Comments on: The Science of Good and Evil

By: 09-07-22 | Blubeanz

09-07-22 | Blubeanz — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:55:31 +0000

[...] his book The Science of Good and Evil, Dr. Michael Shermer tackles the question of why we are moral? That is, what is the basis for [...]

By: Gary

Gary — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 20:10:41 +0000

John you have got it all wrong. Need is has two meanings. One is desire and the other is necessity. It is a word many people use to delude themselves. Want or desire are healthy. I desire or want to be a millionaire but i do not “need”, find it absolutely necessary that i become a millionaire. Since i only want it i will not upset myself if i don’t have it. But if i believe i “need” it i will most likely upset myself and possibility do something that even i believe is wrong to get it.

I suggest reading Dr. Albert Ellis Ph.D.

Also Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is wrong. Maslow was mentally sick and that is all i will say about him.

Dr. Albert Ellis has said. “I will not purposely “and” needlessly hard anyone.” In this case Albert Ellis means necessity when using needlessly. I haven’t found a case this does not work. Of course if you are deluding yourself nothing will work.

By: Science, Morality, and Meaning « The Skeptical Teacher

Science, Morality, and Meaning « The Skeptical Teacher — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 23:38:54 +0000

[...] that science can (and should) inform our views on morality & ethics, I suggest checking out Dr. Michael Shermer’s The Science of Good & Evil. There is a growing body of science-based work on this topic, and it is sure to get more and more [...]

By: Friar Hilarius

Friar Hilarius — Sun, 10 May 2009 10:57:09 +0000

If we are free to invent our own ideas of good and evil there is no guarantee that the resulting ideas will result in peaceful outcomes

I reject such concepts as anarchistic and lacking in utility

A belief system must provide for compatibility of living otherwise it is doomed to fail, or at the very least lead to harmful conflicts which an agreed morality would avoid

Avoiding harm to others and promoting the good of all need to be the foundations of any moral system worth the name

Blessings and Peace
Friar Hilarius

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 08 May 2009 11:58:06 +0000

I see these adolescent observations (Dwayne and Stefan) on the relativity of good and evil and I think of Victor Frankl’s words,
“We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread.”

By: Daniel

Daniel — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 14:53:04 +0000

If society could be set up so that “subcultures” could be established that upheld their own rules within their own borders, and had peaceful relations with neighbors, it is not impossible to imagine a world where there is a close to perfect place in it for everyone.

By: John

John — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 01:51:44 +0000

Good or evil is not a matter law or perception but need vs want.
Need = Good
Want = Evil
If we do something or hurt someone because we need to do it in order to survive then that is good. For example, we kill someone in self defense or in a war. If we do something or hurt someone because we want to then that is evil. For example, we kill someone for life insurance money.

By: Erik Rothe

Erik Rothe — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 22:51:13 +0000

Want to get the full scoop….. Myspace.com/erikthered9 It is your own face that you see reflected in the water and it is your own self that you see in your heart.

By: Erik Rothe

Erik Rothe — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 22:48:11 +0000

Evil: A force of destruction that decieves and devours everything in its wake until there’s nothing left;a vaccuum of doom. Evil is killing the world bigtime

HOLY CRUSADERS UNITE……EriktheRed(Delirious Nomad)

By: Peter Grant

Peter Grant — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 16:05:16 +0000

I also suspect that there is an evolutionary basis for morality, we each have an innate sense of justice. Cultural differences do not necessarily imply moral relativism within the same species. We are all humans after all, and quite close genetically.