1
00:00:02,720 --> 00:00:03,640
Speaker 1: Life audio.

2
00:00:05,440 --> 00:00:08,479
Speaker 2: I'm simply saying, if there's one, let me make it.

3
00:00:08,640 --> 00:00:12,039
Speaker 2: Let me make this point. If that's not what I said, okay,

4
00:00:12,080 --> 00:00:13,680
Speaker 2: thank correct me. I didn't want to mistate you.

5
00:00:13,760 --> 00:00:15,680
Speaker 1: Go ahead. I didn't say that. I said that, if

6
00:00:15,720 --> 00:00:19,799
Speaker 1: you think there are objectively moral facts, why can't you isolate?

7
00:00:20,040 --> 00:00:22,119
Speaker 1: I didn't say that was a matter of opinion. I'm saying,

8
00:00:22,120 --> 00:00:25,120
Speaker 1: you and I have opinions about things. What's the objective proof?

9
00:00:25,280 --> 00:00:27,200
Speaker 1: The objective truth is we have different opinion.

10
00:00:27,320 --> 00:00:31,640
Speaker 2: We have morally improved since that time. I have no

11
00:00:31,800 --> 00:00:33,960
Speaker 2: problem saying that, and I think the vast majority of

12
00:00:34,000 --> 00:00:35,080
Speaker 2: people would be with me.

13
00:00:35,280 --> 00:00:36,880
Speaker 1: But we're just going to disagree on this. I'm just

14
00:00:36,920 --> 00:00:39,280
Speaker 1: saying that my view is as coherent as your view.

15
00:00:39,960 --> 00:00:44,000
Speaker 2: Bartererman is one of the most influential atheist slash agnostics today.

16
00:00:44,280 --> 00:00:47,519
Speaker 2: He's written multiple New York Times best selling books, is

17
00:00:47,600 --> 00:00:51,920
Speaker 2: recently a retired professor from UNC Chapel Hill, and is

18
00:00:51,960 --> 00:00:55,120
Speaker 2: the author of the new book Love Thy Stranger, which

19
00:00:55,200 --> 00:00:59,520
Speaker 2: I found fascinating and enjoyable. There's a ton we agree on,

20
00:00:59,560 --> 00:01:01,880
Speaker 2: which is where we will start. Now we're going to

21
00:01:01,920 --> 00:01:04,120
Speaker 2: get to the heart of the book, where I suspect

22
00:01:04,200 --> 00:01:06,600
Speaker 2: we have some disagreement and we're gonna have a little

23
00:01:06,600 --> 00:01:09,000
Speaker 2: bit of fun. Bart, thanks for coming on the show.

24
00:01:09,760 --> 00:01:10,480
Speaker 1: Thanks for having me.

25
00:01:11,200 --> 00:01:12,760
Speaker 2: Yeah. So, right at the beginning of the book, in

26
00:01:12,800 --> 00:01:16,200
Speaker 2: the introduction, you state your thesis and you say, my

27
00:01:16,600 --> 00:01:19,560
Speaker 2: argument in this book is that the impulse to help

28
00:01:19,600 --> 00:01:23,920
Speaker 2: strangers in need is embedded in our Western moral conscience

29
00:01:24,360 --> 00:01:28,640
Speaker 2: because of the teachings of Jesus. Tell us about that

30
00:01:28,760 --> 00:01:30,080
Speaker 2: and kind of the heart of your book.

31
00:01:32,400 --> 00:01:36,400
Speaker 1: I got very interested in why it is that when

32
00:01:36,440 --> 00:01:40,080
Speaker 1: there's a disaster that hits you know, there's a hurricane

33
00:01:40,360 --> 00:01:42,759
Speaker 1: or there's a flood, there's an earthquake, and people are

34
00:01:42,760 --> 00:01:46,840
Speaker 1: in need, we know, starvation in various parts of the world, whatever,

35
00:01:48,160 --> 00:01:51,760
Speaker 1: we feel this impulse to help, you know, we write

36
00:01:51,760 --> 00:01:54,720
Speaker 1: a check, or we or locally we visited us, you know,

37
00:01:54,760 --> 00:01:57,480
Speaker 1: we volt here at a sup kitchen or whatever. And

38
00:01:58,160 --> 00:02:01,200
Speaker 1: that's true not only if people who are Christian the

39
00:02:01,280 --> 00:02:04,080
Speaker 1: truth just about everybody in the West. It's not everybody

40
00:02:04,160 --> 00:02:07,480
Speaker 1: does it. It's not that everybody has huge but people

41
00:02:07,560 --> 00:02:10,160
Speaker 1: have that kind of pull and many people act on it,

42
00:02:10,400 --> 00:02:13,480
Speaker 1: regardless of the religious commitments. And I got interested in

43
00:02:13,520 --> 00:02:17,520
Speaker 1: that because, among other things, I'm an expert on ancient

44
00:02:17,720 --> 00:02:21,680
Speaker 1: the ancient world generally, and I have been long intrigued

45
00:02:21,720 --> 00:02:24,919
Speaker 1: with ancient Greek and Roman moral philosophy as well as

46
00:02:25,040 --> 00:02:30,160
Speaker 1: ancient Judaism before Christianity, and this impulse was not there,

47
00:02:31,840 --> 00:02:34,280
Speaker 1: and you can demonstrate it was not there. And so

48
00:02:34,440 --> 00:02:37,280
Speaker 1: my question was how did he get here that? If

49
00:02:37,280 --> 00:02:41,840
Speaker 1: it wasn't there, how did it get here? And my

50
00:02:41,880 --> 00:02:46,239
Speaker 1: thesis my book is that Jesus had a different idea

51
00:02:46,520 --> 00:02:49,320
Speaker 1: from other moral from moral philosophers of his day, and

52
00:02:49,440 --> 00:02:52,360
Speaker 1: from his Jewish tradition so far as we can tell

53
00:02:52,760 --> 00:02:55,840
Speaker 1: that are that when people are in need, we need

54
00:02:55,880 --> 00:02:59,480
Speaker 1: to help them. Whatever their relation to us is, whether

55
00:02:59,560 --> 00:03:01,800
Speaker 1: we know them or not, whether they if we don't

56
00:03:01,800 --> 00:03:03,800
Speaker 1: know them, it doesn't matter what their nationality is, what

57
00:03:03,840 --> 00:03:06,919
Speaker 1: their ethnicity is, what the religion is, what they're gender,

58
00:03:07,120 --> 00:03:10,359
Speaker 1: anything like that. Nothing matters except they're in need. That

59
00:03:10,400 --> 00:03:14,000
Speaker 1: this was the teaching of Jesus, and because his followers

60
00:03:14,160 --> 00:03:17,360
Speaker 1: ended up taking over the Roman Empire, that became the

61
00:03:17,440 --> 00:03:21,080
Speaker 1: ethical message that was preached for centuries, so much so

62
00:03:21,200 --> 00:03:23,480
Speaker 1: that it's just embedded in us if we live in

63
00:03:23,480 --> 00:03:25,600
Speaker 1: the West. And so that's what the thesis of the

64
00:03:25,600 --> 00:03:27,560
Speaker 1: book is that it starts with the teachings of Jesus.

65
00:03:28,400 --> 00:03:30,400
Speaker 2: Now, what's so fascinating about this to me? As I've

66
00:03:30,400 --> 00:03:32,680
Speaker 2: read some of your books that deal with historical issues

67
00:03:32,760 --> 00:03:35,320
Speaker 2: New Testament issues, but this is a book in which

68
00:03:35,320 --> 00:03:38,040
Speaker 2: you're weighing into ethics and what might even be called

69
00:03:38,280 --> 00:03:41,040
Speaker 2: meta ethics, kind of the grounding of right and wrong

70
00:03:41,120 --> 00:03:44,720
Speaker 2: and the moral transformation that takes place. You might have

71
00:03:44,800 --> 00:03:46,720
Speaker 2: answered this, but I was really curious if there's more

72
00:03:46,720 --> 00:03:50,040
Speaker 2: of a backstory to why you wrote this book, Like

73
00:03:50,080 --> 00:03:52,520
Speaker 2: you're in your lane in some sense, it comes out

74
00:03:52,560 --> 00:03:54,840
Speaker 2: towards the end of the book some of your critiques

75
00:03:54,880 --> 00:03:57,640
Speaker 2: to the New Testament differences, which is fine, but in

76
00:03:57,720 --> 00:03:59,920
Speaker 2: some ways you're stepping a little bit outside of your

77
00:04:00,080 --> 00:04:02,160
Speaker 2: lane or crept me if you see it differently, and

78
00:04:02,200 --> 00:04:05,760
Speaker 2: weighing into these moral ethical issues, which for me, given

79
00:04:05,760 --> 00:04:08,360
Speaker 2: that you've had conversations and debate with so many scholars,

80
00:04:08,400 --> 00:04:11,960
Speaker 2: I thought this is such a fascinating angle was in

81
00:04:12,000 --> 00:04:15,240
Speaker 2: particular fascinating with this book. But does that ring true

82
00:04:15,280 --> 00:04:17,159
Speaker 2: to you? And is there more of any backstory why

83
00:04:17,200 --> 00:04:19,040
Speaker 2: you wrote this book in particular?

84
00:04:19,760 --> 00:04:22,360
Speaker 1: Well, there are two backstories. One is that I've been

85
00:04:22,960 --> 00:04:24,320
Speaker 1: it's out of my lane in terms of what I

86
00:04:24,400 --> 00:04:27,919
Speaker 1: published for general audiences, but it's not out of my

87
00:04:27,960 --> 00:04:30,600
Speaker 1: lane in terms of my academic work. When I came

88
00:04:30,640 --> 00:04:33,359
Speaker 1: to Chapel Hill in nineteen eighty eight, my first semester,

89
00:04:33,400 --> 00:04:37,520
Speaker 1: I was teaching Greek and Roman moral philosophy, ancient Greek

90
00:04:37,560 --> 00:04:40,920
Speaker 1: and Roman religion and such, and so I've been very

91
00:04:40,920 --> 00:04:43,280
Speaker 1: interested in this girl for a long time. The other

92
00:04:43,320 --> 00:04:45,120
Speaker 1: thing is kind of the more immediate background about what

93
00:04:45,240 --> 00:04:48,360
Speaker 1: got me interested in writing this particular book. My most

94
00:04:48,400 --> 00:04:50,680
Speaker 1: recent book was an academic book, so it's one that

95
00:04:51,440 --> 00:04:53,880
Speaker 1: most people would know about. It was published with Yale

96
00:04:53,960 --> 00:04:57,240
Speaker 1: University Press, and it's called Journeys to Heaven and Hell.

97
00:04:57,960 --> 00:04:59,840
Speaker 1: I wrote a separate book that's called Heaven and Hell,

98
00:05:00,160 --> 00:05:02,880
Speaker 1: was a trade book for general audiences, but this Journey's

99
00:05:02,880 --> 00:05:05,680
Speaker 1: book was written for academics, and it was dealing with

100
00:05:06,120 --> 00:05:09,479
Speaker 1: this issue that you have in ancient texts. You have

101
00:05:09,560 --> 00:05:12,279
Speaker 1: a lot of ancient texts in Greek and Roman and

102
00:05:12,320 --> 00:05:16,279
Speaker 1: Jewish circles and then in Christian circles that describe guided

103
00:05:16,320 --> 00:05:20,080
Speaker 1: tours of heaven and Hell where people are actually they

104
00:05:20,080 --> 00:05:22,120
Speaker 1: actually go to the places of the damned and the

105
00:05:22,120 --> 00:05:24,479
Speaker 1: places of the blest going back as far as we

106
00:05:24,520 --> 00:05:28,000
Speaker 1: have literature, It's in Homer in the Odyssey book ten,

107
00:05:28,240 --> 00:05:30,640
Speaker 1: it's in Virgil, in the Enead book six, it's in

108
00:05:30,960 --> 00:05:33,440
Speaker 1: and you get it in uh So those Greek and Romans,

109
00:05:33,480 --> 00:05:34,720
Speaker 1: you get a lot of in Greek romans, or you

110
00:05:34,800 --> 00:05:36,559
Speaker 1: get in Jewish circles, and then you end up getting

111
00:05:36,560 --> 00:05:40,000
Speaker 1: in Christian circles. And my analysis of these things was

112
00:05:40,040 --> 00:05:44,000
Speaker 1: to try and show that these various these various are

113
00:05:44,000 --> 00:05:48,479
Speaker 1: called katabases, these various journey traditions are used not so

114
00:05:48,600 --> 00:05:52,040
Speaker 1: much to show what the afterlife is really like. The

115
00:05:52,080 --> 00:05:54,440
Speaker 1: literary function of these is to show people how they

116
00:05:54,440 --> 00:05:57,479
Speaker 1: ought to behave in the present, you know, in light

117
00:05:57,600 --> 00:06:00,440
Speaker 1: of like, you know, realities of the life impossile after

118
00:06:00,920 --> 00:06:04,159
Speaker 1: you gotta act this way. And in that book I

119
00:06:04,200 --> 00:06:07,760
Speaker 1: did a comparison of Greek understandings of the afterlife with

120
00:06:08,040 --> 00:06:11,560
Speaker 1: Christian understanders of the afterlife, specifically with the question of

121
00:06:11,600 --> 00:06:16,200
Speaker 1: what's wrong with being wealthy, because Greek thinkers thought that

122
00:06:16,240 --> 00:06:19,400
Speaker 1: the problem with being wealthy is it made you a selfish, greedy,

123
00:06:19,520 --> 00:06:23,360
Speaker 1: unpleasant person, and nobody liked that. And the Christian view

124
00:06:23,760 --> 00:06:25,480
Speaker 1: was that if you do that you're not helping the poor,

125
00:06:25,520 --> 00:06:28,800
Speaker 1: so you won't get into heaven. And so in the

126
00:06:28,839 --> 00:06:31,640
Speaker 1: Greek tradition it was all about like your character, and

127
00:06:31,680 --> 00:06:33,640
Speaker 1: in the Christian tradition it was about helping the poor.

128
00:06:34,400 --> 00:06:36,680
Speaker 1: And I just thought that's really interesting contrast. I'd like

129
00:06:36,760 --> 00:06:40,159
Speaker 1: to write that for a general audience. So the book

130
00:06:40,200 --> 00:06:43,159
Speaker 1: started off with that as the as the theme, but

131
00:06:43,200 --> 00:06:46,040
Speaker 1: then it expanded, as you know, into broader issues of

132
00:06:46,120 --> 00:06:50,480
Speaker 1: Christian love and forgiveness and as well as charitable giving.

133
00:06:51,200 --> 00:06:53,240
Speaker 2: That is fascinating. I don't recall reading that the book,

134
00:06:53,240 --> 00:06:55,760
Speaker 2: but that makes sense that would draw you into writing

135
00:06:55,800 --> 00:06:58,919
Speaker 2: this given your background and interests. So let's dive in

136
00:06:59,000 --> 00:07:03,480
Speaker 2: the uptitle the book again. The title Love Thy Stranger,

137
00:07:03,520 --> 00:07:06,479
Speaker 2: of course a unique play off of love thy Neighbor,

138
00:07:06,880 --> 00:07:09,200
Speaker 2: and that our neighbor you mentioned is not just our

139
00:07:09,360 --> 00:07:13,240
Speaker 2: in group. Before Jesus, it became the out group and

140
00:07:13,280 --> 00:07:17,560
Speaker 2: this universal ethic to care for a neighbor. The subtitle

141
00:07:17,640 --> 00:07:22,280
Speaker 2: is how the teachers of Jesus transformed the moral conscience

142
00:07:22,760 --> 00:07:26,040
Speaker 2: of the West, and you give some specific examples here.

143
00:07:26,160 --> 00:07:28,160
Speaker 2: You say, prior to the spread of Christianity, there were

144
00:07:28,160 --> 00:07:32,320
Speaker 2: no public hospitals in the Roman world, no orphanages, poor houses,

145
00:07:32,400 --> 00:07:35,880
Speaker 2: or old person's homes, no government assistance to help those

146
00:07:35,920 --> 00:07:38,800
Speaker 2: in need, or private charities to minister the poor, homeless

147
00:07:38,800 --> 00:07:41,920
Speaker 2: and hungary. These are Christian innovations. Now, of course it's

148
00:07:41,920 --> 00:07:44,160
Speaker 2: a Christian I'm cheering this thing on going. Yes, there's

149
00:07:44,160 --> 00:07:46,400
Speaker 2: a lot of other writers that you talk about, people

150
00:07:46,440 --> 00:07:50,280
Speaker 2: like Tom Holland who have attributed these things to Christians.

151
00:07:51,000 --> 00:07:53,920
Speaker 2: You also indicate that there's this shift so not only

152
00:07:54,120 --> 00:07:58,360
Speaker 2: positively helping, but this shift away from a culture of

153
00:07:58,720 --> 00:08:03,760
Speaker 2: dominance where fathers could dominate their kids, dominate their wives

154
00:08:04,000 --> 00:08:08,840
Speaker 2: physically but also sexually, so from one of dominance to

155
00:08:08,920 --> 00:08:12,040
Speaker 2: one of service. So the heart of my question is

156
00:08:12,040 --> 00:08:15,520
Speaker 2: is when you call this a moral transformation, is this

157
00:08:15,720 --> 00:08:19,080
Speaker 2: a change on a horizontal level in which it's just

158
00:08:19,200 --> 00:08:23,520
Speaker 2: a change like say clothing styles have changed over time.

159
00:08:24,200 --> 00:08:29,400
Speaker 2: Or is this an objectively good transformation that Jesus brought

160
00:08:29,960 --> 00:08:33,320
Speaker 2: that we ought to live the way that Jesus lived

161
00:08:33,800 --> 00:08:37,200
Speaker 2: and support things like hospitals, orphanages, and poorhouses.

162
00:08:39,040 --> 00:08:41,520
Speaker 1: I would say some things are objectively good in my opinion.

163
00:08:41,559 --> 00:08:45,400
Speaker 1: I think it's good that we have hospitals, it's good

164
00:08:45,440 --> 00:08:47,920
Speaker 1: we have orphanage. Are these are It's good that we

165
00:08:48,000 --> 00:08:51,360
Speaker 1: have disaster relief programs. I think these are good. This

166
00:08:51,440 --> 00:08:53,679
Speaker 1: is my personal opinion. Since it's my personal opinion, I

167
00:08:53,720 --> 00:08:56,560
Speaker 1: don't think it's objective. But my view is those are

168
00:08:56,600 --> 00:09:00,120
Speaker 1: good things. I am not claiming in the book that

169
00:09:00,240 --> 00:09:03,760
Speaker 1: jesus teachings are fully implemented by Christians or ever have been.

170
00:09:05,640 --> 00:09:09,040
Speaker 1: I do argue that Jesus had a different ideology of

171
00:09:09,120 --> 00:09:13,800
Speaker 1: service rather than domination, and that was really quite different

172
00:09:13,840 --> 00:09:17,240
Speaker 1: from anything you get in a moral philosophy in the

173
00:09:17,240 --> 00:09:22,959
Speaker 1: ancient world. I'm not saying that his followers followed his

174
00:09:24,120 --> 00:09:26,480
Speaker 1: teachings on this. I mean it's quite clear that the

175
00:09:26,559 --> 00:09:31,959
Speaker 1: Christian Church throughout history has preferred dominance at many times

176
00:09:32,040 --> 00:09:36,040
Speaker 1: and still does today, and that many individual Christians have

177
00:09:36,120 --> 00:09:38,640
Speaker 1: not taken on board the idea that you should live

178
00:09:38,679 --> 00:09:41,040
Speaker 1: a life of service rather than the life of domination.

179
00:09:41,760 --> 00:09:44,400
Speaker 1: And it's you know, it's quite clear at every level

180
00:09:44,520 --> 00:09:48,120
Speaker 1: in our society that hasn't taken on. But the intervention

181
00:09:48,200 --> 00:09:50,040
Speaker 1: that I think that Jesus made that has stuck with

182
00:09:50,160 --> 00:09:52,760
Speaker 1: us is that if we want to do good things

183
00:09:52,760 --> 00:09:55,280
Speaker 1: for other people, we should focus not just on our

184
00:09:55,280 --> 00:09:59,000
Speaker 1: family and friends, but on those in need that that's

185
00:09:59,080 --> 00:10:01,720
Speaker 1: the priority. And I think that did make a radical

186
00:10:01,720 --> 00:10:04,640
Speaker 1: difference in the Western world, not just in the institutions,

187
00:10:04,679 --> 00:10:07,280
Speaker 1: but also in our conscience. We think that we ought

188
00:10:07,320 --> 00:10:07,720
Speaker 1: to do that.

189
00:10:09,040 --> 00:10:12,160
Speaker 2: Okay, So here's where I think some clarity would help us.

190
00:10:12,160 --> 00:10:14,960
Speaker 2: Here you said in one sense that these are objective,

191
00:10:15,240 --> 00:10:19,240
Speaker 2: and then twice you said, but in your opinion, so

192
00:10:19,280 --> 00:10:26,319
Speaker 2: these are not objectively morally moral improvements within themselves. That's

193
00:10:26,360 --> 00:10:29,440
Speaker 2: a part of my question, and maybe we could, maybe

194
00:10:29,440 --> 00:10:32,679
Speaker 2: we could clarify what we mean by objective. Is I

195
00:10:33,080 --> 00:10:35,280
Speaker 2: pull up a book on meta ethics just to read

196
00:10:35,320 --> 00:10:39,120
Speaker 2: objective and if you disagree this, it's totally fine. He says.

197
00:10:39,679 --> 00:10:43,080
Speaker 2: Moral realism's basic claim is that some things are right

198
00:10:43,840 --> 00:10:48,120
Speaker 2: and some things are wrong or good or bad, regardless

199
00:10:48,200 --> 00:10:53,840
Speaker 2: of people's beliefs, preferences, or attitudes regarding them. So, just

200
00:10:53,880 --> 00:10:57,240
Speaker 2: like there's certain historical facts true outside of us, there's

201
00:10:57,280 --> 00:11:02,040
Speaker 2: certain scientific facts true outside of us, there's moral facts

202
00:11:02,360 --> 00:11:07,400
Speaker 2: true outside of us. That's typically what's meant by moral objectivism.

203
00:11:08,080 --> 00:11:12,400
Speaker 2: And so it sounds like you're saying you're a moral subjectivist,

204
00:11:12,840 --> 00:11:17,080
Speaker 2: that the teachings of Jesus they're based upon somebody's opinion,

205
00:11:17,160 --> 00:11:21,120
Speaker 2: whether they adopt them or not, they're not actually objectively

206
00:11:21,200 --> 00:11:23,880
Speaker 2: good within themselves that I categorize that correctly.

207
00:11:25,559 --> 00:11:28,439
Speaker 1: I think you're doing with two different categories. Some things

208
00:11:28,480 --> 00:11:34,400
Speaker 1: are objective. It's objective that there are public hospitals, agreed. Yeah,

209
00:11:34,760 --> 00:11:40,559
Speaker 1: it's not an objective that that moral values are either

210
00:11:40,559 --> 00:11:44,880
Speaker 1: good or bad. Usually there's lots of subjective moral values.

211
00:11:45,840 --> 00:11:49,239
Speaker 1: Is it good to kill somebody, Well.

212
00:11:50,600 --> 00:11:59,120
Speaker 2: Depends, okay, So I assume you're down there you said,

213
00:11:59,520 --> 00:12:03,120
Speaker 2: I agree with you in principle that sometimes it depends

214
00:12:03,160 --> 00:12:05,200
Speaker 2: whether we should kill somebody or not. Maybe you and

215
00:12:05,200 --> 00:12:08,199
Speaker 2: I would agree in self defense, that's morally okay.

216
00:12:09,040 --> 00:12:13,040
Speaker 1: So necessarily some cases it's okay. That's the point. Though,

217
00:12:13,240 --> 00:12:18,280
Speaker 1: it's if it's based on a situation, then there it's

218
00:12:18,320 --> 00:12:21,080
Speaker 1: not objective that it's good or bad to kill somebody.

219
00:12:21,679 --> 00:12:22,840
Speaker 1: It depends on the situation.

220
00:12:23,920 --> 00:12:29,720
Speaker 2: Okay. So some moral claims depend upon the situation, but

221
00:12:29,840 --> 00:12:34,160
Speaker 2: that doesn't make them necessarily subjective. So for example, the

222
00:12:34,280 --> 00:12:36,400
Speaker 2: claim I mean in your book, I mean, we could

223
00:12:36,440 --> 00:12:39,679
Speaker 2: jump straight to the case is you condemn anti Semitism

224
00:12:40,280 --> 00:12:45,080
Speaker 2: and violence against Jews, which you argue led to the Holocaust.

225
00:12:45,640 --> 00:12:49,680
Speaker 2: So let's talk about that one. Are there circumstances that

226
00:12:49,720 --> 00:12:54,800
Speaker 2: would make that okay? Or is it universally wrong to

227
00:12:55,000 --> 00:12:58,880
Speaker 2: do what the Nazis did against the Jews.

228
00:13:00,080 --> 00:13:05,360
Speaker 1: I don't have any access to any kind of universal objectivity.

229
00:13:05,640 --> 00:13:09,960
Speaker 1: I'm a human being and I have thoughts and views,

230
00:13:10,840 --> 00:13:14,599
Speaker 1: so do you. If there were something that was a

231
00:13:14,720 --> 00:13:18,920
Speaker 1: universally objective moral value, our only access to it would

232
00:13:18,960 --> 00:13:23,720
Speaker 1: be through our brains. And our brains are our brains

233
00:13:23,720 --> 00:13:27,720
Speaker 1: are objects. You have roughly one hundred billion neurons in yours.

234
00:13:28,360 --> 00:13:34,280
Speaker 1: I've got a few less in mind. But since our

235
00:13:34,559 --> 00:13:40,040
Speaker 1: recognition of morality is based on our human perception, even

236
00:13:40,160 --> 00:13:42,360
Speaker 1: if you want to claim that there's some kind of

237
00:13:42,520 --> 00:13:46,600
Speaker 1: moral objectivity, we have no direct access to it except

238
00:13:46,640 --> 00:13:50,120
Speaker 1: through our subjectivity.

239
00:13:50,520 --> 00:13:53,000
Speaker 2: Okay. So I think there might be a confusion between

240
00:13:53,200 --> 00:13:56,720
Speaker 2: how we know things and whether or not something is

241
00:13:56,760 --> 00:14:00,800
Speaker 2: actually true. So historical claims in the past, which you

242
00:14:00,840 --> 00:14:05,920
Speaker 2: claim are objective, we have to we know them. Okay.

243
00:14:06,000 --> 00:14:08,600
Speaker 2: So let me ask you this. You think some of

244
00:14:08,640 --> 00:14:13,080
Speaker 2: your views about the New Testament are right and Christians

245
00:14:13,559 --> 00:14:15,640
Speaker 2: are wrong? Do you hold that view?

246
00:14:16,840 --> 00:14:17,200
Speaker 1: Yes?

247
00:14:17,679 --> 00:14:22,160
Speaker 2: Okay, so you know that as a subject, you are

248
00:14:22,240 --> 00:14:26,200
Speaker 2: the one who studies this and so just because the

249
00:14:26,320 --> 00:14:30,080
Speaker 2: subject analyzes something doesn't mean they don't think they're true,

250
00:14:30,120 --> 00:14:32,600
Speaker 2: and it doesn't mean they're not true. So if that's

251
00:14:32,640 --> 00:14:35,960
Speaker 2: true for history, if that's true for science, why would

252
00:14:35,960 --> 00:14:40,040
Speaker 2: that not be true for morality? That just because we're

253
00:14:40,080 --> 00:14:44,760
Speaker 2: subjects engaging in something doesn't mean there's no objective truth

254
00:14:45,080 --> 00:14:47,240
Speaker 2: that we can debate and we can discuss and we

255
00:14:47,280 --> 00:14:48,360
Speaker 2: can kind of analyze.

256
00:14:49,040 --> 00:14:51,040
Speaker 1: I'm saying, if there is an objective truth, we have

257
00:14:51,080 --> 00:14:55,160
Speaker 1: no access to it. As subjects, we only have access

258
00:14:55,200 --> 00:14:58,720
Speaker 1: to what we think is true. And it's not fair

259
00:14:58,760 --> 00:15:02,120
Speaker 1: to compare history and science because they're very different. They

260
00:15:02,160 --> 00:15:08,200
Speaker 1: have different different modes of establishing their truth claims. Historians

261
00:15:08,200 --> 00:15:11,160
Speaker 1: can only establish the probabilities what happened in the past,

262
00:15:11,280 --> 00:15:14,920
Speaker 1: sometimes with relative certainty virtual certainty form most of us,

263
00:15:15,320 --> 00:15:19,400
Speaker 1: and sometimes with great uncertainty. Science isn't about predicting the

264
00:15:19,440 --> 00:15:22,120
Speaker 1: past or trying to explain the past. It's about predicting

265
00:15:22,160 --> 00:15:26,200
Speaker 1: the future. If you do a chemical experiment and it

266
00:15:26,240 --> 00:15:28,800
Speaker 1: comes out a certain way, and you'd redo it a

267
00:15:28,840 --> 00:15:31,560
Speaker 1: thousand times, it comes out the same way every time.

268
00:15:31,920 --> 00:15:34,640
Speaker 1: You use that experiment as a basis, then to do

269
00:15:34,920 --> 00:15:39,120
Speaker 1: the next thing and so it has predictive value, and

270
00:15:39,200 --> 00:15:41,800
Speaker 1: so they're dealing with different things. History is dealing with

271
00:15:41,840 --> 00:15:46,760
Speaker 1: the past and probabilities. Science is based on an experimentation

272
00:15:47,000 --> 00:15:49,680
Speaker 1: for predictive values different things.

273
00:15:50,320 --> 00:15:52,480
Speaker 2: Okay, So I agree with you on the last point

274
00:15:52,520 --> 00:15:55,400
Speaker 2: that you made that how we know certain truths in

275
00:15:55,560 --> 00:15:59,760
Speaker 2: history is different than how we know certain truths in math.

276
00:16:00,760 --> 00:16:03,400
Speaker 2: But it's also different than how we know certain truths

277
00:16:03,560 --> 00:16:07,800
Speaker 2: in morality. So if science we know truths maybe by

278
00:16:07,920 --> 00:16:12,280
Speaker 2: repeating things and having hypotheses and empirically investigating them. The

279
00:16:12,320 --> 00:16:15,080
Speaker 2: mere fact that we are subjects trying to know and

280
00:16:15,200 --> 00:16:17,920
Speaker 2: analyze something in science doesn't mean there's not a truth.

281
00:16:18,560 --> 00:16:21,680
Speaker 2: Same thing applies to history. We don't examine and study

282
00:16:21,680 --> 00:16:25,160
Speaker 2: things in the same way that we do scientifically. There's

283
00:16:25,200 --> 00:16:28,600
Speaker 2: a different means to it. But the mere fact that

284
00:16:28,640 --> 00:16:33,120
Speaker 2: we are subjects trying to figure out what is historically

285
00:16:33,360 --> 00:16:37,040
Speaker 2: true doesn't mean there's no objective truth that is there.

286
00:16:37,800 --> 00:16:43,880
Speaker 2: So my point is that I agree. Okay, So my

287
00:16:43,960 --> 00:16:45,320
Speaker 2: only point so far, and then I'll come back to

288
00:16:45,360 --> 00:16:46,800
Speaker 2: that because I think the point you're making is really

289
00:16:46,800 --> 00:16:51,080
Speaker 2: important is that there's different ways we know truth in science.

290
00:16:51,440 --> 00:16:54,080
Speaker 2: There's different ways we know truth in history, and the

291
00:16:54,120 --> 00:16:58,360
Speaker 2: mere fact that we are subjects trying to discover something

292
00:16:58,400 --> 00:17:01,720
Speaker 2: in different means does doesn't follow that there's no truth.

293
00:17:02,120 --> 00:17:05,280
Speaker 2: That's the only comparison that I made between history and

294
00:17:05,320 --> 00:17:08,960
Speaker 2: between science, and then between morality and so you said

295
00:17:09,000 --> 00:17:12,520
Speaker 2: we have no access to moral truth. I guess I'd

296
00:17:12,520 --> 00:17:14,040
Speaker 2: say a couple of things. I don't know what it

297
00:17:14,119 --> 00:17:17,200
Speaker 2: means to know moral truth through our brains. It makes

298
00:17:17,240 --> 00:17:20,679
Speaker 2: sense with science because we're studying physical matter, but moral

299
00:17:20,720 --> 00:17:24,280
Speaker 2: truths are not physical. They're im material, they don't have weight.

300
00:17:24,440 --> 00:17:28,159
Speaker 2: So clearly we're going to access them differently than we

301
00:17:28,240 --> 00:17:32,000
Speaker 2: do science, just like history accesses things differently than science.

302
00:17:32,560 --> 00:17:35,000
Speaker 2: So my question is, you said, correct me if I'm wrong.

303
00:17:35,000 --> 00:17:39,000
Speaker 2: You said we have no access to moral truth. How

304
00:17:39,040 --> 00:17:39,600
Speaker 2: do you know that?

305
00:17:41,920 --> 00:17:44,879
Speaker 1: It's my opinion just as yours is your opinion?

306
00:17:47,200 --> 00:17:50,359
Speaker 2: Okay, So, yes, we have opinions about things. So let

307
00:17:50,359 --> 00:17:53,879
Speaker 2: me ask a clear one. So most people would agree

308
00:17:53,920 --> 00:18:00,359
Speaker 2: with this. They would say torturing a child for fun

309
00:18:00,520 --> 00:18:06,480
Speaker 2: or burning a child alive for adults pleasure is wrong.

310
00:18:07,600 --> 00:18:10,760
Speaker 2: Now I have no problem. I'm about as close to

311
00:18:10,800 --> 00:18:15,199
Speaker 2: being one hundred percent certain as possible that torturing a

312
00:18:15,359 --> 00:18:19,639
Speaker 2: child for adult entertainment is wrong, and we don't know

313
00:18:19,680 --> 00:18:22,199
Speaker 2: that the way we know science and history. We know

314
00:18:22,320 --> 00:18:27,080
Speaker 2: it intuitively and naturally by reflecting upon it. So do

315
00:18:27,119 --> 00:18:30,840
Speaker 2: you agree with me that burning a child alive for

316
00:18:30,880 --> 00:18:32,320
Speaker 2: adult entertainment is wrong?

317
00:18:33,119 --> 00:18:33,439
Speaker 1: Yes?

318
00:18:35,119 --> 00:18:38,320
Speaker 2: Okay, So I guess I'm confused because you said it's

319
00:18:38,359 --> 00:18:42,200
Speaker 2: only a matter of opinion, But now you're wrong.

320
00:18:42,560 --> 00:18:45,000
Speaker 1: I didn't say that was a matter of opinion. I'm

321
00:18:45,000 --> 00:18:47,840
Speaker 1: saying you and I have opinions about things. Sure, those

322
00:18:48,600 --> 00:18:50,920
Speaker 1: If you have an opinion, I have an opinion. What's

323
00:18:50,960 --> 00:18:54,520
Speaker 1: the objective of truth? The objective truth is we have

324
00:18:54,560 --> 00:18:59,040
Speaker 1: different opinions. But how do you use objective truth in

325
00:18:59,160 --> 00:19:02,320
Speaker 1: order to establish that you're right about either a historical

326
00:19:02,359 --> 00:19:05,800
Speaker 1: claim or a moral claim, and that I'm empirically wrong?

327
00:19:07,960 --> 00:19:09,360
Speaker 2: How do I have to figure it out?

328
00:19:09,680 --> 00:19:11,840
Speaker 1: You're doing it by your reason, you're thinking about it.

329
00:19:11,960 --> 00:19:12,440
Speaker 2: That's right.

330
00:19:13,400 --> 00:19:16,680
Speaker 1: Other people think about it, have different views, not about everything.

331
00:19:16,720 --> 00:19:20,800
Speaker 1: Most people do agree that when if they were seeing

332
00:19:20,800 --> 00:19:22,440
Speaker 1: me here, they agree I was sitting in a chair,

333
00:19:23,119 --> 00:19:26,320
Speaker 1: I am sitting in a chair. Yeah. What what good

334
00:19:26,320 --> 00:19:29,160
Speaker 1: does it do to say that there are moral objectives

335
00:19:29,200 --> 00:19:31,320
Speaker 1: unless you can isolate all of them.

336
00:19:33,600 --> 00:19:35,680
Speaker 2: Why would we have to be able to isolate all

337
00:19:35,720 --> 00:19:39,439
Speaker 2: of them. If there's one thing that's morally wrong, that's

338
00:19:39,480 --> 00:19:40,800
Speaker 2: all we need, then we.

339
00:19:40,800 --> 00:19:44,520
Speaker 1: Have moral truth of objectivity.

340
00:19:46,080 --> 00:19:47,520
Speaker 2: Okay, let me take a step back. I'm not sure

341
00:19:47,560 --> 00:19:50,159
Speaker 2: to following your point. You said we can't know certain

342
00:19:50,160 --> 00:19:53,960
Speaker 2: moral truths unless we know that all moral truths, Like

343
00:19:54,000 --> 00:19:56,160
Speaker 2: you kind of made a universal statement about the number

344
00:19:56,200 --> 00:19:58,399
Speaker 2: of moral truths we have to say. I'm simply saying

345
00:19:58,960 --> 00:20:01,000
Speaker 2: if there's no one you mean make, let me make

346
00:20:01,040 --> 00:20:01,400
Speaker 2: this point.

347
00:20:01,400 --> 00:20:03,800
Speaker 1: If there's that's not what I said.

348
00:20:04,160 --> 00:20:06,159
Speaker 2: Okay, then correct me. I didn't want to mistate you.

349
00:20:06,240 --> 00:20:09,280
Speaker 1: Go ahead. I didn't say that. I said that, if

350
00:20:09,320 --> 00:20:13,560
Speaker 1: you think there are objectively moral facts, why can't you

351
00:20:13,680 --> 00:20:17,960
Speaker 1: isolate them? I don't know if it exist. If they

352
00:20:18,000 --> 00:20:21,240
Speaker 1: couldn't exist, I didn't say that. I said, if they

353
00:20:21,359 --> 00:20:25,000
Speaker 1: are there, why can't you name them?

354
00:20:25,160 --> 00:20:27,760
Speaker 2: Okay, So I certainly don't want to misstate your argument.

355
00:20:27,840 --> 00:20:30,240
Speaker 2: Thank you for correcting that. But I don't know what

356
00:20:30,240 --> 00:20:33,280
Speaker 2: it means to isolate them. I can state them, and

357
00:20:33,359 --> 00:20:38,240
Speaker 2: it means that you agreed with me that torturing a

358
00:20:38,320 --> 00:20:43,280
Speaker 2: child for adult entertainment is wrong. That's a universal moral truth.

359
00:20:44,080 --> 00:20:45,760
Speaker 1: Oh, no, I don't think it is.

360
00:20:47,520 --> 00:20:50,840
Speaker 2: Okay. You know in the no.

361
00:20:51,119 --> 00:20:54,359
Speaker 1: In the ancient world, for example, people were also human

362
00:20:54,400 --> 00:20:58,680
Speaker 1: beings often practice child sacrifice. It was often very painful.

363
00:20:59,200 --> 00:21:01,960
Speaker 1: They thought it was the right thing to do. Now,

364
00:21:02,000 --> 00:21:05,720
Speaker 1: you could claim they didn't understand the objective truths of morality,

365
00:21:06,480 --> 00:21:10,920
Speaker 1: or you could say that, actually, you know, this moral

366
00:21:10,960 --> 00:21:13,520
Speaker 1: truth that we thought was objective and available to everybody

367
00:21:13,600 --> 00:21:18,080
Speaker 1: was not available to them.

368
00:21:18,240 --> 00:21:22,040
Speaker 2: Or we could say a third option, they did have

369
00:21:22,240 --> 00:21:25,760
Speaker 2: a moral sense, and this would get us into Lewis's

370
00:21:25,840 --> 00:21:29,000
Speaker 2: argument that you seem to agree that there's at least

371
00:21:29,440 --> 00:21:33,800
Speaker 2: certain universal or commonly experienced maybe won't use the word universal,

372
00:21:34,400 --> 00:21:39,399
Speaker 2: commonly experienced moral principles such as for posterity, caring for

373
00:21:39,440 --> 00:21:46,160
Speaker 2: our kids, such as loving others in a certain fashion, mercy, justice,

374
00:21:46,720 --> 00:21:50,680
Speaker 2: These seem to transcend culture. So I have no problem.

375
00:21:50,840 --> 00:21:52,680
Speaker 2: Let me make this quick point. I have no problem

376
00:21:52,720 --> 00:21:58,000
Speaker 2: pointing back to those who sacrifice their kids, practice cannibalism,

377
00:21:58,520 --> 00:21:59,959
Speaker 2: some of the things that we see in the Old

378
00:22:00,119 --> 00:22:02,880
Speaker 2: Testament and saying, oh, they were doing what was morally

379
00:22:02,880 --> 00:22:06,080
Speaker 2: wrong and they should have known better because they have

380
00:22:06,280 --> 00:22:11,000
Speaker 2: access to basic more principles, and we have morally improved

381
00:22:11,280 --> 00:22:14,720
Speaker 2: since that time. I have no problem saying that, and

382
00:22:14,760 --> 00:22:17,159
Speaker 2: I think the vast majority of people would be with me.

383
00:22:17,359 --> 00:22:19,840
Speaker 2: Just like our science is better, our history is better,

384
00:22:20,440 --> 00:22:24,000
Speaker 2: we have made moral progress from that time. Sounds like

385
00:22:24,040 --> 00:22:24,600
Speaker 2: you disagree.

386
00:22:25,720 --> 00:22:28,000
Speaker 1: Well, if you're talking about people who are listening to

387
00:22:28,000 --> 00:22:30,480
Speaker 1: the podcast, yeah, probably so. If you talked to moral philosophers,

388
00:22:30,520 --> 00:22:37,760
Speaker 1: probably not so. I I agree that humans have certain

389
00:22:37,760 --> 00:22:42,919
Speaker 1: inclinations that absolutely tell us that something is right and wrong.

390
00:22:43,640 --> 00:22:46,680
Speaker 1: That doesn't mean that there's some kind of objective standard there.

391
00:22:47,920 --> 00:22:51,520
Speaker 1: It means that this is our inclination as human beings.

392
00:22:53,080 --> 00:22:56,560
Speaker 2: Okay, so let me ask this. This is helpful. By

393
00:22:56,600 --> 00:22:58,720
Speaker 2: the way, I'm going to come back to this point

394
00:22:58,760 --> 00:23:04,359
Speaker 2: about inclination. In your book, you make two claims. One

395
00:23:04,480 --> 00:23:07,440
Speaker 2: you talk about you embrace your beliefs because you think

396
00:23:07,480 --> 00:23:10,720
Speaker 2: they're superior. Otherwise you wouldn't embrace them. And by the way,

397
00:23:11,000 --> 00:23:12,919
Speaker 2: I'm with you, that's what it means to hold the

398
00:23:12,920 --> 00:23:15,679
Speaker 2: belief There's nothing elitist about that. I don't fault you

399
00:23:15,760 --> 00:23:18,280
Speaker 2: for that. But then in page seventy six you talk

400
00:23:18,320 --> 00:23:24,399
Speaker 2: about progress we have made since our ancient forebears. So

401
00:23:24,560 --> 00:23:28,119
Speaker 2: if it's all opinion and there's no standard by which

402
00:23:28,200 --> 00:23:32,359
Speaker 2: we judge. I don't know what superior and progress even means.

403
00:23:33,920 --> 00:23:37,760
Speaker 1: You don't you don't believe in progress because earlier you

404
00:23:37,800 --> 00:23:41,120
Speaker 1: said we've progressed in terms of history and science.

405
00:23:41,880 --> 00:23:44,240
Speaker 2: Okay, so that's not my point. I said, I don't

406
00:23:44,240 --> 00:23:44,760
Speaker 2: believe in it.

407
00:23:45,240 --> 00:23:45,480
Speaker 1: Let me.

408
00:23:45,600 --> 00:23:49,960
Speaker 2: Let me clarify again. I'm saying from your perspective, and

409
00:23:50,080 --> 00:23:54,080
Speaker 2: correct me if I don't explain this right. There's not

410
00:23:54,160 --> 00:23:58,120
Speaker 2: an objective moral standard outside of us. We've been wired

411
00:23:58,160 --> 00:24:03,400
Speaker 2: by evolution to have certain inclinations that feel absolute to us,

412
00:24:04,040 --> 00:24:09,120
Speaker 2: but they're not actually absolute. That's the explanation for reality

413
00:24:09,320 --> 00:24:11,800
Speaker 2: I see in your book. And yet twice in the

414
00:24:11,840 --> 00:24:15,600
Speaker 2: book you talk about you embrace your beliefs because you

415
00:24:15,840 --> 00:24:19,480
Speaker 2: think they are superior, and then on page seventy six

416
00:24:19,880 --> 00:24:23,840
Speaker 2: you talk about moral progress we've made since our ancient forebears.

417
00:24:24,680 --> 00:24:27,560
Speaker 2: I believe that certain morality is superior. I think the

418
00:24:27,600 --> 00:24:31,000
Speaker 2: morality of Jesus is superior because I think we do

419
00:24:31,080 --> 00:24:33,479
Speaker 2: have an obligation to care for the poor. I think

420
00:24:33,560 --> 00:24:36,760
Speaker 2: people are made in God's image, and I think we've

421
00:24:36,920 --> 00:24:43,080
Speaker 2: made progress, so moving beyond slavery, moving beyond cannibalism, moving

422
00:24:43,160 --> 00:24:46,840
Speaker 2: beyond these kinds of things is progress. But from the

423
00:24:46,960 --> 00:24:50,639
Speaker 2: ethic you've laid out, insofar as I understand it, I

424
00:24:50,640 --> 00:24:54,560
Speaker 2: don't understand what superior or progress means any more than

425
00:24:54,600 --> 00:24:56,919
Speaker 2: I made progress in the kind of ice cream flavor

426
00:24:57,000 --> 00:24:59,520
Speaker 2: that I like. If it's all subjective, what is superior

427
00:24:59,600 --> 00:25:00,720
Speaker 2: progress even mean?

428
00:25:03,640 --> 00:25:07,520
Speaker 1: So this seems to be an issue that you're very

429
00:25:07,840 --> 00:25:13,720
Speaker 1: intent upon. You and I share a human DNA that

430
00:25:13,760 --> 00:25:17,000
Speaker 1: has been transformed over the centuries because of the way

431
00:25:17,080 --> 00:25:24,480
Speaker 1: culture developed. If you yourself think you have access to

432
00:25:24,760 --> 00:25:29,280
Speaker 1: moral absolutes, which I think you you believe you do

433
00:25:29,359 --> 00:25:32,919
Speaker 1: have access to them, is that correct? I think that

434
00:25:33,040 --> 00:25:34,120
Speaker 1: you have access to them.

435
00:25:34,240 --> 00:25:37,000
Speaker 2: Yeah, I would use the term objective moral truths, But

436
00:25:37,440 --> 00:25:39,679
Speaker 2: I'm with you in general as.

437
00:25:39,560 --> 00:25:42,280
Speaker 1: Opposed to what did I say, I thought objective?

438
00:25:42,840 --> 00:25:44,800
Speaker 2: I'm equivalent. Sorry, I tend to not use the term

439
00:25:44,880 --> 00:25:48,000
Speaker 2: absolute for an issue you raised earlier that I think

440
00:25:48,600 --> 00:25:48,960
Speaker 2: is wrong.

441
00:25:49,080 --> 00:25:52,040
Speaker 1: And I think you're objective moral truths, right, yes, And

442
00:25:52,040 --> 00:25:54,560
Speaker 1: and you admit that in different cultures they have different

443
00:25:54,760 --> 00:25:58,600
Speaker 1: views of what those absolute what those moral truth objective

444
00:25:58,600 --> 00:26:02,359
Speaker 1: moral truths are. Different cultures have different views of moral

445
00:26:02,560 --> 00:26:03,480
Speaker 1: objective truth.

446
00:26:04,680 --> 00:26:09,880
Speaker 2: I think different cultures have common moral principles that transcend culture.

447
00:26:11,000 --> 00:26:16,040
Speaker 2: These are principles that are universal or near universal, even

448
00:26:16,040 --> 00:26:20,280
Speaker 2: though the practices may vary, which is what we would expect,

449
00:26:20,960 --> 00:26:23,200
Speaker 2: and so go ahead.

450
00:26:23,320 --> 00:26:26,600
Speaker 1: One of my top moral priorities is to help people

451
00:26:26,640 --> 00:26:30,400
Speaker 1: who are hungry and homeless, okay, And I think that

452
00:26:30,400 --> 00:26:33,440
Speaker 1: that for me, that is a very kind of core

453
00:26:34,080 --> 00:26:41,280
Speaker 1: moral value, and I try to act on it. That

454
00:26:41,359 --> 00:26:47,040
Speaker 1: moral value was not an evidence for the vast majority

455
00:26:47,080 --> 00:26:49,800
Speaker 1: of the three hundred thousand years that Homo sapiens have

456
00:26:49,840 --> 00:26:54,640
Speaker 1: been in existence. And so if you want to say

457
00:26:54,920 --> 00:26:58,200
Speaker 1: that we all have those moral values, I think history

458
00:26:58,240 --> 00:27:00,840
Speaker 1: would show you that you're wrong, that in fact, those

459
00:27:00,880 --> 00:27:03,719
Speaker 1: moral values have been around. That particular moral value as

460
00:27:03,720 --> 00:27:05,919
Speaker 1: being like a high importance of help those in need,

461
00:27:06,000 --> 00:27:09,080
Speaker 1: has been around for about eighteen hundred years out of

462
00:27:09,119 --> 00:27:12,879
Speaker 1: the three hundred thousand years the humans have existed. So

463
00:27:12,960 --> 00:27:17,760
Speaker 1: I don't think we all have the same moral code. Okay.

464
00:27:17,840 --> 00:27:19,959
Speaker 2: So a couple of things. You said your moral value

465
00:27:20,320 --> 00:27:23,080
Speaker 2: is to help the hungry and the homeless, and that's

466
00:27:23,119 --> 00:27:26,159
Speaker 2: when you deeply hold by the way, I applaud you

467
00:27:26,200 --> 00:27:29,560
Speaker 2: for that. I think that is an objectively good moral

468
00:27:29,640 --> 00:27:32,600
Speaker 2: thing to do. And if I understand correctly, on your

469
00:27:32,600 --> 00:27:36,840
Speaker 2: own blog, you give away the proceeds of people who

470
00:27:37,000 --> 00:27:38,960
Speaker 2: Am I correct on that, you give away the proceeds

471
00:27:38,960 --> 00:27:41,160
Speaker 2: of people who subscribe to your blog. You give away

472
00:27:41,200 --> 00:27:43,280
Speaker 2: to the poor, to the need, et cetera. Am I

473
00:27:43,400 --> 00:27:43,960
Speaker 2: right on that?

474
00:27:44,920 --> 00:27:46,800
Speaker 1: Yeah, the last three years we've given a million and

475
00:27:46,840 --> 00:27:50,640
Speaker 1: a half dollars to charities dealing with hunger, homelessness, and

476
00:27:50,720 --> 00:27:51,520
Speaker 1: disaster relief.

477
00:27:52,320 --> 00:27:56,600
Speaker 2: Amazing. I love that, And I would say good for you,

478
00:27:57,280 --> 00:27:59,840
Speaker 2: because you're helping people who can't help themselves.

479
00:27:59,880 --> 00:28:02,119
Speaker 1: I love that. It is where you and I can

480
00:28:02,200 --> 00:28:05,200
Speaker 1: have common cause. I mean, it's absolutely I mean and

481
00:28:05,280 --> 00:28:07,840
Speaker 1: with just anybody who has that kind of moral sense.

482
00:28:08,320 --> 00:28:10,760
Speaker 1: My point in my book is that moral sense was

483
00:28:10,840 --> 00:28:15,280
Speaker 1: a sense that almost that nobody had in the ancient world,

484
00:28:15,480 --> 00:28:18,720
Speaker 1: and to claim it as some kind of objective moral

485
00:28:18,800 --> 00:28:23,159
Speaker 1: value is I think a historical it's not recognizing the

486
00:28:23,200 --> 00:28:24,560
Speaker 1: realities of the human race.

487
00:28:25,640 --> 00:28:28,600
Speaker 2: Okay, So I do agree with you that things like

488
00:28:28,680 --> 00:28:34,520
Speaker 2: hospitals and orphanages and nursing homes and charity and forgiveness,

489
00:28:34,840 --> 00:28:38,200
Speaker 2: caring for the poor and the weak came in terms

490
00:28:38,240 --> 00:28:43,040
Speaker 2: of a universal ethic. It came through Jesus. That doesn't

491
00:28:43,080 --> 00:28:48,360
Speaker 2: mean that all morality is therefore subjective, and it doesn't

492
00:28:48,400 --> 00:28:53,720
Speaker 2: mean that Jesus teaching isn't more objectively right than previous teaching.

493
00:28:54,320 --> 00:28:56,920
Speaker 2: I don't think that follows from it. So part of

494
00:28:56,960 --> 00:28:59,560
Speaker 2: my question for you would be, is I applied you

495
00:28:59,560 --> 00:29:02,760
Speaker 2: we have and cause because I say, hey, the poor

496
00:29:02,800 --> 00:29:05,040
Speaker 2: that you're giving money to are made in the image

497
00:29:05,080 --> 00:29:09,040
Speaker 2: of God. They have value, and they have dignity, and

498
00:29:09,080 --> 00:29:11,520
Speaker 2: so we ought to those of us who have power

499
00:29:11,680 --> 00:29:16,280
Speaker 2: and privilege, et cetera, ought to care for those who don't.

500
00:29:17,000 --> 00:29:18,760
Speaker 2: But it seems to me if you're saying this is

501
00:29:18,840 --> 00:29:21,840
Speaker 2: just your subjective value and you do it and it's

502
00:29:21,880 --> 00:29:25,440
Speaker 2: not objectively true, you could have said, I'm going to

503
00:29:25,520 --> 00:29:27,720
Speaker 2: take the proceeds from my blog and I'm going to

504
00:29:27,760 --> 00:29:31,040
Speaker 2: give it to advance racism or sexism, and that's just

505
00:29:31,080 --> 00:29:36,200
Speaker 2: my personal, private, subjective feeling. And by your standard, if

506
00:29:36,240 --> 00:29:38,720
Speaker 2: I hear you correctly, that's not actually wrong. You don't

507
00:29:38,760 --> 00:29:41,440
Speaker 2: prefer it, you don't like it, but that's not really

508
00:29:41,440 --> 00:29:45,440
Speaker 2: wrong in itself. And one thing before you say this

509
00:29:45,800 --> 00:29:48,360
Speaker 2: is you said I'm hung up on this. At the

510
00:29:48,440 --> 00:29:52,240
Speaker 2: root of your book is about the moral transformation of

511
00:29:52,280 --> 00:29:56,000
Speaker 2: the West, and you dismiss the moral argument, which is fine,

512
00:29:56,040 --> 00:29:58,840
Speaker 2: You're totally welcome to do so. I'm enjoying this give

513
00:29:58,880 --> 00:30:03,640
Speaker 2: and take. But part of this question is what describes reality,

514
00:30:04,520 --> 00:30:07,760
Speaker 2: Can evolution and natural selection in the way you take it,

515
00:30:07,800 --> 00:30:10,760
Speaker 2: if I understand correctly describe morality and the rest of

516
00:30:10,800 --> 00:30:13,800
Speaker 2: our beliefs, or is there something in the world that

517
00:30:13,880 --> 00:30:19,040
Speaker 2: points beyond itself to a god and an objective moral code.

518
00:30:19,520 --> 00:30:24,440
Speaker 2: That's the question. So part of your blog, it seems

519
00:30:24,440 --> 00:30:29,880
Speaker 2: to me you're saying, yes, it's your private inclinations, but

520
00:30:29,960 --> 00:30:32,320
Speaker 2: it would follow that if you used it for anything else,

521
00:30:32,760 --> 00:30:37,640
Speaker 2: there is no moral distinction, which makes me raise a question,

522
00:30:37,920 --> 00:30:38,920
Speaker 2: why are you doing it?

523
00:30:38,920 --> 00:30:39,080
Speaker 1: Then?

524
00:30:39,120 --> 00:30:41,280
Speaker 2: If it's not objectively good, does it make you feel good?

525
00:30:41,880 --> 00:30:44,240
Speaker 2: Is it virtue signaling? I'm not saying you are. I'm

526
00:30:44,240 --> 00:30:46,320
Speaker 2: just saying it raises the question, if this is not

527
00:30:46,400 --> 00:30:49,080
Speaker 2: objectively good, why choose a over me just because you

528
00:30:49,160 --> 00:30:49,440
Speaker 2: like it.

529
00:30:51,000 --> 00:30:52,440
Speaker 1: I think part of the problem I'm having with this

530
00:30:52,480 --> 00:30:55,560
Speaker 1: conversation is that you're raising so many points when you

531
00:30:55,600 --> 00:30:58,720
Speaker 1: talk that each one needs to be dealt with separately,

532
00:30:59,480 --> 00:31:02,600
Speaker 1: and so it's very difficult to have a conversation about

533
00:31:02,640 --> 00:31:05,760
Speaker 1: any of the single points I mean to begin with.

534
00:31:05,880 --> 00:31:10,880
Speaker 1: You agreed that throughout the vast majority of human history,

535
00:31:11,440 --> 00:31:14,720
Speaker 1: people have not had felt this need to help those

536
00:31:14,800 --> 00:31:18,480
Speaker 1: who were hungry and thirsty if they weren't friends and families.

537
00:31:18,840 --> 00:31:21,800
Speaker 1: That means that most people did not have the moral

538
00:31:21,880 --> 00:31:25,800
Speaker 1: inclinations that you have. But then you claim that your

539
00:31:25,840 --> 00:31:30,880
Speaker 1: moral inclinations are objective, and either that means that you

540
00:31:31,000 --> 00:31:36,520
Speaker 1: have greater access to objective truth than ninety ninety nine

541
00:31:36,560 --> 00:31:40,240
Speaker 1: percent of the human race since it's existed, or it

542
00:31:40,280 --> 00:31:43,920
Speaker 1: means you're or it means you're contradicting yourself. And so

543
00:31:45,600 --> 00:31:47,440
Speaker 1: you know, you're making a lot of other points about

544
00:31:47,440 --> 00:31:51,280
Speaker 1: how you have to have objectivity, or because otherwise you

545
00:31:51,280 --> 00:31:54,400
Speaker 1: could just it could be random, or that objectivity proves

546
00:31:54,440 --> 00:31:56,840
Speaker 1: that there is a god, and you know those are

547
00:31:56,880 --> 00:32:01,880
Speaker 1: other points. My point here is that you've greed that

548
00:32:02,080 --> 00:32:05,480
Speaker 1: your inclination to help those in need is based on

549
00:32:05,520 --> 00:32:08,240
Speaker 1: the development within the human psyche. You said that you

550
00:32:08,360 --> 00:32:12,440
Speaker 1: agreed with my sense that Jesus transformed the moral conscients

551
00:32:12,480 --> 00:32:15,240
Speaker 1: of the West. If he transformed it, that means the

552
00:32:15,240 --> 00:32:18,520
Speaker 1: moral conscience now is different from what it was before,

553
00:32:19,080 --> 00:32:22,760
Speaker 1: which means that people haven't always had access to this objectivity,

554
00:32:23,040 --> 00:32:26,040
Speaker 1: which should raise questions for you about what you even

555
00:32:26,160 --> 00:32:31,360
Speaker 1: mean by anybody having access to it, including your example

556
00:32:31,480 --> 00:32:34,000
Speaker 1: about torturing a child, which of course I agree with.

557
00:32:34,760 --> 00:32:37,000
Speaker 1: But if you can list that as an example of

558
00:32:37,000 --> 00:32:39,720
Speaker 1: what's morally objective, why not list everything?

559
00:32:41,960 --> 00:32:46,520
Speaker 2: Okay, So this is helpful, and I'm certainly not trying

560
00:32:46,520 --> 00:32:48,479
Speaker 2: to pile on to me objections. We can take them

561
00:32:48,520 --> 00:32:50,680
Speaker 2: one by one. That's fair and the right thing to do.

562
00:32:50,960 --> 00:32:53,240
Speaker 2: So I don't want to do that. Let me take

563
00:32:53,240 --> 00:32:55,400
Speaker 2: that back, but let's focus on the one that you made,

564
00:32:56,400 --> 00:33:01,160
Speaker 2: namely that Jesus transformed the moral teachings of the West

565
00:33:03,280 --> 00:33:04,560
Speaker 2: the conscience of the West.

566
00:33:04,640 --> 00:33:04,920
Speaker 1: Thank you.

567
00:33:05,480 --> 00:33:08,640
Speaker 2: So I agree with that inso far as it goes.

568
00:33:08,760 --> 00:33:13,600
Speaker 2: I would say Jesus expanded the moral conscience of the West.

569
00:33:14,560 --> 00:33:18,720
Speaker 2: So there still was And this is Lewis's argument that

570
00:33:18,800 --> 00:33:23,920
Speaker 2: I think you agree with some basic moral principles that

571
00:33:24,000 --> 00:33:29,240
Speaker 2: people have across cultures. There's a sense that right and

572
00:33:29,400 --> 00:33:32,880
Speaker 2: wrong exist. And I ought to be a good person,

573
00:33:32,920 --> 00:33:36,479
Speaker 2: even though maybe culturalates defined differently in cultural a versus

574
00:33:36,480 --> 00:33:39,200
Speaker 2: culture b I ought to love people, even though love

575
00:33:39,240 --> 00:33:42,520
Speaker 2: looks differently in culture a versus cultural b. I got

576
00:33:42,520 --> 00:33:45,520
Speaker 2: to care for my children on posterity, although that looks differently.

577
00:33:45,960 --> 00:33:48,880
Speaker 2: So the point is not the practice. But there are

578
00:33:49,120 --> 00:33:53,120
Speaker 2: moral principles that we find. This is Lewis's argument in

579
00:33:53,160 --> 00:33:57,840
Speaker 2: The Abolition of Man, that are across cultures, these common

580
00:33:58,040 --> 00:34:04,600
Speaker 2: basic moral principles commitments, although the practice changes, so that

581
00:34:04,720 --> 00:34:08,839
Speaker 2: moral objectivity has existed from the beginning, And I would

582
00:34:08,920 --> 00:34:11,480
Speaker 2: argue is in the scripture, which is a separate question.

583
00:34:12,280 --> 00:34:16,480
Speaker 2: And so I'm not saying Jesus introduced this idea of

584
00:34:16,680 --> 00:34:20,759
Speaker 2: moral teaching and it didn't exist before. I'm saying he

585
00:34:21,000 --> 00:34:26,440
Speaker 2: expanded a certain moral belief that existed before then in

586
00:34:26,520 --> 00:34:30,880
Speaker 2: terms of globally, he expanded it. But he also expanded

587
00:34:30,880 --> 00:34:34,480
Speaker 2: it to include the disenfranchised, include the poor, those in

588
00:34:34,520 --> 00:34:38,920
Speaker 2: the outgroup. So I don't think there's any inconsistency in

589
00:34:39,000 --> 00:34:43,439
Speaker 2: saying Jesus expanded our moral teachings, because we do see

590
00:34:43,640 --> 00:34:47,919
Speaker 2: common moral teachings before the time of Jesus. So there's

591
00:34:48,080 --> 00:34:51,200
Speaker 2: no inconsistency in the argument that I'm making, which is

592
00:34:51,239 --> 00:34:54,440
Speaker 2: why Christians applaud things like books by Tom Holland. And

593
00:34:54,480 --> 00:34:58,239
Speaker 2: I thought your book was so great. I was like, yeah, hospitals, orphanages.

594
00:34:58,640 --> 00:35:02,640
Speaker 2: This is the teachings of Jesus because he expanded these

595
00:35:02,800 --> 00:35:06,920
Speaker 2: truths that we have to those who couldn't experience it

596
00:35:07,200 --> 00:35:11,080
Speaker 2: in the past. So does that make sense or should

597
00:35:11,600 --> 00:35:13,040
Speaker 2: we keep going?

598
00:35:13,239 --> 00:35:16,359
Speaker 1: No, it's the thesis of my book. But I mean,

599
00:35:16,360 --> 00:35:18,919
Speaker 1: that's the thesis of my book that Jesus transformed something

600
00:35:18,920 --> 00:35:21,400
Speaker 1: that was already there. People had moral conscience. I mean

601
00:35:21,400 --> 00:35:25,759
Speaker 1: I talk about moral discussions that go back as far

602
00:35:25,760 --> 00:35:27,880
Speaker 1: as we have literature and trace them up to Jesus

603
00:35:28,040 --> 00:35:32,319
Speaker 1: day and up to today. So there are transformations. I

604
00:35:32,360 --> 00:35:35,160
Speaker 1: think the point is that you see kind of common

605
00:35:35,239 --> 00:35:39,240
Speaker 1: moral values across cultures. For example, parents love their children

606
00:35:39,560 --> 00:35:43,120
Speaker 1: and take care of them. Across cultures. Virtually every culture

607
00:35:43,160 --> 00:35:46,360
Speaker 1: thinks that in some instances it's wrong to murder somebody.

608
00:35:46,680 --> 00:35:48,560
Speaker 1: You can go down a list of things that are

609
00:35:49,040 --> 00:35:54,000
Speaker 1: broadly shared, even as you agree the practices are quite different,

610
00:35:54,480 --> 00:35:58,160
Speaker 1: so that we think the child sacrifice is a heinous idea,

611
00:35:58,440 --> 00:36:00,680
Speaker 1: and other people thought this was a really good Okay,

612
00:36:00,760 --> 00:36:05,120
Speaker 1: So there are differences and similarities. You're saying that the

613
00:36:05,160 --> 00:36:10,719
Speaker 1: similarities across cultures demonstrate, as C. S. Lewis argued that

614
00:36:11,200 --> 00:36:13,319
Speaker 1: there must be some it must have been given to

615
00:36:13,400 --> 00:36:16,000
Speaker 1: us by some superior being, and that there's some kind

616
00:36:16,040 --> 00:36:21,400
Speaker 1: of objective morality. I'm disagreeing with that. This is not

617
00:36:21,480 --> 00:36:23,480
Speaker 1: a big point for me in the book, and so

618
00:36:23,520 --> 00:36:25,319
Speaker 1: I just want people to know that. You know, I

619
00:36:25,320 --> 00:36:28,279
Speaker 1: do think that Christians will will appreciate many parts of

620
00:36:28,280 --> 00:36:30,920
Speaker 1: this book. They'll like you, They'll disagree with other parts.

621
00:36:31,000 --> 00:36:35,120
Speaker 1: I think. I think many Christians will disagree with the

622
00:36:35,120 --> 00:36:37,359
Speaker 1: Most Christians I know will disagree with parts other than

623
00:36:37,400 --> 00:36:40,240
Speaker 1: the ones you're trying to focus on in terms of objectivity.

624
00:36:40,960 --> 00:36:44,880
Speaker 1: But there are other explanations for Lewis identifies in several

625
00:36:44,920 --> 00:36:48,800
Speaker 1: of his writings about about people having shared moral sense.

626
00:36:49,280 --> 00:36:52,000
Speaker 1: There are other ways to explain it that, in my opinion,

627
00:36:52,520 --> 00:36:55,200
Speaker 1: that don't affect my thesis, but in my opinion, are

628
00:36:55,239 --> 00:36:56,279
Speaker 1: superior to his view.

629
00:36:59,560 --> 00:37:02,400
Speaker 2: Okay, so let me see where we go from me.

630
00:37:02,480 --> 00:37:04,360
Speaker 2: I agree there's a ton more in your book that

631
00:37:04,400 --> 00:37:06,879
Speaker 2: we haven't talked about here, which is in part why

632
00:37:07,000 --> 00:37:08,399
Speaker 2: I sent a note to your team and I said,

633
00:37:08,440 --> 00:37:11,560
Speaker 2: here's what I'm interested in exploring. Is this okay with Bart?

634
00:37:11,800 --> 00:37:13,839
Speaker 2: They agreed? I was like, great, so we can't cover

635
00:37:13,880 --> 00:37:16,239
Speaker 2: everything in the book. There's some New Testament critiques about

636
00:37:16,239 --> 00:37:18,279
Speaker 2: atonement and forgiveness. They're fascinating.

637
00:37:19,080 --> 00:37:22,160
Speaker 1: I didn't think it's like, well, those those are.

638
00:37:22,239 --> 00:37:26,040
Speaker 2: Those are very interesting points, and that's a time. That's

639
00:37:26,080 --> 00:37:29,400
Speaker 2: another time for uh, it's another time we can debate that.

640
00:37:29,680 --> 00:37:34,680
Speaker 2: But partly I'm I'm not actually making the argument that

641
00:37:34,760 --> 00:37:39,960
Speaker 2: there's commonality across culture and that proves that it comes

642
00:37:40,000 --> 00:37:44,560
Speaker 2: from God. That's not my point. I was simply pushing

643
00:37:44,680 --> 00:37:48,279
Speaker 2: back and saying, responding to the what you said was

644
00:37:48,280 --> 00:37:52,319
Speaker 2: an apparent contradiction in my belief that Jesus is the

645
00:37:52,360 --> 00:37:55,920
Speaker 2: one who brought this moral teaching to the world, and

646
00:37:55,960 --> 00:37:59,920
Speaker 2: I'm saying there's actually commonality before this time that exists

647
00:38:00,120 --> 00:38:05,480
Speaker 2: across culture. C. S. Lewis pointed that out the follow

648
00:38:05,560 --> 00:38:08,600
Speaker 2: up question, Okay, agree with that, right, and the follow

649
00:38:08,680 --> 00:38:11,440
Speaker 2: up questions. I think where we differ in the sense

650
00:38:11,440 --> 00:38:18,360
Speaker 2: of what best explains those common beliefs across culture, That's

651
00:38:18,400 --> 00:38:20,759
Speaker 2: where I think we differ. And to me, that's what's

652
00:38:20,840 --> 00:38:23,680
Speaker 2: most interesting about the book. Even though there's plenty of

653
00:38:23,760 --> 00:38:27,240
Speaker 2: other interesting stuff and we are disagreeing on certain issues.

654
00:38:27,239 --> 00:38:29,160
Speaker 2: You're right, there's plenty of other stuff here. That's why

655
00:38:29,160 --> 00:38:31,920
Speaker 2: I said to find your book fascinating. I was intrigued

656
00:38:31,960 --> 00:38:35,400
Speaker 2: by it. There's plenty of other stuff. We have more

657
00:38:35,440 --> 00:38:39,680
Speaker 2: common ground in this book than we do difference. To me,

658
00:38:39,800 --> 00:38:41,520
Speaker 2: when I read a book like this, I'm trying to

659
00:38:41,560 --> 00:38:46,000
Speaker 2: find what is the best explanation, because if if evolution,

660
00:38:46,200 --> 00:38:51,240
Speaker 2: as you laid out, can sufficiently account for our belief

661
00:38:51,400 --> 00:38:54,920
Speaker 2: in morality, then that doesn't mean there's no God. That

662
00:38:55,120 --> 00:38:59,719
Speaker 2: just means that this argument doesn't point towards God's right.

663
00:39:00,160 --> 00:39:02,120
Speaker 1: So I don't argue whether there's a God or not.

664
00:39:02,320 --> 00:39:03,920
Speaker 1: My book has nothing to do with whether there's a

665
00:39:03,920 --> 00:39:04,400
Speaker 1: God or not.

666
00:39:05,280 --> 00:39:08,120
Speaker 2: You're talking about, Yeah, that's a sub line text. Now

667
00:39:08,160 --> 00:39:10,960
Speaker 2: you tell your story a little bit of having questions

668
00:39:10,960 --> 00:39:14,840
Speaker 2: about God, becoming an agnostic at least for a season,

669
00:39:15,440 --> 00:39:18,400
Speaker 2: and then still having a moral code, so kind of

670
00:39:18,520 --> 00:39:21,840
Speaker 2: underlies it. But maybe you know part of this ethic

671
00:39:21,920 --> 00:39:25,480
Speaker 2: of Jesus. Could you tell us what exactly do you

672
00:39:25,560 --> 00:39:28,399
Speaker 2: think is unique about the teachings that Jesus gave.

673
00:39:30,040 --> 00:39:31,880
Speaker 1: I think there are a couple of things, and you

674
00:39:32,520 --> 00:39:35,239
Speaker 1: mentioned them. You mentioned them, but well you mentioned one

675
00:39:35,239 --> 00:39:38,839
Speaker 1: of them. Anyway, it was it's been throughout the human race.

676
00:39:38,880 --> 00:39:42,080
Speaker 1: Ever since there's been a species that humans take care

677
00:39:42,120 --> 00:39:46,600
Speaker 1: of others within who are genetically and socially related to them.

678
00:39:46,960 --> 00:39:49,319
Speaker 1: That's always been the case. It's true of every species.

679
00:39:49,520 --> 00:39:52,320
Speaker 1: It's true of honey bees, it is true of chimpanzees,

680
00:39:52,360 --> 00:39:57,640
Speaker 1: it's true of snakes. If you any species that does

681
00:39:57,680 --> 00:40:01,200
Speaker 1: not have some sense of altruism would not survive as

682
00:40:01,200 --> 00:40:04,719
Speaker 1: a species, because if it's every individual for themselves, they're

683
00:40:04,760 --> 00:40:10,839
Speaker 1: too easily picked off by their enemies. And so every

684
00:40:10,840 --> 00:40:13,800
Speaker 1: species has that. Darwin recognized that even Darwin didn't know

685
00:40:13,800 --> 00:40:16,880
Speaker 1: about genes yet, but before they knew that their genetic

686
00:40:16,920 --> 00:40:20,320
Speaker 1: explanations for this, Darwin recognized the survival of the fittest

687
00:40:20,320 --> 00:40:23,719
Speaker 1: does not mean every individual for himself. It means that

688
00:40:23,800 --> 00:40:27,000
Speaker 1: the group has to be has to have coherence, that

689
00:40:27,080 --> 00:40:32,080
Speaker 1: requires cooperation, and on some level then that that requires altruism.

690
00:40:32,360 --> 00:40:35,399
Speaker 1: So that was there, and in Greek and Roman moral

691
00:40:35,400 --> 00:40:38,520
Speaker 1: philosophy within the Roman Jesus is born in the Roman world,

692
00:40:38,680 --> 00:40:42,240
Speaker 1: within Greek philosophical traditions that Romans inherited to go back.

693
00:40:43,080 --> 00:40:47,400
Speaker 1: We can trace them definitely back through Aristotle to Plato, Desocrates,

694
00:40:47,440 --> 00:40:50,480
Speaker 1: and there certainly were pre Socratic philosophs who held these views.

695
00:40:50,880 --> 00:40:53,719
Speaker 1: In the views that are advanced there, the idea is

696
00:40:53,760 --> 00:40:56,920
Speaker 1: that you absolutely have to be loving towards other people

697
00:40:56,960 --> 00:40:59,640
Speaker 1: and caring for other people and helping other people, but

698
00:40:59,840 --> 00:41:02,680
Speaker 1: it is always within the group that is socially and

699
00:41:02,680 --> 00:41:06,200
Speaker 1: biologically related to you in some way or another, not

700
00:41:06,360 --> 00:41:09,960
Speaker 1: the outsider. My argument in the book is that Jesus

701
00:41:10,080 --> 00:41:14,680
Speaker 1: universalized this so that it would be applied to anybody

702
00:41:14,719 --> 00:41:17,680
Speaker 1: in need, whether they were in your social group or not,

703
00:41:18,000 --> 00:41:19,920
Speaker 1: whether the part of your family, your friends, whether they

704
00:41:19,920 --> 00:41:24,520
Speaker 1: shared your nationality, your ethnicity, your race, anything else didn't

705
00:41:24,520 --> 00:41:27,279
Speaker 1: matter if they were in need, those are the people

706
00:41:27,320 --> 00:41:29,719
Speaker 1: you're supposed to help. What I argue my book is

707
00:41:29,760 --> 00:41:32,320
Speaker 1: that is different from what you get in Greek and

708
00:41:32,400 --> 00:41:35,359
Speaker 1: Roman philosophy, and it's different from what you get from

709
00:41:35,400 --> 00:41:38,000
Speaker 1: the Hebrew Bible, and it's a different So I'm not

710
00:41:38,000 --> 00:41:40,680
Speaker 1: saying that he's against Judaism. I'm not saying against Greek

711
00:41:40,719 --> 00:41:43,040
Speaker 1: and Roman philosophy. He would agree with a lot of Aristotle.

712
00:41:43,080 --> 00:41:45,680
Speaker 1: I mean he would have. But I'm saying the idea

713
00:41:45,719 --> 00:41:49,880
Speaker 1: of just the priority being people in need no matter

714
00:41:49,880 --> 00:41:53,960
Speaker 1: what is I think is the major innovation. Okay, and

715
00:41:54,000 --> 00:41:57,879
Speaker 1: that's what transformed our conscience. That's transformed our conscience because

716
00:41:57,920 --> 00:42:00,799
Speaker 1: the idea that you know, if you're if your brother gets,

717
00:42:00,920 --> 00:42:04,040
Speaker 1: you know, run over by a car, you should take

718
00:42:04,080 --> 00:42:07,320
Speaker 1: care of him. Everybody has that. It's part of our DNA.

719
00:42:07,520 --> 00:42:09,239
Speaker 1: But the idea that you should worry about somebody in

720
00:42:09,280 --> 00:42:12,359
Speaker 1: Sudan who's starving to death, that was not a thing

721
00:42:12,640 --> 00:42:16,399
Speaker 1: in the ancient world. And it wasn't just because because

722
00:42:16,400 --> 00:42:18,759
Speaker 1: of communication issues he didn't know about the Sudan. It's

723
00:42:18,800 --> 00:42:22,759
Speaker 1: because that was somebody else's concern. Our concern is our group.

724
00:42:24,480 --> 00:42:26,760
Speaker 2: Okay, that makes sense. So I think in some ways,

725
00:42:26,920 --> 00:42:30,440
Speaker 2: if I understand you correctly, we have an answer to

726
00:42:30,760 --> 00:42:33,120
Speaker 2: the question I started by asking you in the sense

727
00:42:33,160 --> 00:42:37,480
Speaker 2: of is this an improvement morally to use your terms

728
00:42:37,480 --> 00:42:41,120
Speaker 2: that you used progress or is this just a change

729
00:42:41,239 --> 00:42:45,400
Speaker 2: and a shift that's not actually morally better. That's the

730
00:42:45,440 --> 00:42:47,800
Speaker 2: heart of the question that I wanted to ask, because

731
00:42:48,120 --> 00:42:50,000
Speaker 2: you're right, I agree with you. This is we can

732
00:42:50,080 --> 00:42:54,960
Speaker 2: use terms like revolution and transformation for the teachings of Jesus,

733
00:42:55,000 --> 00:42:59,280
Speaker 2: how they've been spread around the world. It's that significant

734
00:43:00,200 --> 00:43:02,920
Speaker 2: part of my question is is this actually a genuine

735
00:43:02,920 --> 00:43:07,480
Speaker 2: improvement do we have obligations to care for the poor

736
00:43:08,400 --> 00:43:12,120
Speaker 2: or are these just inclinations that bubble up because of

737
00:43:12,160 --> 00:43:16,480
Speaker 2: our culture or because of evolution. And it sounds like

738
00:43:16,480 --> 00:43:19,239
Speaker 2: you're saying, just for clarity, that these are just inclinations

739
00:43:19,239 --> 00:43:22,080
Speaker 2: that bubble up because of culture, we don't actually have

740
00:43:22,200 --> 00:43:23,520
Speaker 2: those obligations.

741
00:43:24,120 --> 00:43:26,040
Speaker 1: I mean, I think I think the problem is that

742
00:43:26,080 --> 00:43:29,600
Speaker 1: you're you in your in your worldview. If you don't

743
00:43:29,600 --> 00:43:34,640
Speaker 1: have objective reality that we can access, that there are

744
00:43:34,640 --> 00:43:38,560
Speaker 1: no grounds for uh, for what we think, what we believe,

745
00:43:38,760 --> 00:43:40,960
Speaker 1: how we behave that. You've got to have some kind

746
00:43:41,000 --> 00:43:44,160
Speaker 1: of objective grounding for it. And it's very difficult for

747
00:43:44,200 --> 00:43:48,600
Speaker 1: you to understand a world in which people have very

748
00:43:48,680 --> 00:43:52,560
Speaker 1: distinct beliefs and understanding of what's true and how they

749
00:43:52,640 --> 00:43:55,319
Speaker 1: want to behave if they don't have it grounded in

750
00:43:55,400 --> 00:43:58,560
Speaker 1: these kinds of objective anchors if you want to call it,

751
00:43:58,600 --> 00:44:00,239
Speaker 1: I'm not sure what you would call them, but you've

752
00:44:00,239 --> 00:44:03,279
Speaker 1: got to have these objective truths, uh, you know. And

753
00:44:03,320 --> 00:44:05,200
Speaker 1: so it's very platonic of you. I mean, you know

754
00:44:05,280 --> 00:44:07,680
Speaker 1: this is uh you know, this is this goes back

755
00:44:07,719 --> 00:44:11,759
Speaker 1: to Plato, and it's completely understandable. It's what I used

756
00:44:11,760 --> 00:44:14,480
Speaker 1: to think, uh, and now I realize it doesn't make

757
00:44:14,480 --> 00:44:19,799
Speaker 1: any sense. So so you don't need objective groundings for

758
00:44:19,840 --> 00:44:22,719
Speaker 1: feeling like you need to help somebody in need. It's

759
00:44:22,800 --> 00:44:24,680
Speaker 1: part of who you are, it's part of how you

760
00:44:24,719 --> 00:44:28,759
Speaker 1: are wired. It's not because like you you don't have

761
00:44:29,520 --> 00:44:31,520
Speaker 1: It's not like it's not like you have a ten

762
00:44:31,560 --> 00:44:33,520
Speaker 1: commandments written on the law and you see this one, Oh,

763
00:44:33,560 --> 00:44:36,279
Speaker 1: don't steal. Okay, there it is. That's the objective thing.

764
00:44:36,320 --> 00:44:39,360
Speaker 1: I cannot steal. Therefore I won't steal. It's it's that

765
00:44:39,520 --> 00:44:42,480
Speaker 1: you have certain you have certain inclinations that are built

766
00:44:42,520 --> 00:44:46,080
Speaker 1: into you. And you shouldn't say that that's just why

767
00:44:46,120 --> 00:44:48,759
Speaker 1: you feel it, or it is merely because you have

768
00:44:48,760 --> 00:44:51,000
Speaker 1: a subjective view or you have a feeling. It's not

769
00:44:51,040 --> 00:44:53,080
Speaker 1: like merely or just it's it's what it means to

770
00:44:53,080 --> 00:44:56,839
Speaker 1: be a human being. And so that so we have

771
00:44:56,880 --> 00:44:59,399
Speaker 1: different views, and it's rooted in your sense there has

772
00:44:59,480 --> 00:45:02,320
Speaker 1: to be some of objectivity or there are no grounds

773
00:45:02,560 --> 00:45:05,880
Speaker 1: for faith, belief, understanding of truth, behavior, or anything else.

774
00:45:06,120 --> 00:45:08,760
Speaker 1: And I think that's completely and demonstrably wrong.

775
00:45:09,480 --> 00:45:11,760
Speaker 2: And that's fine. You call the argument the moral argument

776
00:45:11,840 --> 00:45:14,960
Speaker 2: blindingly flawed, that doesn't bother me at all. I appreciated

777
00:45:14,960 --> 00:45:19,200
Speaker 2: your clarity on it. Uh yeah, look, that's totally fine

778
00:45:19,200 --> 00:45:21,440
Speaker 2: on me. I appreciate when something doesn't dance around it

779
00:45:21,480 --> 00:45:24,439
Speaker 2: and they say exactly what they think. I don't think.

780
00:45:24,560 --> 00:45:28,160
Speaker 2: Maybe I'm wrong that I'm failing to understand this. I've

781
00:45:28,200 --> 00:45:32,800
Speaker 2: read tons of evolutionary ethics, atheist ethics, had a lot

782
00:45:32,840 --> 00:45:38,680
Speaker 2: of conversations. I'm simply asking the question, what best explains

783
00:45:39,239 --> 00:45:43,440
Speaker 2: this deep belief we have in moral rights and in

784
00:45:43,480 --> 00:45:48,040
Speaker 2: moral duties and in our obligation to the poor. What

785
00:45:48,239 --> 00:45:52,200
Speaker 2: best explains that? And it seems to me if I'm

786
00:45:52,239 --> 00:45:54,600
Speaker 2: failing to understand something, I would push back and say,

787
00:45:54,600 --> 00:45:57,640
Speaker 2: you're failing to understand this, And again, maybe this is

788
00:45:57,680 --> 00:45:59,960
Speaker 2: just bringing clarity for folks, but you're right now.

789
00:46:01,600 --> 00:46:03,920
Speaker 1: I'm just saying that it seems like that you're it's

790
00:46:03,960 --> 00:46:07,520
Speaker 1: because you say it's just based on subjectivity and if

791
00:46:07,560 --> 00:46:12,640
Speaker 1: that's like a lower criterion of truth, because that's what

792
00:46:12,680 --> 00:46:14,960
Speaker 1: you generally think it's a lower criterion of truth. And

793
00:46:15,000 --> 00:46:18,400
Speaker 1: so I'm saying that I don't think you understand it

794
00:46:18,400 --> 00:46:19,920
Speaker 1: if you think it's a lower criterion of truth.

795
00:46:20,480 --> 00:46:24,080
Speaker 2: I think when it comes to morality. Then you can't

796
00:46:24,280 --> 00:46:29,600
Speaker 2: escape a relativistic morality. That's my point. So again after

797
00:46:29,760 --> 00:46:34,239
Speaker 2: history and back to you can escape it. Okay. So

798
00:46:34,320 --> 00:46:36,560
Speaker 2: that's where let me read this and then you tell

799
00:46:36,560 --> 00:46:38,920
Speaker 2: me how you think you can escape it in a

800
00:46:39,400 --> 00:46:43,880
Speaker 2: meaningful way. Okay. So you write this in the introduction

801
00:46:44,000 --> 00:46:47,759
Speaker 2: page fourteen, you said, some evangelical Christians tell me this

802
00:46:47,920 --> 00:46:51,400
Speaker 2: makes no sense. And by the way, let me take

803
00:46:51,440 --> 00:46:53,560
Speaker 2: a step back and you can correct the story. You're

804
00:46:53,600 --> 00:46:56,319
Speaker 2: talking about. How this is chapter two the Ancient Quest

805
00:46:56,360 --> 00:47:00,520
Speaker 2: for Happiness, and you describe that you left the faith

806
00:47:00,560 --> 00:47:03,640
Speaker 2: for what I know? Would I know how to behave

807
00:47:04,040 --> 00:47:08,040
Speaker 2: without any direction from above? Would I have no moral compass?

808
00:47:08,120 --> 00:47:12,919
Speaker 2: Would I fall into meaninglessness, nihilism, anarchy, and despair? Would

809
00:47:12,960 --> 00:47:16,560
Speaker 2: I be drunk in? Would it be drunken revelry every night?

810
00:47:16,760 --> 00:47:19,920
Speaker 2: Well written? By the way, he said, despite these concerns,

811
00:47:20,000 --> 00:47:22,520
Speaker 2: I felt driven to follow where I thought the truth led.

812
00:47:22,560 --> 00:47:24,600
Speaker 2: In the end, I didn't see an alternative for reasons

813
00:47:24,640 --> 00:47:27,120
Speaker 2: unconnected with biblical scholarship. I again to recognize that I

814
00:47:27,120 --> 00:47:29,080
Speaker 2: had become an agnostic. And of course that's your book,

815
00:47:29,480 --> 00:47:32,520
Speaker 2: God's Problem and the Problem of Evil, an important book

816
00:47:32,560 --> 00:47:34,920
Speaker 2: in its own right. One of my biggest surprises was

817
00:47:34,960 --> 00:47:37,880
Speaker 2: that my deconversion at almost zero effect on my daily life.

818
00:47:38,360 --> 00:47:41,160
Speaker 2: Anarchy and wild living never did arrive. Today, all these

819
00:47:41,239 --> 00:47:44,080
Speaker 2: years later, I'm no less ethical than I was before.

820
00:47:44,680 --> 00:47:47,880
Speaker 2: I'm not much more ethical either. I appreciate your candor,

821
00:47:47,920 --> 00:47:50,080
Speaker 2: as it turns out, but I do seem to have

822
00:47:50,120 --> 00:47:51,960
Speaker 2: a more refined sense of what it means to be

823
00:47:51,960 --> 00:47:54,879
Speaker 2: a moral person. And I do work hard, often without

824
00:47:54,960 --> 00:47:59,360
Speaker 2: much success, to do what is right, both for myself

825
00:47:59,480 --> 00:48:02,160
Speaker 2: and for others. And then we get to the key point. Now,

826
00:48:02,160 --> 00:48:04,640
Speaker 2: I'm just reading this for context so people understand and

827
00:48:05,960 --> 00:48:09,399
Speaker 2: get it stated correctly. You said. Some evangelical Christians tell

828
00:48:09,400 --> 00:48:12,399
Speaker 2: me this makes no sense that, unlike believers in God,

829
00:48:12,440 --> 00:48:14,759
Speaker 2: I have no reason to be moral. They think I'm

830
00:48:14,800 --> 00:48:18,239
Speaker 2: deceived when I insist I feel a deep commitment to

831
00:48:18,320 --> 00:48:22,120
Speaker 2: other members of a species that originated through time, matter

832
00:48:22,360 --> 00:48:25,799
Speaker 2: and chance. Without divine guidance, they say, I have no

833
00:48:26,040 --> 00:48:29,160
Speaker 2: grounds for deciding what is right and wrong, and no

834
00:48:29,280 --> 00:48:33,000
Speaker 2: incentive to behave well. So when I read this, my

835
00:48:33,120 --> 00:48:36,120
Speaker 2: thoughts were a few things. I don't think you're deceived

836
00:48:36,200 --> 00:48:38,960
Speaker 2: at all when you feel a deep commitment to other

837
00:48:39,040 --> 00:48:41,360
Speaker 2: members of your species. I don't know why any Christian

838
00:48:41,360 --> 00:48:44,040
Speaker 2: would tell you that you're deceived in that. I think

839
00:48:44,080 --> 00:48:47,600
Speaker 2: without God, somebody could have some means or reasons to

840
00:48:47,680 --> 00:48:49,600
Speaker 2: decide what is right and wrong, and they could have

841
00:48:49,640 --> 00:48:53,440
Speaker 2: some incentive to behave well. But when this says I

842
00:48:53,520 --> 00:48:56,960
Speaker 2: feel a deep commitment, you keep pointing back again, as

843
00:48:56,960 --> 00:49:00,920
Speaker 2: far as I understand it correctly, to inclinations and feelings

844
00:49:01,000 --> 00:49:05,200
Speaker 2: and beliefs, and it says this originated through time, matter

845
00:49:05,520 --> 00:49:10,000
Speaker 2: and chance. So these beliefs that are deep seated in

846
00:49:10,040 --> 00:49:14,600
Speaker 2: your own words emerge through time, matter and chance. So

847
00:49:15,040 --> 00:49:17,839
Speaker 2: given that evolution is a contingent process and it could

848
00:49:17,840 --> 00:49:23,040
Speaker 2: have resulted in a different outcome, Darwin himself said, why

849
00:49:23,080 --> 00:49:26,040
Speaker 2: does a process that creates feelings in us through time,

850
00:49:26,040 --> 00:49:30,520
Speaker 2: matter and chance have any authority? Why is one feeling

851
00:49:30,760 --> 00:49:34,719
Speaker 2: better than another feeling if time, matter and chance are

852
00:49:34,800 --> 00:49:38,960
Speaker 2: the driving forces behind it, That's the question for me,

853
00:49:39,400 --> 00:49:42,040
Speaker 2: and I think that's where we're differing. I don't see

854
00:49:42,080 --> 00:49:46,520
Speaker 2: why that subjectivity results in it answers the question of

855
00:49:46,560 --> 00:49:47,640
Speaker 2: why we should be moral.

856
00:49:51,680 --> 00:49:56,279
Speaker 1: Right. I know, I know that's your view, and you

857
00:49:56,400 --> 00:49:59,040
Speaker 1: have a lot of feelings for a lot of things.

858
00:50:00,000 --> 00:50:02,040
Speaker 1: I'm sure what you're drinking now is that coffee? You

859
00:50:02,080 --> 00:50:02,319
Speaker 1: know what?

860
00:50:02,480 --> 00:50:05,760
Speaker 2: It's a think biblically mug bart. If we meet in person,

861
00:50:06,360 --> 00:50:08,439
Speaker 2: I would give you one. It's literally just water.

862
00:50:09,320 --> 00:50:11,960
Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, well okay, see you know, you know why

863
00:50:11,960 --> 00:50:15,080
Speaker 1: do you like to drink water? You know you've got

864
00:50:15,080 --> 00:50:17,040
Speaker 1: this inclination and you just you know, you want to

865
00:50:17,120 --> 00:50:21,040
Speaker 1: drink water and you like water. I'm drinking. I'm drinking

866
00:50:21,080 --> 00:50:23,799
Speaker 1: a combination of tonic and Jews here and you know

867
00:50:23,840 --> 00:50:27,680
Speaker 1: I like that, and it's it's what I drink because

868
00:50:27,680 --> 00:50:31,480
Speaker 1: it's what I like, and I prefer drinking that, and

869
00:50:31,520 --> 00:50:34,200
Speaker 1: I think I ought to drink that. And the fact

870
00:50:34,200 --> 00:50:36,520
Speaker 1: that I feel that way and that I really love

871
00:50:36,560 --> 00:50:39,520
Speaker 1: this mixture that I'm drinking. This, this emotion of love

872
00:50:39,560 --> 00:50:41,560
Speaker 1: toward it and its inclination make me want to make

873
00:50:41,600 --> 00:50:43,160
Speaker 1: this thing and drink it does not prove that there's

874
00:50:43,200 --> 00:50:49,040
Speaker 1: a God. It proves that I'm shaped in a certain

875
00:50:49,080 --> 00:50:52,320
Speaker 1: way to have inclinations and I try to follow them.

876
00:50:53,200 --> 00:50:55,279
Speaker 1: You could argue that the inclinations were given to me

877
00:50:55,360 --> 00:50:58,439
Speaker 1: by God, which is your view. C. S. Lewis's view.

878
00:50:58,880 --> 00:51:01,520
Speaker 1: My view is that you can explain this without appealing

879
00:51:01,560 --> 00:51:03,880
Speaker 1: to God. That there are other problems in believing in

880
00:51:03,920 --> 00:51:06,759
Speaker 1: God that we're not getting into here, obviously, But I

881
00:51:06,840 --> 00:51:09,400
Speaker 1: have no problem with believing that we've developed in certain

882
00:51:09,440 --> 00:51:12,520
Speaker 1: ways so as to prefer certain things to others, and

883
00:51:12,560 --> 00:51:16,680
Speaker 1: to feel so firmly committed to those beliefs that we

884
00:51:16,719 --> 00:51:20,120
Speaker 1: act out on them, we base our entire lives on them.

885
00:51:20,600 --> 00:51:22,920
Speaker 1: And it isn't because there's some There has to be

886
00:51:22,960 --> 00:51:26,000
Speaker 1: some kind of objectivity, or we shouldn't feel that way.

887
00:51:26,360 --> 00:51:29,080
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm going to like this thing, whether you

888
00:51:29,120 --> 00:51:31,359
Speaker 1: know there's an objective value up there in the sky

889
00:51:31,480 --> 00:51:35,160
Speaker 1: that says the Tonic and this Jews mixture is good.

890
00:51:35,719 --> 00:51:38,239
Speaker 1: It's good because I think it's good. You might find

891
00:51:38,280 --> 00:51:42,879
Speaker 1: it repulsive. I find human sacrifice repulsive. Other people found

892
00:51:42,920 --> 00:51:49,480
Speaker 1: it good, so and yeah so, And if it is

893
00:51:49,520 --> 00:51:51,480
Speaker 1: an objective value that's been given to us, you still

894
00:51:51,520 --> 00:51:54,720
Speaker 1: have to explain why, for the vast majority of human history,

895
00:51:55,000 --> 00:51:56,960
Speaker 1: most people haven't shared your more values.

896
00:51:58,800 --> 00:52:01,160
Speaker 2: So in the last part, that's toe where we differ.

897
00:52:01,320 --> 00:52:04,600
Speaker 2: And you're right that people don't share my particular moral values.

898
00:52:05,080 --> 00:52:09,000
Speaker 2: But it is interesting the commonality again across culture on

899
00:52:09,200 --> 00:52:13,640
Speaker 2: basic moral principles. I think that's what requires explanation. But

900
00:52:13,719 --> 00:52:15,960
Speaker 2: that's the secondary point we've gone back and forth on.

901
00:52:16,880 --> 00:52:19,160
Speaker 1: But I will just point out that every species has this.

902
00:52:19,600 --> 00:52:22,640
Speaker 1: It isn't just humans who can think and believe in God.

903
00:52:23,280 --> 00:52:28,399
Speaker 1: Every species has shared moral values. I mean, it doesn't

904
00:52:28,440 --> 00:52:32,040
Speaker 1: matter whether you're talking about chimpanzees or honey bees. They

905
00:52:32,080 --> 00:52:35,200
Speaker 1: all do. And so the fact we have it. I mean,

906
00:52:35,320 --> 00:52:37,680
Speaker 1: do you think that the fact that you have guardian

907
00:52:37,719 --> 00:52:41,759
Speaker 1: bees that protect the hive by killing themselves in order

908
00:52:41,800 --> 00:52:44,200
Speaker 1: to keep an invader out, that is that a proof

909
00:52:44,200 --> 00:52:47,319
Speaker 1: for the existence of God. I don't think so. But

910
00:52:47,360 --> 00:52:53,520
Speaker 1: it's a universal honeybee view. So we're just going to

911
00:52:53,560 --> 00:52:55,279
Speaker 1: disagree on this. I'm just saying that my view is

912
00:52:55,400 --> 00:53:00,719
Speaker 1: as coherent as your view. So it's not Yeah, it's

913
00:53:00,719 --> 00:53:04,840
Speaker 1: not just you know, some kind of subjective like I'm choosing, Like,

914
00:53:05,160 --> 00:53:07,719
Speaker 1: it's not like that. It is just as coherent because

915
00:53:07,760 --> 00:53:10,680
Speaker 1: I think it's written into us because of our because

916
00:53:10,680 --> 00:53:11,400
Speaker 1: of our evolution.

917
00:53:13,120 --> 00:53:15,600
Speaker 2: Okay, So I'm actually not trying to persuade you to

918
00:53:15,680 --> 00:53:18,319
Speaker 2: believe differently anymore than you're probably trying to persuade me.

919
00:53:18,800 --> 00:53:20,040
Speaker 2: One of the things I do in the show is

920
00:53:20,080 --> 00:53:24,120
Speaker 2: I want clarity for people listening exactly what's at stake,

921
00:53:24,520 --> 00:53:28,280
Speaker 2: what morality entails, and then people can decide what they think.

922
00:53:28,680 --> 00:53:31,080
Speaker 2: That's part of the goal. So I'd say a couple

923
00:53:31,080 --> 00:53:33,400
Speaker 2: of things back, and then I have I'll certain let

924
00:53:33,440 --> 00:53:34,600
Speaker 2: your respond if you want to, but I have one

925
00:53:34,640 --> 00:53:38,319
Speaker 2: last question for you. Want to respect your time. But

926
00:53:38,560 --> 00:53:41,720
Speaker 2: the example that you gave about drinking water or juice

927
00:53:41,760 --> 00:53:44,960
Speaker 2: and tonic is it's a feeling, it's an urge, it's

928
00:53:45,000 --> 00:53:49,319
Speaker 2: an instinct. So I agree with you. We drink and

929
00:53:49,360 --> 00:53:54,120
Speaker 2: we act biologically because of instinct. The question is are

930
00:53:54,160 --> 00:53:59,240
Speaker 2: our moral beliefs akin to instinct? And this is where

931
00:53:59,600 --> 00:54:03,320
Speaker 2: Lewis also argued separately. He said, we have instincts to

932
00:54:03,360 --> 00:54:08,239
Speaker 2: help people, and we have instincts to hurt people. So

933
00:54:08,520 --> 00:54:11,600
Speaker 2: just like you have instincts to drink water or drink tonic,

934
00:54:12,360 --> 00:54:16,600
Speaker 2: if there's no human value, if there's no standard outside

935
00:54:16,600 --> 00:54:20,040
Speaker 2: of us, then one is really not any better than

936
00:54:20,080 --> 00:54:24,120
Speaker 2: the other morally speaking, although it might be better biologically,

937
00:54:24,280 --> 00:54:28,000
Speaker 2: that's a separate issue. And so your example seems to

938
00:54:28,040 --> 00:54:30,160
Speaker 2: show that all the things you rail against in the

939
00:54:30,160 --> 00:54:35,440
Speaker 2: book racism, genocide, sexism, In fact, there's a point in

940
00:54:35,480 --> 00:54:39,919
Speaker 2: your book where you seemingly condemn Christians for forcing their

941
00:54:40,040 --> 00:54:44,440
Speaker 2: morals on other people. If morality is all instinct, I

942
00:54:44,440 --> 00:54:47,280
Speaker 2: don't even know how to make sense of those kinds

943
00:54:47,280 --> 00:54:50,640
Speaker 2: of moral condemnations in the way that you do. So

944
00:54:50,680 --> 00:54:53,680
Speaker 2: you said that I have some inconsistency earlier. Fine, I'll

945
00:54:53,800 --> 00:54:56,920
Speaker 2: leave it to our viewers and listeners to decide if

946
00:54:56,960 --> 00:54:59,759
Speaker 2: you think there's inconsistency there. But I think there's an

947
00:54:59,760 --> 00:55:03,040
Speaker 2: in consistency and just saying morality is a matter of

948
00:55:03,120 --> 00:55:08,879
Speaker 2: inclination and preference, but then favoring and choosing to give

949
00:55:08,960 --> 00:55:10,880
Speaker 2: to the poor in a way that seems to be

950
00:55:10,960 --> 00:55:14,719
Speaker 2: morally superior, and then in your book condemning things like

951
00:55:14,840 --> 00:55:19,000
Speaker 2: Christians who weaponize the Bible against others. So I think

952
00:55:19,040 --> 00:55:21,600
Speaker 2: there's an inconsistency there. Tell me why there's not, And

953
00:55:21,640 --> 00:55:22,840
Speaker 2: then I have one last question for you.

954
00:55:22,840 --> 00:55:26,399
Speaker 1: If that's okay, I think as there's only an inconsistency

955
00:55:26,400 --> 00:55:28,280
Speaker 1: if you think there has to be an objective value

956
00:55:28,280 --> 00:55:32,680
Speaker 1: that you're subscribing to. I still think you really don't

957
00:55:32,760 --> 00:55:38,120
Speaker 1: understand the idea of how subjectivity and our inherent human

958
00:55:38,200 --> 00:55:42,239
Speaker 1: nature guides us in action, so that it's not just

959
00:55:42,640 --> 00:55:47,400
Speaker 1: that it is that that is how we are, of course,

960
00:55:47,480 --> 00:55:51,040
Speaker 1: and drinking juice is an analogy. It's not a moral act,

961
00:55:51,360 --> 00:55:54,759
Speaker 1: although it can be a moral act. I agree. You know,

962
00:55:55,000 --> 00:55:57,600
Speaker 1: if I were drinking cyanide, you would probably say that

963
00:55:57,960 --> 00:56:01,640
Speaker 1: ain't good, that's immoral because you're kill you so but

964
00:56:01,840 --> 00:56:05,680
Speaker 1: you know, so I have just as strong a moral

965
00:56:05,760 --> 00:56:08,760
Speaker 1: impulse as you have. But I don't think that's saying

966
00:56:08,760 --> 00:56:12,280
Speaker 1: that it's rooted in some kind of objective morality simply

967
00:56:12,320 --> 00:56:14,200
Speaker 1: makes any sense if you look at the history of

968
00:56:14,239 --> 00:56:17,280
Speaker 1: the human race, and if you look at cross cultural

969
00:56:17,280 --> 00:56:21,120
Speaker 1: anthropology and other things. So I just so we're just

970
00:56:21,160 --> 00:56:23,560
Speaker 1: going to disagree on that. I think that the idea

971
00:56:23,600 --> 00:56:27,120
Speaker 1: of objectivity provides people with a kind of sense of

972
00:56:27,800 --> 00:56:33,239
Speaker 1: satisfaction that their views are rooted in ultimate reality and

973
00:56:33,239 --> 00:56:36,320
Speaker 1: that other people are just making stuff up. And I

974
00:56:37,640 --> 00:56:40,439
Speaker 1: get that impulse is what I had for a long time.

975
00:56:40,520 --> 00:56:42,560
Speaker 1: I don't agree with it anymore. I think that it's

976
00:56:42,640 --> 00:56:45,440
Speaker 1: just wrong. It's not why we behave. If we all

977
00:56:45,640 --> 00:56:48,399
Speaker 1: did have an objective sense of morality, the world would

978
00:56:48,440 --> 00:56:50,080
Speaker 1: not be in the mess that it's in right now.

979
00:56:52,400 --> 00:56:54,440
Speaker 2: So it's in oh man. I have so many questions

980
00:56:54,480 --> 00:56:56,360
Speaker 2: for you when you set a kind of satisfaction. It

981
00:56:56,360 --> 00:56:59,600
Speaker 2: depends on what we mean by satisfaction. It's not a

982
00:56:59,640 --> 00:57:03,080
Speaker 2: feeling of satisfaction for me. The question for me is

983
00:57:03,800 --> 00:57:05,879
Speaker 2: what is reality? What is true? And I think that's

984
00:57:05,920 --> 00:57:08,799
Speaker 2: your same question. You make that very clear, and so

985
00:57:08,880 --> 00:57:11,799
Speaker 2: I think part of the question to clarify is this

986
00:57:12,040 --> 00:57:15,080
Speaker 2: belief that we have and the majority of people today

987
00:57:15,880 --> 00:57:19,560
Speaker 2: hold a view of moral realism. I would argue throughout

988
00:57:19,600 --> 00:57:25,560
Speaker 2: history such as burning a child alive for entertainment is wrong.

989
00:57:26,720 --> 00:57:29,400
Speaker 2: I think that tells us something about the nature of

990
00:57:29,480 --> 00:57:33,560
Speaker 2: the world, the value of a child, are obligations to

991
00:57:33,640 --> 00:57:37,360
Speaker 2: one another, how we should behave and not only love

992
00:57:37,400 --> 00:57:40,440
Speaker 2: our neighbor, but love thy stranger. I think those are

993
00:57:40,560 --> 00:57:43,800
Speaker 2: clues to the way reality is. Sounds like you are

994
00:57:43,880 --> 00:57:46,560
Speaker 2: satisfied to use the same term in kind of a

995
00:57:46,640 --> 00:57:52,120
Speaker 2: bottom up evolutionary explanation that gives us certain inclinations, so

996
00:57:52,160 --> 00:57:55,080
Speaker 2: we can choose to adopt the teachings of Jesus or

997
00:57:55,160 --> 00:57:59,880
Speaker 2: not choose them. But that explanation seems to adequately capture

998
00:58:00,440 --> 00:58:03,080
Speaker 2: our moral beliefs. Is that fair? Would you land?

999
00:58:03,080 --> 00:58:03,240
Speaker 1: There?

1000
00:58:03,280 --> 00:58:05,360
Speaker 2: Is that a fair summaryity that many people do.

1001
00:58:05,640 --> 00:58:08,720
Speaker 1: I mean, into your system, people do choose to follow Jesus'

1002
00:58:09,160 --> 00:58:13,200
Speaker 1: teachings or not too everybody chooses, So whether you believe

1003
00:58:13,240 --> 00:58:16,600
Speaker 1: an objective reality or not, everybody chooses.

1004
00:58:18,800 --> 00:58:20,840
Speaker 2: Agree. Yeah, and of course the question is are there

1005
00:58:20,840 --> 00:58:22,880
Speaker 2: better choices and worse choices?

1006
00:58:23,480 --> 00:58:29,080
Speaker 1: Speaking, many people who deny that subjectivity can be like

1007
00:58:29,600 --> 00:58:32,480
Speaker 1: a compelling argument say, well, you have no reason to

1008
00:58:32,480 --> 00:58:36,320
Speaker 1: think this, then why do you think that's better? And

1009
00:58:36,360 --> 00:58:39,040
Speaker 1: you think it's better because it could correspond to something

1010
00:58:39,120 --> 00:58:42,720
Speaker 1: objective out there that somehow you have access to, but

1011
00:58:42,800 --> 00:58:45,080
Speaker 1: throughout history most other people have not had access to.

1012
00:58:45,560 --> 00:58:47,240
Speaker 1: And so that's why, I mean, it's kind of comforting

1013
00:58:47,240 --> 00:58:49,720
Speaker 1: because you think you've got the access to the objective reality.

1014
00:58:50,320 --> 00:58:55,920
Speaker 2: Well, okay, all right, we'll leave psychological motivations aside. I

1015
00:58:55,920 --> 00:58:58,400
Speaker 2: think we've gotten the point where we've at least clarified

1016
00:58:58,480 --> 00:59:02,080
Speaker 2: for our viewers where we differ, why we differ, which

1017
00:59:02,120 --> 00:59:04,880
Speaker 2: is the goal of this. Again, there's a ton more

1018
00:59:04,920 --> 00:59:06,680
Speaker 2: we did not get into. I fight your section on

1019
00:59:06,800 --> 00:59:12,920
Speaker 2: walking through Epicureanism and Stoicism, and the third one, cynicism,

1020
00:59:13,160 --> 00:59:15,720
Speaker 2: was really interesting people trying to make sense of the

1021
00:59:15,760 --> 00:59:18,520
Speaker 2: good life. That was fascinating. We didn't get into your

1022
00:59:18,600 --> 00:59:23,080
Speaker 2: chapter on altruistic behavior, which I'm still thinking through in

1023
00:59:23,160 --> 00:59:27,800
Speaker 2: my own mind, like is can there be any truly purely,

1024
00:59:27,920 --> 00:59:31,440
Speaker 2: one hundred percent morally motivated acts or is there always

1025
00:59:31,440 --> 00:59:35,040
Speaker 2: some egoism? I don't have that perfectly answered. But your

1026
00:59:35,120 --> 00:59:37,840
Speaker 2: chapter there was really thought provoking. That could be an

1027
00:59:37,960 --> 00:59:41,000
Speaker 2: entire discussion in itself, not to mention some of the

1028
00:59:41,040 --> 00:59:46,120
Speaker 2: New Testament challenges that anybody familiar with your work would expect.

1029
00:59:46,160 --> 00:59:48,920
Speaker 2: So we didn't get there, but I think from my perspective,

1030
00:59:48,960 --> 00:59:51,040
Speaker 2: we have a lot of clarity on this. So the

1031
00:59:51,120 --> 00:59:52,920
Speaker 2: last page of your book, one more question if this

1032
00:59:53,000 --> 00:59:57,040
Speaker 2: is okay? And I think this also might clarify how

1033
00:59:57,080 --> 01:00:00,400
Speaker 2: we diagnose morality. It's going to shape what we think

1034
01:00:00,440 --> 01:00:03,160
Speaker 2: the good life could be. But you wrote this at

1035
01:00:03,160 --> 01:00:05,400
Speaker 2: the end, and again I just thought this was so interesting.

1036
01:00:05,480 --> 01:00:07,560
Speaker 2: You said, if we choose not to do much or

1037
01:00:07,600 --> 01:00:10,960
Speaker 2: anything at all, and this is in terms of caring

1038
01:00:11,040 --> 01:00:15,440
Speaker 2: for the poor, showing charity, etc. The way you've described,

1039
01:00:15,440 --> 01:00:17,240
Speaker 2: if we choose not to do much or anything at all,

1040
01:00:17,400 --> 01:00:22,880
Speaker 2: we sometimes feel pains of guilt and regret. Why is that?

1041
01:00:23,600 --> 01:00:23,880
Speaker 1: Now?

1042
01:00:24,080 --> 01:00:26,200
Speaker 2: I think you know the answer of why I feel

1043
01:00:26,200 --> 01:00:30,400
Speaker 2: that that way, I would say we feel guilt because

1044
01:00:30,400 --> 01:00:35,080
Speaker 2: we actually are guilty. There is a real moral code,

1045
01:00:35,720 --> 01:00:39,760
Speaker 2: there's right and there's wrong that exists in the world.

1046
01:00:39,840 --> 01:00:44,040
Speaker 2: And I would argue that we intuitively and naturally know

1047
01:00:44,200 --> 01:00:48,920
Speaker 2: this differently than history, differently than with science, and we

1048
01:00:49,000 --> 01:00:51,680
Speaker 2: live our lives as if there's a real moral code.

1049
01:00:52,200 --> 01:00:56,439
Speaker 2: Hence we need forgiveness for sin. So when I read

1050
01:00:56,480 --> 01:00:59,760
Speaker 2: the end, I was like, this makes sense from my perspective.

1051
01:01:00,360 --> 01:01:04,320
Speaker 2: Tell me why you think we feel guilt and what

1052
01:01:04,440 --> 01:01:05,960
Speaker 2: you think we should do about it?

1053
01:01:07,240 --> 01:01:11,200
Speaker 1: Well, I do you know, and we do feel guilt,

1054
01:01:11,560 --> 01:01:14,080
Speaker 1: and it's built into us. I mean, as you said,

1055
01:01:14,120 --> 01:01:16,160
Speaker 1: you've read a lot of evolutionary biology, and so it's

1056
01:01:16,160 --> 01:01:21,600
Speaker 1: not difficult to explain this from evolutionary biologic evolutionary biological grounds.

1057
01:01:23,360 --> 01:01:26,480
Speaker 1: The sense of guilt comes to us because we're doing

1058
01:01:26,520 --> 01:01:29,560
Speaker 1: things that might harm ourselves or others. And that's a

1059
01:01:29,560 --> 01:01:33,520
Speaker 1: problem evolutionarily, because if you harm others within your community,

1060
01:01:33,520 --> 01:01:36,640
Speaker 1: you may destroy your community. And it's not that we've

1061
01:01:36,760 --> 01:01:39,000
Speaker 1: evolved the sense of guilt so that we don't destroy

1062
01:01:39,040 --> 01:01:42,080
Speaker 1: our communities. Is that people who have this sense of guilt,

1063
01:01:42,360 --> 01:01:46,400
Speaker 1: this idea that they're acting wrongly. People who have that

1064
01:01:46,760 --> 01:01:51,560
Speaker 1: tend to survive better than others, and their genes survive

1065
01:01:51,800 --> 01:01:54,560
Speaker 1: better than others, and so it's within our genetic code

1066
01:01:54,920 --> 01:01:58,600
Speaker 1: to feel this. I have no problems with saying some

1067
01:01:58,680 --> 01:02:03,160
Speaker 1: actions are right and some are wrong without an objective standard. Yes,

1068
01:02:03,600 --> 01:02:05,880
Speaker 1: I think that is right. I know that sounds like

1069
01:02:05,960 --> 01:02:08,520
Speaker 1: people people believe in objectivity says you have no grounds

1070
01:02:08,560 --> 01:02:12,040
Speaker 1: for saying that. But I'm just telling you, yes, you do,

1071
01:02:12,560 --> 01:02:14,720
Speaker 1: because it's written into what it means to be a

1072
01:02:14,760 --> 01:02:18,560
Speaker 1: human being. And if you are a human being, that's

1073
01:02:18,600 --> 01:02:22,160
Speaker 1: how you feel. So it's not written there because God

1074
01:02:22,200 --> 01:02:24,760
Speaker 1: gave it to in your opinion. Let me just emphasize

1075
01:02:24,760 --> 01:02:26,720
Speaker 1: as well, for people are listening to this, This this

1076
01:02:26,800 --> 01:02:29,680
Speaker 1: debate of objectivity and subjectivity is like not the point

1077
01:02:29,720 --> 01:02:34,960
Speaker 1: of my book at all. I mean I it's the

1078
01:02:35,280 --> 01:02:37,600
Speaker 1: point of the book is about a transformation of our

1079
01:02:37,640 --> 01:02:42,280
Speaker 1: ethical sense and the argument I think, as you were saying, Sean,

1080
01:02:42,320 --> 01:02:44,920
Speaker 1: that it would it would work whether you're a believer

1081
01:02:45,000 --> 01:02:46,880
Speaker 1: or not in terms of the argument of my book.

1082
01:02:46,880 --> 01:02:51,720
Speaker 1: But the historical transformation. But objectivity and subjective is not

1083
01:02:51,760 --> 01:02:54,360
Speaker 1: something I really other than like in the introduction to

1084
01:02:54,360 --> 01:02:56,120
Speaker 1: a couple of chapters where I explain why I don't

1085
01:02:56,120 --> 01:02:57,480
Speaker 1: think you have to believe in God to be a

1086
01:02:57,640 --> 01:02:58,240
Speaker 1: moral person.

1087
01:02:59,640 --> 01:03:01,480
Speaker 2: So I totally agree with you that you make more

1088
01:03:01,600 --> 01:03:05,400
Speaker 2: arguments in the book than the question of objectivity and subjectivity.

1089
01:03:05,880 --> 01:03:07,480
Speaker 2: But I thought it was fascinating the way you dealt

1090
01:03:07,480 --> 01:03:10,120
Speaker 2: with a moral argument. How you waging evolution, claiming our

1091
01:03:10,120 --> 01:03:13,600
Speaker 2: morality and if we have this huge moral transformation. It

1092
01:03:13,720 --> 01:03:18,240
Speaker 2: raised the question what best explains it? You have very well. Yeah,

1093
01:03:18,360 --> 01:03:21,640
Speaker 2: you have very well stated your argument very clearly. Appreciate

1094
01:03:21,640 --> 01:03:23,560
Speaker 2: you taking the time to come on. I love this

1095
01:03:23,640 --> 01:03:25,840
Speaker 2: back and forth. Thanks so much, Bart, and I would

1096
01:03:25,840 --> 01:03:28,400
Speaker 2: commend to our listeners. There's other stuff we disagram, which

1097
01:03:28,440 --> 01:03:31,040
Speaker 2: is totally fine. But your book, Love Thy Stranger. I

1098
01:03:31,080 --> 01:03:33,560
Speaker 2: was fascinated by it. I was intrigued by it, and

1099
01:03:33,680 --> 01:03:35,440
Speaker 2: just so you know, there's a few times I was like,

1100
01:03:35,560 --> 01:03:39,120
Speaker 2: amen to your book. So I hope folks will pick

1101
01:03:39,160 --> 01:03:41,880
Speaker 2: it up and wrestle with more of what's in it

1102
01:03:41,920 --> 01:03:44,560
Speaker 2: than we covered here. Thanks for coming on, well, thanks

1103
01:03:44,560 --> 01:03:45,120
Speaker 2: for having me