Prezzo consigliato: 16,99 € Maggiori informazioni

Risparmi: 3,94 € (23%)

I prezzi degli articoli in vendita su Amazon includono l’IVA. In base all’indirizzo di spedizione, l’IVA potrebbe variare durante il processo di acquisto. Per maggiori informazioni clicca qui.

Resi GRATUITI

Consegna GRATUITA lunedì, 22 aprile sul tuo primo ordine. Ordina entro 1 ora 7 min. Maggiori informazioni

oppure consegna più rapida sabato, 20 aprile. Maggiori informazioni

Scegli il tuo indirizzo

Disponibilità immediata

13,05 € € () Include le opzioni selezionate. Include il pagamento mensile iniziale e le opzioni selezionate. Dettagli

Spedizione

Amazon

Spedizione

Amazon

Venditore

Amazon

Venditore

Amazon

Resi

Restituibile entro 30 giorni dal ricevimento

Resi

Restituibile entro 30 giorni dal ricevimento

L'articolo può essere restituito in condizioni originali entro 30 giorni dal ricevimento per ottenere un rimborso completo

Consulta la politica di reso completa

Pagamento

Transazione sicura

Pagamento

Transazione sicura

Ci impegniamo a proteggere i tuoi dati e la tua privacy. Il nostro sistema di protezione dei pagamenti crittografa i tuoi dati durante la trasmissione. Non divulghiamo i dati della tua carta di credito a venditori terzi né rivendiamo i tuoi dati personali a terze parti. Maggiori informazioni

Dettagli

Scopri di più

Aggiungi opzioni regalo

Consegna a 3,36 € 7 - 13 maggio. Maggiori informazioni

Scegli il tuo indirizzo

Usato: Ottime condizioni | Dettagli

Venduto da worldofbooksit

Immagine non disponibile

Immagine non disponibile per
Colore:

Per visualizzare questo video scarica Flash Player

Segui l'autore

Sam Harris

Segui

The Moral Landscape Copertina flessibile – 12 aprile 2012

Edizione Inglese di Sam Harris (Autore)

1.670

Visualizza tutti i formati ed edizioni

Questo articolo è acquistabile con Bonus Cultura, Carta Cultura Giovani, Carta del Merito e/o Carta del Docente quando venduto e spedito da Amazon: Sono esclusi prodotti di Venditori terzi del Marketplace. Il Bonus è strettamente personale e può essere utilizzato esclusivamente dal suo titolare. Termini e condizioni

{"desktop_buybox_group_1":[{"displayPrice":"13,05 €","priceAmount":13.05,"currencySymbol":"€","integerValue":"13","decimalSeparator":",","fractionalValue":"05","symbolPosition":"right","hasSpace":true,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"Jl1akOYdq49CMJ6CaJY7UZ8N34qTg5WOiviq2Ez69GHHQGoP8RNcq8uU2Req2P%2Fsdz4NqpIDIM5eSBL5rC%2B%2BUoAmKIXdqEXqnWzLjJFnBCuiD5dNygvxZ%2FFSz%2BL1IF104vTRQhB4B1UnS%2FurMSUG5w%3D%3D","locale":"it-IT","buyingOptionType":"NEW","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":0}, {"displayPrice":"8,40 €","priceAmount":8.40,"currencySymbol":"€","integerValue":"8","decimalSeparator":",","fractionalValue":"40","symbolPosition":"right","hasSpace":true,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"Jl1akOYdq49CMJ6CaJY7UZ8N34qTg5WOCVG2vDefTElbWeCxXMyDHkJ5FV2X7cM%2FhE%2B1%2BvOTr8YZis9%2BBKjzyonuXFBrWqi0I4GAr7iHX%2FhsN30h99879r%2FRlMtGunUu%2F%2BOWFYzwjpaHqT4pm6uSCDiuTaInP1d2EHEn%2B5B%2FZEk4rDeOFuPDqA%3D%3D","locale":"it-IT","buyingOptionType":"USED","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":1}]}

Opzioni di acquisto e componenti aggiuntivi

The Moral Landscape, 9780552776387

Segnala un problema con questo prodotto

Lunghezza stampa

384 pagine
Lingua

Inglese
Editore

Black Swan
Data di pubblicazione

12 aprile 2012
Dimensioni

12.7 x 2.4 x 19.8 cm
ISBN-10

9780552776387
ISBN-13

978-0552776387
Visualizza tutti i dettagli

Spesso comprati insieme

13,05€

Disponibilità immediata

Venduto e spedito da Amazon.

+

Waking Up: Searching for Spirituality Without Religion

11,87€

Disponibilità immediata

Venduto e spedito da Amazon.

+

9,49€

Disponibilità immediata

Venduto e spedito da Amazon.

Prezzo totale:

Per visualizzare il nostro prezzo, aggiungi gli articoli al carrello.

Riprova!

Dettagli

Aggiunto al carrello.

Scegli gli articoli da acquistare insieme.

Sam Harris
8.061
Copertina flessibile
17 offerte da 7,50 €
Sam Harris
2.848
Copertina flessibile
15 offerte da 2,93 €
Sam Harris
2.594
Copertina flessibile
16 offerte da 4,44 €

Descrizione prodotto

Recensione

I was one of those who had unthinkingly bought into the hectoring myth that science can say nothing about morals. To my surprise, The Moral Landscape has changed all that for me... As for religion, and the preposterous idea that we need God to be good, nobody wields a sharper bayonet than Sam Harris -- Richard Dawkins

Sam Harris breathes intellectual fire into an ancient debate. Reading this thrilling, audacious book, you feel the ground shifting beneath your feet. Reason has never had a more passionate advocate -- Ian McEwan

A tremendously appealing vision, and one that no thinking person can afford to ignore -- Steven Pinker, Harvard College Professor of Psychology

Readers are bound to come away with previously firm convictions about the world challenged, and a vital new awareness about the nature and value of science and reason in our lives -- Lawrence M. Krauss, Professor at Arizona State University

This is an inspiring book -- John Lloyd ― The Financial Times

L'autore

Sam Harris is the author of five New York Times bestsellers. His books include The End of Faith, Letter to a Christian Nation, The Moral Landscape, Free Will, Lying, and Waking Up. The End of Faith won the 2005 PEN/Martha Albrand Award for Nonfiction. His work has been published in more than twenty languages. Harris has written for the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Economist, The Times, the Boston Globe, the Atlantic, Annals of Neurology, and other outlets. He received a degree in philosophy from Stanford University and a PhD in neuroscience from UCLA. Please visit his website at SamHarris.org.

Dettagli prodotto

ASIN ‏ : ‎ 0552776386
Editore ‏ : ‎ Black Swan (12 aprile 2012)
Lingua ‏ : ‎ Inglese
Copertina flessibile ‏ : ‎ 384 pagine
ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 9780552776387
ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-0552776387
Peso articolo ‏ : ‎ 1,05 Kilograms
Dimensioni ‏ : ‎ 12.7 x 2.4 x 19.8 cm

Posizione nella classifica Bestseller di Amazon: n. 1,849 in Teologia e filosofia delle religioni (Libri)
- n. 7,331 in Filosofia (Libri)
- n. 11,834 in Studi culturali e sociali (Libri)

Recensioni dei clienti:
1.670

Informazioni sull'autore

Segui gli autori per ottenere aggiornamenti sulle nuove uscite, oltre a consigli avanzati.

Sam Harris

Brief content visible, double tap to read full content.

Full content visible, double tap to read brief content.

Scopri di più sui libri dell'autore, guarda autori simili, leggi i blog dell’autore e altro ancora

Recensioni clienti

4,5 su 5

1.670 valutazioni globali

Come funzionano le recensioni e le valutazioni dei clienti

Le recensioni migliori da altri paesi

Traduci tutte le recensioni in Italiano

S. Waikhom

A must-read for everyone.

Recensito in India il 27 gennaio 2020

Acquisto verificato

The author attempts to universalize morality as the well-being and greater good for mankind as a whole. He lays out the argument as to how science can help out in this noble undertaking. He also provides some useful insights into the human mind and how our brains work. I highly recommend it for everyone irrespective of their own interests and beliefs.

2 persone l'hanno trovato utile

Traduci recensione in Italiano

James

The best argument yet for unifying facts and values

Recensito in Australia il 30 aprile 2019

Acquisto verificato

A logically argued thesis for an objective moral framework, derived from cognitive neuroscience and our collective wellbeing. This book is vastly ahead of its time and is likely the best window we will get into the future of moral philosophy.

Traduci recensione in Italiano

Tim

Morality as religious doctrine now confined to the dustbins: Sam Harris and the argument for science

Recensito in Giappone il 24 novembre 2017

Acquisto verificato

In The Moral Landscape, renowned writer Sam Harris presents the case for science as a challenge to centuries of religious monopoly on matters of morality. Convincingly presented with arguments from a scientific and responsibly social point of view-balanced with ideas from the other side, The Moral Landscape is Harris armed with the evidence, and infused with humanity and reason. The great tussle between the faithful and the secular provides a framework for Harris’s ideas, but in this book the fight is neither center-left nor center-right; it is where it is, from the standpoint of reason over superstition and mock-science. At the same time, Harris argues with a scientist’s careful humility-where evidence and reason inform powerful ideas of morality, effectively bringing the concept out of the Stone Age and into the rational era of Darwin and beyond. An admirable work, and one that will impress the man’s admirers, but also perhaps move some fence-sitters away from the grey areas of doubt and inbuilt respect for faith as our only route to moral cognition. Highly recommended.

Una persona l'ha trovato utile

Traduci recensione in Italiano

Felipe

Must read

Recensito in Brasile il 30 marzo 2016

Acquisto verificato

An incredible book.

“the Fact that we may not be able to resolve specific moral dilemmas does not suggest that all competing responses to them are equally valid. In my experience, mistaking no answers in practice for no answers in principle is a great source of moral confusion.”

“Meaning, values, morality, and the good life must relate to facts about the well-being of conscious creatures - and, in our case, must lawfully depend upon events in the world and upon states of the human brain. Rational, open-ended, honest inquiry has always been the true source of insight into such processes. Faith, if it is ever right about anything, is right by accident.”

“Religious thinkers in all faiths, and on both ends of the political spectrum, are united on precisely this point; the defense one most often hears for belief in God is not that there is compelling evidence for His evidence, but that faith in Him is the only reliable source of meaning and moral guidance.”

“Only a rational understanding of human well-being will allow billions of us to coexist peacefully, converging on the same social, political, economic and environmental goals.”

“I will argue that anyone who would seriously maintain that the opposite is the case - is either misusing words or not taking the time to consider the details.”

“But the mere endurance of a belief system or custom does not suggest that it is adaptive, much less wise. It merely suggests that it hasn’t led directly to a society’s collapse or killed its practitioners outright.”

“Every society that has ever existed has had to channel and subdue certain aspects of human nature - envy, territorial violence, avarice, deceit, laziness, cheating, etc. - through social mechanisms and institutions. It would be a miracle if all societies - irrespective of size, geographical location, their place in history, or the genomes of their members - had done this equally well. And yet the prevailing bias of cultural relativism assumes that such a miracle has occurred not just once, but always.”

"Because there are no easy remedies for social inequality, many scientists and public intellectuals also believe that the great masses of humanity are best kept sedated by pious delusions."

"There are many tools one must get in hand to think scientifically - ideas about cause and effect, respect for evidence and logical coherence, a dash of curiosity and intellectual honesty, the inclination to make falsifiable predictions, etc. - and these must be put to use long before one starts worrying about mathematical models or specific data."

"When we say that we are reasoning or speaking "objectively", we generally mean that we are free of obvious bias, open to counterarguments, cognizant of the relevant facts, and so on. This is to make a claim about how we are thinking. In this sense, there is no impediment to our studying subjective (first person) facts "objectively"."

"I am not denying the necessarily subjective (experiential) component of the facts under discussion. I am certainly not claiming that moral truths exist independent of the experience of conscious beings - like the platonic Form of the Good - or that certain actions are intrinsically wrong. I am simply saying that, given that there are facts - real facts - to be known about how conscious creatures can experience the worst possible misery and the greatest possible well-being, it is objectively true to say that there are right and wrong answers to moral questions, whether or not we can always answer these questions in practice."

"Now that we have consciousness on the table, my further claim is that the concept of "well-being" captures all that we can intelligibly value. And "morality" - whatever people's associations with this term happen to be - really relates to the intentions and behaviors that affect the well-being of conscious creatures."

"And, as I have said, there may be many different ways for individuals and communities to thrive - many peaks on the moral landscape - so if there is real diversity in how people can be deeply fulfilled in this life, such diversity can be accounted for and honored in the context of science."

"This possibility - the prospect of radically different moral commitments - is at the heart of many people's doubts about moral truth."

"Science cannot tell us why, scientifically, we should value health. But once we admit that health is the proper concern of medicine, we can then study and promote it through science."

Chapter 2

"As we better understand the brain, we will increasingly understand all of the forces - kindness, reciprocity, trust, openness to argument, respect for evidence, intuitions of fairness, impulse control, the mitigation of aggression, etc. - that allow friends and strangers to collaborate successfully on the common projects of civilization. Understanding ourselves in this way, and using this knowledge to improve human life, will be among the most important challenges to science in the decades to come."

"Being a fellow Homo sapiens, we must presume that the Dobu islanders had brains sufficiently similar to our own to invite comparison. Is there any doubt that the selfishness and general malevolence of the Dobu would have been expressed at the level of their brains? Only if you think the brain does nothing more than filter oxygen and glucose out of the blood. Once we more fully understand the neurophysiology of states like love, compassion, and trust, it will be possible to spell out the differences between ourselves and people like the Dobu in greater detail. But we need not await any breakthroughs in neuroscience to bring the general principle in view: just as it is possible for individuals and groups to be wrong about how best to maintain their physical health, it is possible for them to be wrong about how to maximize their personal and social well-being."

"However, it is interesting to consider what would happen if we simply ignored this step and merely spoke about "well-being." What would our world be like if we ceased to worry about "right" and "wrong", or "good" and "evil", and simply acted so as to maximize well-being, our own and that of others? Would we lose anything important? And if important, wouldn't it be, by definition, a matter of someone's well-being?"

"Moral judgement is, for the most part, driven not by moral reasoning, but by moral intuitions of an emotional nature."

"Moral theorizing fails because our intuitions do not reflect a coherent set of moral truths and were not designed by natural selection or anything else to behave as if they were... If you want to make sense of your moral sense, turn to biology, psychology, and sociology - not normative ethics."

"Clearly, one of the great tasks of civilization is to create cultural mechanisms that protect us from the moment-to-moment failures of our ethical intuitions. We must build our better selves into our laws, tax codes, and institutions."

"this is precisely what is so important about science: it allows us to investigate the world, and our place within it, in ways that get behind first appearances. Why shouldn't we do this with morality and human values generally?"

"Most of us spend some time over the course of our lives deciding how (or weather) to respond to the fact other people on earth needlessly starve to death. Most of us also spend some time deciding which delightful foods we want to consume at home and in our favourite restaurants. Which of these projects absorbs more of your time and material resources on a yearly basis? If you are like most people living in the developed world, such a comparison will not recommend you to sainthood."

"This is one of the paradoxes of human psychology: we often fail to do what we ostensibly want to do and what is most in our self-interest to do. We often fail to do what we most want to do - or, at the very least, we fail to do what, at the end of the day (or year, or lifetime) we will most wish we had done."

"It seems abundantly clear that many people are simply wrong about morality - just as many people are wrong about physics, biology, history, and everything else worth understanding. What scientific purpose is served by averting our eyes from this fact? If morality is a system of thinking about (and maximizing) the well-being of conscious creatures like ourselves, many people's moral concerns must be immoral."

"Am I free to feel that "opaque" is the better word, when I just do not feel that it is the better word? Am I free to change my mind? Of course not. It can only change me."

"consciousness is, among other things, the context in which our intentions become competely available to us."

"When the pancreas fails to produce insulin, there is no shame in taking synthetic insulin to compensate for its lost function. Many people do not feel the same way about regulating mood with antidepressants"

"We do not feel as free as we think we feel. Our sense of our own freedom results from our not paying attention to what it is actually like to be what we are. The moment we do pay attention, we begin to see that free will is nowhere to be found, and our subjectivity is perfectly compatible with this truth. Thoughts and intentions simply arise in the mind. What else could they do? The truth about us is stranger than many suppose: The illusion of free will is itself an illusion."

Chapter 3
"The greater activity we found in the MPFC for belief compared to disbelief may reflect the greater self-relevance and/or reward value of true statements. When we believe a proposition to be true, it is as though we have taken it in hands as part of our extended self: we are saying, in effect, "This is mine. I can use this. This fits my view of the world." It seems to me that such cognitive acceptance has a distinctly positive emotional valence. We actually like the truth, and we may, in fact, dislike falsehood."

"The point , of course, is that science increasingly allows us to identify aspects of our minds that cause us to deviate from norms of factual and moral reasoning - norms which, when made explicit, are generally acknowledged to be valid by all parties."

"As we have begun to see, all reasoning may be inextricable from emotion. But if a person's primary motivation in holding a belief is to hew a positive state of mind - to mitigate feelings of anxiety, embarrassment, or guilt, for instance - this is precisely what we mean by phrases like "wishful thinking" and "self-deception". Such a person will, of necessity, be less responsive to valid chains of evidence and argument that run counter to the beliefs he is seeking to maintain. To point out nonepistemic motives in another's view of the world, therefore, is always a criticism, as it serves to cast doubt upon a person's connection to the world as it is."

"a bias is not merely a source of error; it is a reliable pattern of error. Every bias, therefore, reveals something about the structure of the human mind."

"Of course, people do often believe things in part because these beliefs make them feel better. But they do not do this in the full light of consciousness. Self-deception, emotional bias, and muddled thinking are facts of human cognition."

"expectation can be, if not everything, almost everything. Rosenhan concluded his paper with this damning summary: "It is clear that we cannot distinguish the sane from the insane in psychiatric hospitals."

"As far as our understanding of the world is concerned - there are no facts without values."

Chapter 4

"This prayer of reconciliation goes by many names and now has many advocates. But it is based on a fallacy. The fact that some scientists do not detect any problem with religious faith merely proves that a juxtaposition of good ideas and bad ones is possible. Is there a conflict between marriage and infidelity? The two regularly coincide.
The fact that intellectual honesty can be confined to a ghetto - in a single brain, in an institution, or in a culture - does not mean that there isn't a perfect contradiction between reason and faith, or between the worldview of science taken as a whole and those advanced by the world's "great," and greatly discrepant, religions."

"The goal is not to get more Americans to merely accept the truth of evolution (or any other scientific theory); the goal is to het them to value the principles of reasoning and educated discourse that now make a belief in evolution obligatory. Doubt about evolution is merely a symptom of an underlying condition; the condition is faith itself - conviction without sufficient reason, hope mistaken for knowledge, bad ideas protected from good ones, good ideas obscured by bad ones, wishful thinking elevated to a principle of salvation, etc."

"The fact that certain people can reason poorly with a clear conscience - or can do so while saying that they have a clear conscience - proves absolutely nothing about the compatibility of religious and scientific ideas, goals, or ways of thinking.
It is possible to be wrong and not to know it (we call this "ignorance").
It is possible to be wrong and to know it, but to be reluctant to incur the social cost of admitting this publicly (we call this "hypocrisy").
And it may also be possible to be wrong, to dimly glimpse this fact, but to allow the fear of being wrong to increase one's commitment to one's erroneous beliefs (we call this "self-deception").
It seems clear that these frames of mind do an unusual amount of work in the service of religion."

Chapter 5

"Throughout this book, I have argued that the split between facts and values - and, therefore, between science and morality - is an illusion."

"The claim that science could have something important to say about values (because values relate to facts about the well-being of conscious creatures) is an argument made on first principles. As such, it doesn't rest on any specific empirical results."

"we have all evolved from common ancestors and are, therefore, far more similar than we are different; brains and primary human emotions clearly transcend culture, and they are unquestionably influenced by states of the world (as anyone who has ever stubbed his toe can attest)."

"But does anyone doubt that there are better and worse ways to structure an economy? Would any educated person consider it a form of bigotry to criticize another society's response to a banking crisis? Imagine how terrifying it would be if great numbers of smart people became convinced that all efforts to prevent a global financial catastrophe must be either equally valid or equally nonsensical in principle. And yet this is precisely where we stand on the most important questions in human life."

"Many people also believe that nothing much depends on whether we find a universal foundation for morality. It seems to me, however, that in order to fulfill our deepest interests in this life, both personally and collectively, we must first admit that some interests are more defensible than others."

"If our well-being depends upon the interaction between events in our brains and events in the world, and there are better and worse ways to secure it, than some cultures will tend to produce lives that are more worth living than others; some political persuasions will be more enlighted than others; and some world views will be mistaken in ways that cause needles human misery. Whether or not we ever understand meaning, morality, and values in practice, I have attempted to show that there must be something to know about them in principle. And I am convinced that merely admitting this will transform the way we think about human happiness and the public good."

Afterword

"Is it really so difficult to distinguish between a science of morality and the morality of science?
To assert that moral truths exist, and can be scientifically understood, is not to say that all (or any) scientists curently understand these truths or that those who do will necessarily conform to them."

"To summarize my central thesis: Morality and values depend on the existence of conscious minds - and specifically on the fact that such minds can experience various forms of well-being and suffering in this universe. Conscious minds and their states are natural phenomena, of course, fully constrained by the laws of Nature (whatever these turn out to be in the end). Therefore, there must be right and wrong answers to questions of morality and values that potentially fall wiithin the purview of science. On this view, some people and cultures will be right (to a greater or lesser degree), and some will be wrong, with respect to what they deem important in life."

"I'm not simply claiming that morality is "fully determined by an objective realityy, independent of people's actual values and desires". I am claiming that people's actual values and desires are fully determined by an objective reality, and that we can conceptually get behind all of this - indeed, we must - in order to talk about what is actually good."

2 persone l'hanno trovato utile

Traduci recensione in Italiano

Joseph Psotka

How Psychology Provides a Useful if Largely Unexplored New World of Values that are also Facts.

Recensito negli Stati Uniti il 12 giugno 2013

Acquisto verificato

The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values by Sam Harris

The more we understand ourselves at the level of the brain, the more we will see that there are right and wrong answers to questions of human values. 70

I value the human capacity for induction to create knowledge. As Hume put it there is no causality; only "constant concomitance". There is no absolute fact, only opinion and attitudes and emotions and uncertain knowledge. This is a basic limitation of the scientific method and its greatest strength. And it applies equally to the world of values and morality. As Sam Harris so fluently exposes in this solid book, values cannot be separated from facts, and both are the happy products of science.

As the Greek rhetoricians used to say, " The only measure of mankind is mankind itself." We are the standard for the facts of science and of morality, and so understanding and advancing psychology should be a primary goal of all societies. Harris, instead of asking the Socratic question about what is the good life, asks about human well-being. There is not much difference, but science has given us much more food for thought than Aristotle ever had, and especially in the scientific field of psychology, there is much new understanding that impinges on our insights into the morality of human well-being. Harris provides a thoroughgoing synopsis of this new knowledge and it is the fundament for his thesis that a science of morality is not only possible but urgently needed to improve the general lot of mankind. He makes a convincing case. In fact, as an experimental psychologist, I agree with him completely throughout this book. Never have I read as lucid an account of the many twists and turns in people's rejection of a scientific approach to morality, and while his arguments are not always thoroughly convincing they are clear and analytic and unblurred by dogma. What can one ask more of a scientist? Nowhere does he make his case more clearly than his attack on the fundamentalist and religionist Francis Collins, who has a vision and religious conversion experience when he encounters a mystical frozen waterfall divided into a triune deity. The superstition of religion is a clear antagonist of science, and this conflict cannot be restrained without basic inconsistencies of reasoning.
Here is our situation: if the basic claims of religion are true, the scientific worldview is so blinkered and susceptible to supernatural modification as to be rendered nearly ridiculous;455
For instance, the moral stigma that still surrounds disorders of mood and cognition seems largely the result of viewing the mind as distinct from the brain.1853
The fact that religious belief is both a cultural universal and appears to be tethered to the genome has led scientists like Burton to conclude that there is simply no getting rid of faith-based thinking.2154
Historically, a preoccupation with witchcraft has been a cultural universal. And yet belief in magic is now in disrepute almost everywhere in the developed world.2165
What is surprising, from a scientific point of view, is that 42 percent of Americans believe that life has existed in its present form since the beginning of the world, and another 21 percent believe that while life may have evolved, its evolution has been guided by the hand of God (only 26 percent believe in evolution through natural selection).2502

I am not suggesting that we are guaranteed to resolve every moral controversy through science. Differences of opinion will remain--but opinions will be increasingly constrained by facts.82
To say that the behavior of Muslim jihadists has nothing to do with their religious beliefs is like saying that honor killings have nothing to do with what their perpetrators believe about women, sexuality, and male honor.2630

If there are objective truths to be known about human well-being--if kindness, for instance, is generally more conducive to happiness than cruelty is--then science should one day be able to make very precise claims about which of our behaviors and uses of attention are morally good, which are neutral, and which are worth abandoning. While it is too early180
It is possible to be wrong and to not know it (we call this "ignorance").2961
It is possible to be wrong and to know it, but to be reluctant to incur the social cost of admitting this publicly (we call this "hypocrisy").2961

And it may also be possible to be wrong, to dimly glimpse this fact, but to allow the fear of being wrong to increase one's commitment to one's erroneous beliefs (we call this "self-deception"). It seems clear that these frames of mind do an unusual amount of work in the service of religion.2962

Similarly, anyone truly interested in morality--in the principles of behavior that allow people to flourish--should be open to new evidence and new arguments that bear upon questions of happiness and suffering.412
There may be nothing more important than human cooperation. Whenever more pressing concerns seem to arise--like the threat of a deadly pandemic, an asteroid impact, or some other global catastrophe--human cooperation is the only remedy (if a remedy exists). Cooperation is the stuff of which meaningful human lives and viable societies are made. Consequently, few topics will be more relevant to a maturing science of human well-being.920
Students of philosophy will notice that this commits me to some form of moral realism (viz. moral claims can really be true or false) and some form of consequentialism (viz. the rightness of an act depends on how it impacts the well-being of conscious creatures).1036
Tomasello has found that even twelve-month old children will follow a person's gaze, while chimpanzees tend to be interested only in head movements. He suggests that our unique sensitivity to gaze direction facilitated human cooperation and language development.959
It is not by accident that our most widely accepted moral phrase is "do unto others as you would have them do unto you ..." because our most essential intellectual competence is understanding others; whether through communication or modeling others' minds and awareness, later elaborated into the study of psychology. Edit
Moral view A is truer than moral view B, if A entails a more accurate understanding of the connections between human thoughts/intentions/behavior and human well-being.1081
The one crucial exception, however, is that psychopaths are often unable to recognize expressions of fear and sadness in others, And this may be the difference that makes all the difference.1660
Blair points out, parenting strategies that increase empathy tend to successfully mitigate antisocial behavior in healthy children;1668
Territorial violence might have even been necessary for the development of altruism. The economist Samuel Bowles has argued that lethal, "out-group" hostility and "in-group" altruism are two sides of the same coin.1701
Sometimes our knowledge of psychology conflicts with itself, as in our undertstanding of revenge and compassion, and a resolution needs to be worked out:" the tragic experience of his late father-in-law, who had the opportunity to kill the man who murdered his family during the Holocaust but opted instead to turn him over to the police. After spending only a year in jail, the killer was released, and Diamond's father-in-law spent the last sixty years of his life "tormented by regret and guilt." While there is much to be said against the vendetta culture of the New Guinea Highlands, it is clear that the practice of taking vengeance answers to a common psychological need".1860
In fact, mathematical belief (e.g., "2 + 6 + 8 = 16") showed a similar pattern of activity to ethical belief (e.g., "It is good to let your children know that you love them"), and these were perhaps the most dissimilar sets of stimuli used in our experiment. This suggests that the physiology of belief may be the same regardless of a proposition's content. It also suggests that the division between facts and values does not make much sense in terms of underlying brain function. 2032
And we can traverse the boundary between facts and values in other ways. As we are about to see, the norms of reasoning seem to apply equally to beliefs about facts and to beliefs about values. In both spheres, evidence of inconsistency and bias is always unflattering. Similarities of this kind suggest that there is a deep analogy, if not identity, between the two domains.2043
Morality and values depend on the existence of conscious minds--and specifically on the fact that such minds can experience various forms of well-being and suffering in this universe. Conscious minds and their states are natural phenomena, of course, fully constrained by the laws of Nature (whatever these turn out to be in the end). Therefore, there must be right and wrong answers to questions of morality and values that potentially fall within the purview of science. On this view, some people and cultures will be right (to a greater or lesser degree), and some will be wrong, with respect to what they deem important in life.3259

5 persone l'hanno trovato utile

Traduci recensione in Italiano

Vedi altre recensioni

Amazon Advertising Trova, attira e coinvolgi i clienti	Amazon Music Streaming di milioni di canzoni	AbeBooks Libri, arte e articoli da collezione	Audible Download Audiolibri	Amazon Web Services Servizi Cloud Scalabili

Amazon Seconda mano I nostri prodotti usati e come nuovi	Kindle Direct Publishing Pubblica i tuoi libri in formato elettronico	Shopbop Designer, Marche, Fashion e stile	Amazon Business Servizio per clienti business

Restituisci questo articolo gratuitamente

Immagine non disponibile

Segui l'autore

The Moral Landscape Copertina flessibile – 12 aprile 2012

Opzioni di acquisto e componenti aggiuntivi

Spesso comprati insieme

I clienti che hanno visto questo articolo hanno visto anche