The moral landscape: how science can determine human values

Abstract

In this book, Sam Harris, a noted New Atheist, asks us to consider two lives:Life A: Imagine that you are an illiterate and homeless African woman whose husband has disappeared.You have just seen your seven-year-old daughter raped and murdered at the hands of drug-crazed soldiers, and now you're fearing for your life.Unfortunately, this is not an unusual predicament for you.From the moment you were born, your life has been marred by cruelty and violence.Life B: Imagine that you are a respected professional in a wealthy country, married to a loving, intelligent and charismatic mate.Your employment is intellectually stimulating and pays you very well.For decades your wealth and social connections have allowed you immense personal satisfaction from meaningful work which makes a real difference in the world.You and your closest family will live long, prosperous lives, virtually untouched by crime, sudden bereavements, and other major misfortunes.Which is the better life?We would all no doubt say Life B. Harris takes this as evidence that there is an objective way to determine what is morally good and bad.In fact, as the subtitle of the book indicates, he claims that scientific inquiry can tell us what we should and should not value.Harris feels he can say this because he thinks that the proper meaning of 'value' with respect to human lifethat is to say, the proper meaning of morality -is that which leads to human flourishing, which means, living a satisfying life.Once he has made that move, the rest of his argument is straightforward and cogent: careful observation of what in fact fulfils people is not a matter of philosophical or religious debate, it is a matter of scientific inquiry.We can tell, objectively, what leads to happiness and what leads to misery.Facilitating good lives is what morality is about, says Harris, and that's why science can tell us what we should value and what we should not.As Harris says:"human well-being entirely depends on events in the world and on states of the human brain.Consequently, there must be scientific truths to be known about it."(p.2) "Once we see that a concern for well-being (defined as deeply and as inclusively as possible) is the only intelligible basis for morality and values, we will see that there must be a science of morality… As we come to understand how human beings can best collaborate and thrive in this world, science can help us find a path leading away from the lowest depths of misery and toward the heights of happiness for the greatest number of people."(p.28)There may be problems about the details, but the overall goal of peaks of happiness is quite achievable, says

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 288 citations exist upstream.