A Moral Obligation

Ted Talk:
Science Can Answer Moral Questions



Questions of good and evil, right and wrong are commonly thought unanswerable by science. But Sam Harris argues that science can — and should — be an authority on moral issues, shaping human values and setting out what constitutes a good life. (Recorded at TED2010, February 2010 in Long Beach, CA. Duration: 23:07)

morality: "concern with the distinction between good and evil or right and wrong; right or good conduct"

Anyone that knows me in any capacity will have some idea that I'm not religious. Infact, the best way to put it is that I'm about as religious as I am not. I'm a cop out, an agnostic with a sympathsizing ear to athestic logic. One thing I definitely am, is pro-science. Being able to apply a simple logic to the way my life unfolds is comforting to me. Science is not a beliefs system. Science is NOT religion. Science is a quest for knowledge.

Now, usually, this is well and good. On any given day I am free to go about my buisness and run my life in this capacity, generally unabated. However, it has come to my attention in the past few years that the field of science is often viewed as vehemently anti-religious in an active capacity. I really don't feel like sparking any real debate on this topic, as if science and religion were two head to head ideologies. I have strong opinions on many facets of religion, and will share them if you ask me. However, for the sake of this blog I would like to make my position on morality as a dependant on religion clear.

Religion is NOT a crutch for morality. Morality Can exist without it.

Let me start with a hypothetical. Lets say I was grocery shopping, and while I was trying to walk down the isle there were little children darting every which way and impeding my progress. I easily could push that child aside - yet do not. Now I made the moral decision to myself that it was wrong to push a child.

I did NOT need religion to help me make this moral choice. Am I to believe the only reason I might not have pushed that kid was because God says it's wrong?

I do not steal because I have a base sense of what rightfully belongs to me. I don't murder because it is essentially the ultimate form of theft. Someone's life certainly does not belong to me, and I have no right to take it away.

In fact I'll put it to you to tell me how doing things only for the sake of 'religious morality' is in itself not purely selfish. Is a person of faith making the right decisions because they are concerned with where they will end up? I pity an existence where I can not contribute to this earth for the pure sake of doing it. Every nice thing I do out of a religion-based morality is actively selfish.

If God exists and is truly omnipotent, do you think he'd be more impressed with someone who makes moral choices because he told them to, or because they honeslty feel it's the right thing to do? Now begin questioning your motivations. I have met salt of the earth atheists and evil as sin born-agains, not to mention every combination inbetween.

Morality does not equal religion. Morality and religion should not go hand and hand.

I would really love feedback on this one. I would love to know your thoughts. I'm not stating my beliefs behind a wall of anonymity, and as a consequence respect and invite any opinion on the this delicate matter; good or bad.

Much love, much respect.

Peace in the east,
Sean

Ask Me Weather I Care

Canadians must be boring. This may sound like a gross generalization, but I'm being forced to make this assumption based upon the sheer amount of idle chatter I've been stumbling into regarding the weather.

Why are Canadians as a nation so fixated on this topic? How come at some point in every conversation it creeps in to fill the silence? Do we as a people have nothing better to say? If your ability to converse with me is so strained that all you can do is state a fact like it is nice out, then why are we talking? Wouldn't it be mutually beneficial to both of us if we didn't force a conversation about something that we both walked through on our way into the office? Call me crazy, but it makes as much sense to me as having the following conversation:

You - "Hey Sean, your shirt is green."
Me - "Ah, yes, it is. Your hair is brown."
-fin-

Is there anything to be gained here? I enjoy a good conversation as much as the next person, but I certainly won't be offended if you give me a nod and silence absent of awkward observations of the mundane. I'm not a great talker. I am very bad at generating and maintaining a conversation that I have no vested interest in. I'll respect you 100% more if you save me from it. If you have my attention, you'll know my opinion.

Please don't even get me started on our ability to complain. More precisly, complain about the weather. Combining our want to babble about the weather with our ability to complain is like the perfect storm of annoying Canadian habits. The only thing worse than hearing "it's too hot" and "it's too cold" is when in the fall, I have to hear both every other day. Gah!

I suppose I'm just bitter; the weekend course I was taking has just concluded and most of my human interaction for the next three months is limited to work. For those of you without a job where nothing much changes from day to day, you will find out that weather chat becomes a staple in your people skills around the water cooler. I'm going to miss those classes very much in part due to conversations of substance.

I'm as guilty as the next person sometimes in regards to using it as a tool to fill the awkward silence. Therefore, how about we agree going forward that we'll fill the awkward pauses with something a little less obvious. Tell me about you. Tell me about your life. Just respect me enough to assume I can see what is happening outside my window. Save the weather chat for the blind.