview can ground it. Now, let me

424
00:24:35,200 --> 00:24:35,800
Speaker 2: we'll come back.

425
00:24:35,720 --> 00:24:36,439
Speaker 1: To that a little bit.

426
00:24:37,119 --> 00:24:41,960
Speaker 2: But here's the argument that Craig makes is he says,

427
00:24:42,359 --> 00:24:45,520
Speaker 2: if there is no if God does not exist, there's

428
00:24:45,640 --> 00:24:51,280
Speaker 2: no foundation for objective moral values and duties. So if

429
00:24:51,280 --> 00:24:57,080
Speaker 2: there is no God, doctor David Horner trained at Oxford,

430
00:24:57,960 --> 00:25:01,960
Speaker 2: why would you argue there's not an adequate foundation for

431
00:25:02,160 --> 00:25:03,720
Speaker 2: moral values and duties.

432
00:25:05,520 --> 00:25:09,320
Speaker 3: Well, let me contrast Bart with Nietzsche.

433
00:25:09,880 --> 00:25:11,080
Speaker 1: Okay, that's interesting.

434
00:25:11,119 --> 00:25:13,119
Speaker 3: So that might be one way to attack this.

435
00:25:13,800 --> 00:25:16,320
Speaker 1: So attack this I like that language. List, go, we're

436
00:25:16,320 --> 00:25:16,840
Speaker 1: attacking it.

437
00:25:17,040 --> 00:25:18,720
Speaker 3: Okay, attack this question.

438
00:25:18,760 --> 00:25:21,160
Speaker 4: I'm not attacking you, and I'm not attacking.

439
00:25:20,720 --> 00:25:23,840
Speaker 1: By a good My only defense is I might be

440
00:25:23,920 --> 00:25:25,399
Speaker 1: quicker than you. That's all I got in you.

441
00:25:25,840 --> 00:25:28,760
Speaker 3: Yeah, you are. You definitely are.

442
00:25:29,320 --> 00:25:36,720
Speaker 4: So Nietzsche made a very similar argument, similar argument to Bart.

443
00:25:36,960 --> 00:25:37,240
Speaker 3: Okay.

444
00:25:37,440 --> 00:25:43,000
Speaker 4: So, Bart's thesis is that in this book that this

445
00:25:43,359 --> 00:25:50,600
Speaker 4: lovely the Stranger ethic, this Jesus ethic is new. It

446
00:25:51,240 --> 00:25:54,639
Speaker 4: came in that didn't have so loving people that are

447
00:25:54,680 --> 00:25:58,960
Speaker 4: outside your your social and biological kin just wasn't in

448
00:25:59,080 --> 00:26:02,119
Speaker 4: Greek philosophy. By the way I teach Greek philosophy in

449
00:26:02,200 --> 00:26:05,720
Speaker 4: Roman philosophy, and I mean there's you know, a lot

450
00:26:05,760 --> 00:26:08,320
Speaker 4: of great treatment that he gives at that so he

451
00:26:08,680 --> 00:26:11,720
Speaker 4: knows that stuff really well, but.

452
00:26:11,720 --> 00:26:12,359
Speaker 3: It's not there.

453
00:26:13,800 --> 00:26:17,120
Speaker 4: And so this is something new, which is Tom Holland

454
00:26:17,119 --> 00:26:25,080
Speaker 4: and others have argued this, and well, Nietzsche actually made

455
00:26:25,160 --> 00:26:31,240
Speaker 4: sort of a similar argument, or at least the same conclusion.

456
00:26:32,280 --> 00:26:38,840
Speaker 4: He said, Christian ethics, the Jesus ethic, loving thy stranger is,

457
00:26:40,200 --> 00:26:44,640
Speaker 4: came into the world through Jesus, with his very specific

458
00:26:44,800 --> 00:26:48,960
Speaker 4: set of doctrines about you know, God, about human beings

459
00:26:49,080 --> 00:26:50,760
Speaker 4: and all that kind of stuff. It makes sense in

460
00:26:50,840 --> 00:26:56,600
Speaker 4: that worldview, this conclusion which Nietzsche rejects. He thinks it's bad,

461
00:26:56,760 --> 00:27:01,880
Speaker 4: it's counter evolutionary. It actually does you know, it goes

462
00:27:01,920 --> 00:27:03,200
Speaker 4: against evolution.

463
00:27:03,520 --> 00:27:04,040
Speaker 3: He says.

464
00:27:06,320 --> 00:27:08,960
Speaker 4: And he says this explicitly in Twilight of the Idols

465
00:27:09,440 --> 00:27:15,800
Speaker 4: that these secular British moral philosophers, the utilitarians and so on,

466
00:27:16,160 --> 00:27:19,240
Speaker 4: you're helping yourself to a Christian ethic, but you don't

467
00:27:19,280 --> 00:27:21,720
Speaker 4: believe in the worldview that supports it, that makes sense

468
00:27:21,760 --> 00:27:26,080
Speaker 4: out of it, and to be consistent, you should reject it. Okay,

469
00:27:26,400 --> 00:27:29,080
Speaker 4: So then we have Bart making the same kind of

470
00:27:29,200 --> 00:27:33,359
Speaker 4: argument about that Jesus brought this in. But he's rejecting that.

471
00:27:33,680 --> 00:27:36,159
Speaker 4: You know, he wants to keep the ethic and he

472
00:27:36,200 --> 00:27:40,560
Speaker 4: wants to say it doesn't depend on the worldview beliefs

473
00:27:40,600 --> 00:27:45,200
Speaker 4: in which it was originally cast. And what Craig is saying,

474
00:27:45,240 --> 00:27:48,080
Speaker 4: and what what we're saying, I think is that no,

475
00:27:48,240 --> 00:27:52,399
Speaker 4: wait a minute, we're with Nietzsche on this. Actually, these

476
00:27:52,560 --> 00:27:56,760
Speaker 4: world these moral doctrines are not floating around in nothing.

477
00:27:57,920 --> 00:28:04,800
Speaker 4: They are embedded. They are actually they rest upon a

478
00:28:04,880 --> 00:28:07,440
Speaker 4: way of looking at the world. We call that worldview

479
00:28:07,720 --> 00:28:12,920
Speaker 4: or metaphysics. What's real, what's important, what's good, what human

480
00:28:12,960 --> 00:28:16,520
Speaker 4: beings are, and so on, and that that's what they

481
00:28:16,920 --> 00:28:21,160
Speaker 4: that's what makes sense out of these things. So if

482
00:28:21,200 --> 00:28:25,239
Speaker 4: you accept the conclusion, So if you're Nietzsche, you say, well,

483
00:28:25,280 --> 00:28:28,680
Speaker 4: I reject the conclusion. Therefore I have to reject the worldview. Well,

484
00:28:28,720 --> 00:28:31,879
Speaker 4: Craig is saying, if you accept the conclusion, like Bart does,

485
00:28:32,960 --> 00:28:36,760
Speaker 4: that actually there really are objective moral values, and these

486
00:28:36,840 --> 00:28:40,880
Speaker 4: I mean not just the Jesus values but in general,

487
00:28:41,840 --> 00:28:45,680
Speaker 4: then you need to ask the worldview question, Okay, what

488
00:28:46,440 --> 00:28:49,520
Speaker 4: set of beliefs, what picture of reality makes sense out

489
00:28:49,560 --> 00:28:53,840
Speaker 4: of this? What's the best explanation for this that gives

490
00:28:53,840 --> 00:28:57,040
Speaker 4: an adequate foundation to it. It's just not enough to

491
00:28:57,120 --> 00:28:59,480
Speaker 4: say I like the conclusion, which of course we do

492
00:28:59,600 --> 00:29:01,880
Speaker 4: like the Bart loves the conclusion.

493
00:29:02,000 --> 00:29:04,360
Speaker 3: Sure, yeah, so it's kind of funny.

494
00:29:04,400 --> 00:29:08,800
Speaker 4: There's a sort of a three way contrast between Nietzsche

495
00:29:09,000 --> 00:29:09,440
Speaker 4: and Bart.

496
00:29:09,480 --> 00:29:13,080
Speaker 3: They're both atheists. Yeah, they both tell the story.

497
00:29:12,840 --> 00:29:17,560
Speaker 4: Of Jesus transforming things. They disagree on what to do

498
00:29:17,640 --> 00:29:21,600
Speaker 4: with that. Christians want to say, well, yeah, we affirm

499
00:29:21,840 --> 00:29:25,000
Speaker 4: that Jesus made a transformation, but it's really an expansion

500
00:29:25,040 --> 00:29:29,360
Speaker 4: of something that's even bigger, And the best explanation for

501
00:29:29,480 --> 00:29:33,800
Speaker 4: all of that is the Christian worldview that Jesus represents.

502
00:29:35,160 --> 00:29:39,000
Speaker 2: In some ways, the power of Nietzsche is he understood,

503
00:29:39,560 --> 00:29:42,640
Speaker 2: if we get rid of God and God is dead,

504
00:29:43,400 --> 00:29:47,080
Speaker 2: we have become untethered to the son, so to speak.

505
00:29:47,120 --> 00:29:47,560
Speaker 3: Exactly.

506
00:29:47,880 --> 00:29:49,040
Speaker 1: He understood that means.

507
00:29:48,920 --> 00:29:54,680
Speaker 2: There's no objective morality, there's no human value that falls

508
00:29:54,720 --> 00:29:55,040
Speaker 2: from this.

509
00:29:55,640 --> 00:29:56,200
Speaker 1: So it's the.

510
00:29:56,320 --> 00:30:00,880
Speaker 2: Uber man or the superman or power. It now rains

511
00:30:00,920 --> 00:30:03,840
Speaker 2: the day. And so as much as Nietzsche can be

512
00:30:03,920 --> 00:30:08,320
Speaker 2: the bad guy in certain circles, I think he's a brilliant.

513
00:30:09,200 --> 00:30:11,840
Speaker 4: I'm a fan in a lot of ways because he

514
00:30:12,240 --> 00:30:13,880
Speaker 4: cuts through the bologney.

515
00:30:14,440 --> 00:30:14,840
Speaker 3: He does.

516
00:30:15,480 --> 00:30:18,040
Speaker 2: There's no doubt about that. So we're doing it.

517
00:30:18,040 --> 00:30:18,880
Speaker 3: Can I just tell you.

518
00:30:19,480 --> 00:30:22,600
Speaker 4: A quick anecdote. So when I was at Oxford, I

519
00:30:22,640 --> 00:30:25,880
Speaker 4: went to a debate on the question do we need

520
00:30:25,920 --> 00:30:29,720
Speaker 4: God in order to be good? And on the atheist

521
00:30:29,840 --> 00:30:32,960
Speaker 4: side was a guy named Jonathan Glover, and so he's

522
00:30:33,000 --> 00:30:37,640
Speaker 4: a prominent atheist philosopher, and we talked for quite a

523
00:30:37,720 --> 00:30:42,239
Speaker 4: long time afterwards. He's also a Nietzsche specialist, and so

524
00:30:42,280 --> 00:30:47,120
Speaker 4: we got into this very question. He said Nietzsche was afraid, Well,

525
00:30:47,160 --> 00:30:50,000
Speaker 4: he wasn't afraid, but Nietsche predicted that within one hundred

526
00:30:50,080 --> 00:30:53,520
Speaker 4: years of his time, belief in God would would disappear

527
00:30:53,640 --> 00:30:57,000
Speaker 4: and people would would actually live out the implications of that.

528
00:30:58,440 --> 00:31:02,760
Speaker 4: He and Glover said, I think he's right about that,

529
00:31:02,840 --> 00:31:07,800
Speaker 4: and I'm scared because even though I'm an atheist, I

530
00:31:07,840 --> 00:31:10,560
Speaker 4: don't want people to live that way. And is there

531
00:31:10,600 --> 00:31:14,400
Speaker 4: any way that we as that you as Christians and

532
00:31:16,360 --> 00:31:18,560
Speaker 4: we as atheists can kind.

533
00:31:18,360 --> 00:31:21,680
Speaker 3: Of work together to try to keep these values alive.

534
00:31:22,640 --> 00:31:26,840
Speaker 2: So his concern was more prudential and Pragmaticy, even hey,

535
00:31:26,840 --> 00:31:30,360
Speaker 2: if Christianity is false. We kind of what we need

536
00:31:30,400 --> 00:31:35,080
Speaker 2: we values, which is interesting because we're going to survive

537
00:31:35,400 --> 00:31:40,760
Speaker 2: and flourish and thrive better with Christian values. He seems

538
00:31:40,800 --> 00:31:45,480
Speaker 2: somewhat to be implying as understanding you, which doesn't make sense.

539
00:31:45,520 --> 00:31:47,560
Speaker 2: If there's no God, we're not made in God's image,

540
00:31:47,560 --> 00:31:51,240
Speaker 2: Why would evolution wire us with those kind of beliefs?

541
00:31:51,240 --> 00:31:54,000
Speaker 2: And we could tell some story. Now let's take this

542
00:31:54,040 --> 00:31:55,800
Speaker 2: a little further. I want to pause so people understand

543
00:31:55,840 --> 00:31:58,280
Speaker 2: what we're doing here. We're just doing a review of

544
00:31:58,320 --> 00:32:05,000
Speaker 2: my discussion with Barterman about whether morality is objective or subjective?

545
00:32:05,120 --> 00:32:07,040
Speaker 2: Like the way you phrased it is right. What makes

546
00:32:07,080 --> 00:32:11,800
Speaker 2: the best sense of the world. Are the feelings and

547
00:32:11,920 --> 00:32:14,520
Speaker 2: inclinations we have that we should tell the truth and

548
00:32:14,560 --> 00:32:17,600
Speaker 2: care for the poor? Are they clues that we have

549
00:32:17,760 --> 00:32:21,479
Speaker 2: duties to love one another and there's an immaterial realm

550
00:32:21,920 --> 00:32:25,560
Speaker 2: and maybe a moral law giver? And my guest today,

551
00:32:25,760 --> 00:32:28,480
Speaker 2: Dave Horner, is one of my colleagues at Taboschool Theology.

552
00:32:29,080 --> 00:32:31,800
Speaker 2: Your book is the number one I recommend. Meta Ethics,

553
00:32:31,920 --> 00:32:34,920
Speaker 2: a short companion you wrote with JP Morrelan, one of

554
00:32:34,960 --> 00:32:37,200
Speaker 2: my friends and heroes, endorsed it.

555
00:32:37,200 --> 00:32:37,640
Speaker 1: It's great.

556
00:32:37,720 --> 00:32:40,520
Speaker 2: So there's ethics we can talk about, but meta ethics

557
00:32:40,560 --> 00:32:44,719
Speaker 2: are the bigger questions about the grounding of ethics. So

558
00:32:44,760 --> 00:32:46,800
Speaker 2: I'll just hold it up here for folks. Meta Ethics

559
00:32:46,840 --> 00:32:49,080
Speaker 2: wonderful book. Check it out.

560
00:32:49,400 --> 00:32:51,320
Speaker 1: The grounding that.

561
00:32:53,640 --> 00:32:58,080
Speaker 2: Erman gave is a common one, not for objective morality,

562
00:32:58,080 --> 00:33:01,880
Speaker 2: but for the feelings and beliefs we have about morality

563
00:33:02,440 --> 00:33:06,480
Speaker 2: is an evolutionary one. And so in part I wrote

564
00:33:06,520 --> 00:33:08,680
Speaker 2: down a few things I've thought about since then. But

565
00:33:08,720 --> 00:33:10,840
Speaker 2: I want to know from you what would be the

566
00:33:11,000 --> 00:33:15,960
Speaker 2: problem or problems with an evolutionary explanation for morality.

567
00:33:17,840 --> 00:33:21,080
Speaker 4: Well, can I take a slightly different direction?

568
00:33:21,200 --> 00:33:21,480
Speaker 3: First?

569
00:33:21,520 --> 00:33:23,000
Speaker 1: For the record, you can do whatever you.

570
00:33:22,960 --> 00:33:25,479
Speaker 4: Want to do, Okay, Well that's right, and i'm your teacher,

571
00:33:26,200 --> 00:33:27,479
Speaker 4: so shut up.

572
00:33:27,480 --> 00:33:30,720
Speaker 3: And I'm definitely your elder.

573
00:33:30,760 --> 00:33:32,240
Speaker 2: I think you're the first one who told me to

574
00:33:32,280 --> 00:33:34,040
Speaker 2: shut up and listen on the podcast.

575
00:33:34,200 --> 00:33:36,640
Speaker 1: I will remember this. I love it, very good record.

576
00:33:38,480 --> 00:33:41,080
Speaker 4: But I think there's actually a tension. I'd love to

577
00:33:41,080 --> 00:33:43,040
Speaker 4: see what you think about this. I think there's a

578
00:33:43,120 --> 00:33:49,680
Speaker 4: tension in Bart's own view, okay, between his conviction that

579
00:33:49,680 --> 00:33:54,640
Speaker 4: that all we have is evolution has produced these inclinations

580
00:33:55,680 --> 00:33:59,920
Speaker 4: to value you know, he's got these inclinations to want

581
00:34:00,080 --> 00:34:02,040
Speaker 4: help the poor and all that kind of stuff, and

582
00:34:02,080 --> 00:34:05,280
Speaker 4: it's just it's just in the DNA thing, you know,

583
00:34:05,600 --> 00:34:08,560
Speaker 4: and that's all you need to do. That's all you

584
00:34:08,600 --> 00:34:11,000
Speaker 4: need to do, you know, there needs to there doesn't

585
00:34:11,000 --> 00:34:16,160
Speaker 4: need to be a basis for it beyond that. And

586
00:34:16,160 --> 00:34:20,120
Speaker 4: and then on the other hand, there's his thesis that

587
00:34:20,640 --> 00:34:25,320
Speaker 4: something new came into the world with Jesus that wasn't

588
00:34:25,360 --> 00:34:28,080
Speaker 4: in the world before that and doesn't exist. I would

589
00:34:28,160 --> 00:34:30,120
Speaker 4: think you would want to say, in the in the

590
00:34:30,160 --> 00:34:35,200
Speaker 4: parts of the world that are outside the influence of Christianity,

591
00:34:35,960 --> 00:34:39,120
Speaker 4: and that's what he holds. He holds to this Christian view.

592
00:34:40,320 --> 00:34:48,800
Speaker 4: He also acknowledges that evolutionary biology can explain He argues

593
00:34:48,840 --> 00:34:54,279
Speaker 4: that it can explain altruism within kinship groups, but not

594
00:34:54,400 --> 00:34:59,600
Speaker 4: outside of that. And so this is new for Jesus,

595
00:34:59,640 --> 00:35:06,239
Speaker 4: you know, love thy Stranger, so that you know what

596
00:35:06,400 --> 00:35:09,759
Speaker 4: Jesus produced and he now and bart now lives. Why

597
00:35:10,000 --> 00:35:14,920
Speaker 4: doesn't seem to be to be an evolutionary explanation for

598
00:35:15,080 --> 00:35:16,800
Speaker 4: the values that he actually holds.

599
00:35:17,760 --> 00:35:19,719
Speaker 2: That's interesting when you compare it back to what you

600
00:35:19,760 --> 00:35:24,080
Speaker 2: said about Nietzsche and Jesus' ethic being kind of contrary

601
00:35:24,120 --> 00:35:24,759
Speaker 2: to evolution.

602
00:35:24,920 --> 00:35:27,000
Speaker 1: There's a certain tension that's maybe there.

603
00:35:27,080 --> 00:35:30,280
Speaker 4: Yeah, but I'm just thinking, even if we deny that, okay,

604
00:35:30,320 --> 00:35:33,600
Speaker 4: and I think Nietzsche is probably right about this. But

605
00:35:33,840 --> 00:35:37,120
Speaker 4: in any case, even if even if bart Is is

606
00:35:37,200 --> 00:35:42,200
Speaker 4: completely right about evolutionary biology and so on, the thesis

607
00:35:42,239 --> 00:35:49,000
Speaker 4: of his book is not merely evolutionary. It's that something

608
00:35:49,120 --> 00:35:54,960
Speaker 4: new came in that is inexplicable in terms of mere DNA.

609
00:35:56,280 --> 00:35:59,239
Speaker 3: Type stuff. So I don't know how that fits in.

610
00:36:00,040 --> 00:36:02,560
Speaker 2: That's an interesting that's a really interesting question. I don't

611
00:36:02,600 --> 00:36:06,120
Speaker 2: know totally how to answer that. There's so many angles

612
00:36:06,160 --> 00:36:09,799
Speaker 2: here to this that we didn't even get into. And

613
00:36:09,880 --> 00:36:11,680
Speaker 2: some of the questions I didn't ask him were not

614
00:36:11,760 --> 00:36:13,160
Speaker 2: in his book, and it felt like you would have

615
00:36:13,239 --> 00:36:18,040
Speaker 2: been taken the topic aside. But even how evolution in principle,

616
00:36:18,160 --> 00:36:24,279
Speaker 2: which is a physical, material process, can generate things like

617
00:36:24,680 --> 00:36:31,560
Speaker 2: inclinations and beliefs desires which are not physical. Those things

618
00:36:31,600 --> 00:36:36,399
Speaker 2: are not in your brains. Those things are immaterial. They're

619
00:36:36,400 --> 00:36:41,799
Speaker 2: not like muscle and blood and sinews and bones that

620
00:36:41,880 --> 00:36:46,480
Speaker 2: have weight and extension and color. They're immaterial. And you say, well,

621
00:36:46,560 --> 00:36:50,680
Speaker 2: evolution just wires us to have these feelings. They go, well,

622
00:36:50,840 --> 00:36:54,960
Speaker 2: what exactly is a feeling? Explain that to me in

623
00:36:55,160 --> 00:37:00,680
Speaker 2: material terms, and you can't. In some way, it's getting

624
00:37:00,760 --> 00:37:06,799
Speaker 2: something immaterial from something that's purely material, which you could

625
00:37:06,880 --> 00:37:09,680
Speaker 2: argue is something from nothing that there's not anything immaterial

626
00:37:09,760 --> 00:37:14,080
Speaker 2: built into matter. We didn't get into that. But that's

627
00:37:14,160 --> 00:37:17,879
Speaker 2: an additional problem to me, how a physical process can

628
00:37:17,960 --> 00:37:21,360
Speaker 2: generate things like duties and obligations and beliefs in the

629
00:37:21,400 --> 00:37:22,000
Speaker 2: first place.

630
00:37:22,880 --> 00:37:24,600
Speaker 1: It's a category fallacy.

631
00:37:25,200 --> 00:37:27,840
Speaker 2: Now I have a few other things I want to

632
00:37:28,600 --> 00:37:31,120
Speaker 2: run off you here, But in some ways, it would

633
00:37:31,160 --> 00:37:35,120
Speaker 2: seem to me that if we take an evolutionary perspective,

634
00:37:36,239 --> 00:37:41,960
Speaker 2: we have been fooled into believing that we have obligations,

635
00:37:42,000 --> 00:37:45,200
Speaker 2: fooled into believing that there's a real right and wrong

636
00:37:45,440 --> 00:37:51,240
Speaker 2: because we all do. But we're actually deeply believing something

637
00:37:51,960 --> 00:37:55,799
Speaker 2: that's false. Now, if that's the case, let me read

638
00:37:55,800 --> 00:37:59,399
Speaker 2: a couple quotes from this Michael Ruse, who passed away

639
00:37:59,440 --> 00:38:03,640
Speaker 2: a few months ago. Go really jovial, thoughtful philosopher of

640
00:38:03,719 --> 00:38:07,360
Speaker 2: science who's an atheist. He said, I appreciate when someone

641
00:38:07,400 --> 00:38:10,880
Speaker 2: says love thy neighbor, as thyself. They think they are

642
00:38:10,920 --> 00:38:14,799
Speaker 2: a fern above and beyond themselves. Nevertheless, such reference is

643
00:38:14,920 --> 00:38:18,960
Speaker 2: truly without foundation. Morality is just an aid to survival

644
00:38:19,040 --> 00:38:24,239
Speaker 2: and reproduction, and any deeper meaning is illusory.

645
00:38:25,120 --> 00:38:31,640
Speaker 1: It's illusory, it doesn't exist. Now, you went on to say, basically,

646
00:38:31,840 --> 00:38:36,400
Speaker 1: evolution has fooled us into thinking we have these obligations,

647
00:38:36,440 --> 00:38:39,120
Speaker 1: and we don't. So when to hear that, I have

648
00:38:39,200 --> 00:38:42,240
Speaker 1: two questions, I go. Number One, if I've been fooled

649
00:38:42,239 --> 00:38:45,200
Speaker 1: into thinking I have these obligations, then why do they

650
00:38:45,239 --> 00:38:48,440
Speaker 1: have any force? Why should I follow them?

651
00:38:48,560 --> 00:38:48,640
Speaker 3: And?

652
00:38:48,760 --> 00:38:52,480
Speaker 2: Second, what else have I been fooled about with evolution

653
00:38:53,160 --> 00:38:57,319
Speaker 2: that I can't trust? That I also deeply believe as

654
00:38:57,520 --> 00:39:02,040
Speaker 2: much as I believe anything else. Those are two pretty

655
00:39:02,080 --> 00:39:07,040
Speaker 2: big problems to me that stem from taking an evolutionary ethics.

656
00:39:07,040 --> 00:39:09,160
Speaker 2: So it's like you're trying to explain it here, but

657
00:39:09,239 --> 00:39:13,160
Speaker 2: then it guts the entire project raises further problems.

658
00:39:13,840 --> 00:39:15,200
Speaker 1: Do you agree with those two?

659
00:39:15,200 --> 00:39:18,000
Speaker 2: Do you think those are real problems in the evolutionary ethic?

660
00:39:18,040 --> 00:39:19,000
Speaker 2: Tell me what you think about that?

661
00:39:19,080 --> 00:39:22,080
Speaker 4: Sure, I think you're you're exactly right? And he and

662
00:39:22,320 --> 00:39:27,719
Speaker 4: one other place, Ruth says that that uh and he says,

663
00:39:27,760 --> 00:39:29,880
Speaker 4: we believe, we believe these things.

664
00:39:30,239 --> 00:39:32,840
Speaker 3: By the way, this so this, this, this applies to.

665
00:39:33,280 --> 00:39:38,279
Speaker 4: Bart the the The only way it works is that

666
00:39:38,320 --> 00:39:46,880
Speaker 4: we come to believe these moral duties as objective duties,

667
00:39:48,160 --> 00:39:50,600
Speaker 4: or else it's not going to affect the way we believe,

668
00:39:50,719 --> 00:39:50,920
Speaker 4: you know.

669
00:39:51,160 --> 00:39:52,320
Speaker 3: So he is a scientist.

670
00:39:52,360 --> 00:39:56,239
Speaker 4: He's using the word objective, and it wouldn't work if

671
00:39:56,239 --> 00:39:58,560
Speaker 4: we didn't actually think they were objective, which is kind

672
00:39:58,560 --> 00:39:59,120
Speaker 4: of interesting.

673
00:39:59,480 --> 00:40:04,480
Speaker 3: What is it about being human? And that means I.

674
00:40:04,440 --> 00:40:07,680
Speaker 4: Should respect you, I should not exploit you, and and

675
00:40:07,719 --> 00:40:08,000
Speaker 4: so on.

676
00:40:08,040 --> 00:40:08,520
Speaker 3: What is it?

677
00:40:08,640 --> 00:40:12,280
Speaker 4: What is it about humans? And all of the human

678
00:40:12,360 --> 00:40:15,920
Speaker 4: rights doctrines, the whole, the whole idea of human rights

679
00:40:16,480 --> 00:40:21,080
Speaker 4: emerged from the conviction that every human being has created

680
00:40:21,080 --> 00:40:23,160
Speaker 4: in the image of God. So there there's a kind

681
00:40:23,160 --> 00:40:28,399
Speaker 4: of sacredness that we we should respect. I once did

682
00:40:28,440 --> 00:40:35,560
Speaker 4: an informal debate with Michael Tooley, who advocates for for infanticide,

683
00:40:36,360 --> 00:40:40,040
Speaker 4: and he makes it, advocates, Oh yeah, if you want it,

684
00:40:40,120 --> 00:40:41,640
Speaker 4: if you want to, yeah.

685
00:40:41,480 --> 00:40:42,120
Speaker 1: That makes it okay.

686
00:40:42,560 --> 00:40:44,839
Speaker 3: Not that we should go kill everything, but.

687
00:40:45,239 --> 00:40:47,760
Speaker 4: But if your if your infant is disabled or whatever,

688
00:40:48,560 --> 00:40:50,920
Speaker 4: and you want to do that, you should be perfectly

689
00:40:51,000 --> 00:40:53,239
Speaker 4: free to do that, and he makes it kind of

690
00:40:53,280 --> 00:40:56,440
Speaker 4: a similar argument. He says, in Greek and Roman times,

691
00:40:56,719 --> 00:40:59,360
Speaker 4: in many parts of the world, in fantaside is practiced.

692
00:40:59,560 --> 00:41:02,000
Speaker 4: The only reason we don't practice in fantaside, he said,

693
00:41:02,360 --> 00:41:07,040
Speaker 4: is because of the Jewish and Christian view of the

694
00:41:07,080 --> 00:41:10,400
Speaker 4: image of God. And since we don't believe that anymore,

695
00:41:10,960 --> 00:41:11,880
Speaker 4: it's open season.

696
00:41:12,320 --> 00:41:12,800
Speaker 3: Wow.

697
00:41:13,400 --> 00:41:16,200
Speaker 4: I said, well, if you really think the only way

698
00:41:16,280 --> 00:41:19,920
Speaker 4: to hold to human equality and human dignity is to

699
00:41:19,960 --> 00:41:24,400
Speaker 4: see it grounded in the doctrine of the image of God,

700
00:41:24,880 --> 00:41:28,280
Speaker 4: that's a pretty good dog on good reason to believe

701
00:41:28,480 --> 00:41:32,680
Speaker 4: in the doctrine of the image of God, right, because

702
00:41:32,840 --> 00:41:36,520
Speaker 4: we see that to be true. So this is again,

703
00:41:36,600 --> 00:41:40,839
Speaker 4: this is back to Nietzsche in Bart. I think Bart

704
00:41:40,920 --> 00:41:43,920
Speaker 4: really does believe the Christian ethic. I think he thinks

705
00:41:43,960 --> 00:41:50,040
Speaker 4: it's true. He doesn't want to anchor it in a

706
00:41:50,120 --> 00:41:53,560
Speaker 4: Christian worldview, and so, okay, it's just good enough that

707
00:41:53,640 --> 00:41:59,319
Speaker 4: I prefer this, But I think Nietzsche would say no,

708
00:41:59,360 --> 00:41:59,879
Speaker 4: it's not good.

709
00:42:00,719 --> 00:42:04,759
Speaker 2: That is the power of Nietzsche and the way he

710
00:42:04,800 --> 00:42:08,520
Speaker 2: phrase this is really helpful. Yes, we're equally human, but

711
00:42:08,719 --> 00:42:13,480
Speaker 2: what is it about us being equally human, that gives

712
00:42:13,560 --> 00:42:17,640
Speaker 2: us equal value in equal rights. And that's where we

713
00:42:17,719 --> 00:42:19,759
Speaker 2: take a step back and we go, oh, we say,

714
00:42:19,760 --> 00:42:24,759
Speaker 2: within a Judaeo Christian tradition, human beings are made in

715
00:42:24,840 --> 00:42:28,800
Speaker 2: the image of God, the imago day reflect our creator,

716
00:42:28,840 --> 00:42:32,960
Speaker 2: who's the basis of moral values in his character. So

717
00:42:33,040 --> 00:42:36,920
Speaker 2: we have a grounding and an explanation for this. But

718
00:42:37,120 --> 00:42:40,879
Speaker 2: if we place it within an evolutionary perspective, we got

719
00:42:40,880 --> 00:42:43,520
Speaker 2: here through in his own words. By the way, this

720
00:42:43,680 --> 00:42:47,399
Speaker 2: is actually what I thought was really interesting. He's talking

721
00:42:47,400 --> 00:42:50,719
Speaker 2: about his Christian friends who think he's deceived when he

722
00:42:50,840 --> 00:42:53,360
Speaker 2: insists that a deep commitment to other members are species

723
00:42:53,400 --> 00:42:59,960
Speaker 2: that originated through time, matter and chance. Why would human

724
00:43:00,160 --> 00:43:06,040
Speaker 2: beings that have emerged through that process have value. It's

725
00:43:06,080 --> 00:43:09,799
Speaker 2: not an adequate grounding. So we're equally human, but on

726
00:43:09,840 --> 00:43:13,880
Speaker 2: your worldview, we're equally just products of chance. There's no purpose.

727
00:43:14,520 --> 00:43:17,080
Speaker 2: I don't know how things like value even emerge in

728
00:43:17,120 --> 00:43:19,520
Speaker 2: the first place through time, matter and chance, which is

729
00:43:19,520 --> 00:43:24,640
Speaker 2: a material process, and so being equally human doesn't account

730
00:43:24,680 --> 00:43:27,360
Speaker 2: for it. Then if you say things like well, we

731
00:43:27,480 --> 00:43:33,680
Speaker 2: have intelligence and we have creativity, these things make us value.

732
00:43:33,760 --> 00:43:35,719
Speaker 2: I always thought, you know what if animals could vote,

733
00:43:35,800 --> 00:43:38,200
Speaker 2: cheetahs would be like, nah, it's speed that makes us,

734
00:43:38,200 --> 00:43:40,279
Speaker 2: and elephants would be like, it's size that makes us.

735
00:43:40,320 --> 00:43:45,160
Speaker 2: Why do those things in themselves? Now, they have instrumental value,

736
00:43:45,800 --> 00:43:49,880
Speaker 2: but do they have intrinsic value? And if we ground

737
00:43:49,960 --> 00:43:54,360
Speaker 2: value and say intelligence, does that mean that professors who

738
00:43:54,560 --> 00:43:57,040
Speaker 2: maybe this sounds presumptions, But our job is to think

739
00:43:57,120 --> 00:44:00,840
Speaker 2: and read and analyze ideas. We live in the intellectual realm.

740
00:44:01,520 --> 00:44:02,279
Speaker 3: Do people who.

741
00:44:02,239 --> 00:44:05,360
Speaker 2: Are smarter have more value than those who have less?

742
00:44:05,800 --> 00:44:09,759
Speaker 2: These are the doors you open up into absurdity. And

743
00:44:09,800 --> 00:44:11,560
Speaker 2: so I was just talking about our students. I teach

744
00:44:11,560 --> 00:44:14,760
Speaker 2: a class here. I'm in our Apologize program at Talbot

745
00:44:15,400 --> 00:44:18,200
Speaker 2: full time, but I just got done teaching an undergrad

746
00:44:18,239 --> 00:44:22,920
Speaker 2: class Gospel Kingdom culture. And I said, you know, evolution

747
00:44:23,120 --> 00:44:28,720
Speaker 2: produced us and it produced animals. Why do human beings

748
00:44:28,760 --> 00:44:31,640
Speaker 2: have more value? And the example I gave us from

749
00:44:32,040 --> 00:44:34,920
Speaker 2: the gorilla harambe. You remember in the zoo a few

750
00:44:35,040 --> 00:44:37,800
Speaker 2: years ago and that two or three year old kid

751
00:44:37,840 --> 00:44:40,359
Speaker 2: climbed in with this massive gorilla and it was kind

752
00:44:40,360 --> 00:44:43,799
Speaker 2: of harrowing how strong this thing was, just moving this

753
00:44:43,880 --> 00:44:46,680
Speaker 2: kid around like it was a leaf. I said, did

754
00:44:46,719 --> 00:44:51,279
Speaker 2: they do the right thing shooting the gorilla and not

755
00:44:51,600 --> 00:44:54,920
Speaker 2: the child. Everyone that I heard was like, this is

756
00:44:55,040 --> 00:45:01,479
Speaker 2: tragic and it's terrible, but they did the right thing. Well,

757
00:45:02,120 --> 00:45:07,360
Speaker 2: that only makes sense if humans have intrinsic value. So

758
00:45:07,840 --> 00:45:11,919
Speaker 2: the way you're moving, if I understanding correctly, is saying,

759
00:45:11,960 --> 00:45:14,799
Speaker 2: we know we have more values and duties. We know

760
00:45:14,920 --> 00:45:18,719
Speaker 2: we have human value. Let's move back and say, what

761
00:45:18,880 --> 00:45:26,560
Speaker 2: worldview best explains that we all live and act as if.

762
00:45:26,440 --> 00:45:27,360
Speaker 1: There's moral duties.

763
00:45:27,400 --> 00:45:30,520
Speaker 2: Maybe Jesus expanded that, but throughout the history of the world,

764
00:45:31,680 --> 00:45:36,120
Speaker 2: these have been as clear to us as anything. So

765
00:45:36,360 --> 00:45:41,560
Speaker 2: what world do you best explains this? Our commitment to

766
00:45:41,640 --> 00:45:44,839
Speaker 2: moral values and duties is a clue to the kind

767
00:45:45,000 --> 00:45:46,560
Speaker 2: of universe we live in?

768
00:45:46,880 --> 00:45:49,160
Speaker 1: Is that fair? Sum up? How you connect that?

769
00:45:49,840 --> 00:45:50,040
Speaker 3: Yeah?

770
00:45:50,080 --> 00:45:54,280
Speaker 4: And I would quote one of our friends common friends,

771
00:45:54,280 --> 00:45:54,960
Speaker 4: Paul Copan.

772
00:45:55,440 --> 00:45:56,960
Speaker 1: Yeah, maybe a friend I don't know.

773
00:45:57,080 --> 00:45:59,760
Speaker 2: Okay, Well, he was on recently doing the Hello Berry

774
00:46:00,280 --> 00:46:01,040
Speaker 2: total friend.

775
00:46:00,880 --> 00:46:06,080
Speaker 4: But he has this great slogan from valuelessness, valuelessness comes

776
00:46:07,640 --> 00:46:11,200
Speaker 4: and that's that's the You know, the evolutionary story is

777
00:46:11,239 --> 00:46:16,600
Speaker 4: a causal material story, it's not a value story. So

778
00:46:16,680 --> 00:46:19,920
Speaker 4: we ask, okay, so yeah, we can we can call

779
00:46:20,040 --> 00:46:21,399
Speaker 4: homo sapiens, you.

780
00:46:21,360 --> 00:46:24,359
Speaker 3: Know, the product of all this stuff. But what gives

781
00:46:24,400 --> 00:46:26,320
Speaker 3: them value? Oh wait a minute. Value.

782
00:46:26,360 --> 00:46:31,160
Speaker 4: Now, now we're talking about something different. We're talking about

783
00:46:31,160 --> 00:46:33,840
Speaker 4: something normative that has hotness to it and all that

784
00:46:33,920 --> 00:46:37,560
Speaker 4: kind of stuff. Where does that come from? It doesn't

785
00:46:37,719 --> 00:46:41,680
Speaker 4: merely come from valuelessness. The best way to explain it

786
00:46:41,719 --> 00:46:46,040
Speaker 4: is to start with value. That ultimate reality, God is

787
00:46:46,160 --> 00:46:50,240
Speaker 4: himself a person, a moral being who created with moral

788
00:46:50,360 --> 00:46:55,719
Speaker 4: intentions and created us to flourish and to exemplify and

789
00:46:55,800 --> 00:46:58,120
Speaker 4: live out this kind of moral vision that he has,

790
00:46:58,520 --> 00:47:01,880
Speaker 4: and Jesus filled in a whole lot of it. That

791
00:47:02,080 --> 00:47:05,480
Speaker 4: wasn't clear to everybody before. But you're starting with value

792
00:47:05,520 --> 00:47:08,920
Speaker 4: and you're ending with value. If you start with valuelessness,

793
00:47:09,000 --> 00:47:10,440
Speaker 4: I don't see how you get to value.

794
00:47:11,200 --> 00:47:14,120
Speaker 2: I think that's really well said. So when it's all

795
00:47:14,160 --> 00:47:18,680
Speaker 2: said and done, there's an agreement between Bart and myself, Nietzsche

796
00:47:18,719 --> 00:47:23,880
Speaker 2: and others that we have at least moral feelings and inclinations.

797
00:47:24,719 --> 00:47:28,640
Speaker 2: We all live as if caring for people is better

798
00:47:29,200 --> 00:47:32,680
Speaker 2: than not caring for people. Hopefully you and I that

799
00:47:32,800 --> 00:47:36,600
Speaker 2: reflects our Christian faith. We certainly see that in Bart's

800
00:47:36,640 --> 00:47:39,160
Speaker 2: case given one and a half million dollars away from

801
00:47:39,200 --> 00:47:44,040
Speaker 2: this blog. Remarkable, and we expect people to keep their promises.

802
00:47:44,560 --> 00:47:48,480
Speaker 2: We expect people to tell the truth. We realize that

803
00:47:48,560 --> 00:47:54,359
Speaker 2: it's good when somebody offers forgiveness to somebody else, and

804
00:47:54,440 --> 00:47:57,759
Speaker 2: we celebrate movies like You Knew Is come back to

805
00:47:57,800 --> 00:48:02,240
Speaker 2: superheroes as a matter of time. Day celebrate movies like Endgame,

806
00:48:02,360 --> 00:48:07,200
Speaker 2: in which Iron Man willingly lays down his life as

807
00:48:07,280 --> 00:48:12,560
Speaker 2: a sacrifice for others. That's what a real hero is.

808
00:48:13,760 --> 00:48:18,000
Speaker 2: If this game from evolution, then we've been fooled and

809
00:48:18,600 --> 00:48:24,280
Speaker 2: that life is no better than any other life morally speaking.

810
00:48:25,160 --> 00:48:30,160
Speaker 2: But honestly, none of us actually believe that we know

811
00:48:30,480 --> 00:48:33,239
Speaker 2: we live in a moral universe. That means there's more

812
00:48:33,320 --> 00:48:36,800
Speaker 2: that exists than what we can touch, taste and feel.

813
00:48:37,520 --> 00:48:41,880
Speaker 2: And it raises the question what gives us obligations, what

814
00:48:42,000 --> 00:48:45,880
Speaker 2: gives us value, what gives us duties? This is sounding

815
00:48:45,920 --> 00:48:49,920
Speaker 2: a lot like God. That's my argument. Now, your book

816
00:48:49,960 --> 00:48:52,680
Speaker 2: met Ethics, it's great. I won't recommend it one more time.

817
00:48:52,719 --> 00:48:55,560
Speaker 2: That people will pick it up and maybe people will

818
00:48:55,560 --> 00:48:58,040
Speaker 2: come the philosophy program, Dave, I've said this a bunch

819
00:48:58,040 --> 00:49:01,000
Speaker 2: of times. The ma fil program was there's really life

820
00:49:01,040 --> 00:49:03,360
Speaker 2: changing for me. I've known my wife since third grade,

821
00:49:03,880 --> 00:49:06,200
Speaker 2: and there's two or three times in my life, she says,

822
00:49:06,200 --> 00:49:09,520
Speaker 2: I've distinctly seen the most change in me.

823
00:49:10,520 --> 00:49:12,000
Speaker 1: One was.

824
00:49:14,040 --> 00:49:18,439
Speaker 4: Just checking, well, checking that's right, that's right.

825
00:49:18,640 --> 00:49:19,680
Speaker 1: We've moved beyond.

826
00:49:19,719 --> 00:49:23,359
Speaker 3: Are you just preferences anyway right? Inclinations? Yes?

827
00:49:24,120 --> 00:49:29,400
Speaker 2: Positively, I should qualify and studying there was really formative

828
00:49:29,480 --> 00:49:31,759
Speaker 2: for me, and so I hope people watching will think

829
00:49:31,800 --> 00:49:33,600
Speaker 2: about studying in person or distance.

830
00:49:33,719 --> 00:49:35,800
Speaker 1: May Field program and may Apologize program.

831
00:49:36,120 --> 00:49:38,160
Speaker 2: Pick up a copy of med Ethics, and while you're

832
00:49:38,200 --> 00:49:40,279
Speaker 2: at it, make sure you hit subscribe. We've got a

833
00:49:40,280 --> 00:49:43,920
Speaker 2: lot more conversation like this coming and let us know

834
00:49:43,960 --> 00:49:47,239
Speaker 2: if these kinds of conversations are helpful to you. This

835
00:49:47,280 --> 00:49:50,840
Speaker 2: is our Talbot Tuesday, bringing faculty to you in the

836
00:49:50,880 --> 00:49:53,520
Speaker 2: case like Dave Horny here literally one of the experts

837
00:49:53,560 --> 00:49:57,359
Speaker 2: in the world who studied at Oxford University to these

838
00:49:57,440 --> 00:49:58,200
Speaker 2: kinds of issues.

839
00:49:58,400 --> 00:49:59,160
Speaker 1: Hey, friends, if.

840
00:49:59,080 --> 00:50:02,000
Speaker 2: You enjoyed this show, please hit that fall button on

841
00:50:02,040 --> 00:50:05,040
Speaker 2: your podcast app. Most of you tuning in haven't done

842
00:50:05,040 --> 00:50:07,400
Speaker 2: this yet, and it makes a huge difference in helping

843
00:50:07,480 --> 00:50:10,279
Speaker 2: us reach and equip more people and build community and

844
00:50:10,360 --> 00:50:15,319
Speaker 2: please consider leaving a podcast review. Every review helps. Thanks

845
00:50:15,360 --> 00:50:17,719
Speaker 2: for listening to The Sean McDowell Show, brought to you

846
00:50:17,800 --> 00:50:21,360
Speaker 2: by Talbot School of Theology at Biola University, where we

847
00:50:21,400 --> 00:50:25,240
Speaker 2: have on campus and online programs, and apologetic spiritual formation,

848
00:50:25,440 --> 00:50:28,080
Speaker 2: marriage and family, Bible and so much more. We would

849
00:50:28,120 --> 00:50:30,960
Speaker 2: love to train you to more effectively, live, teach, and

850
00:50:31,080 --> 00:50:33,839
Speaker 2: defend the Christian faith today and we will see you

851
00:50:33,920 --> 00:50:40,759
Speaker 2: when the next episode drops.