new photo blog

i started this blog in 2006, and it's shifted along with my interests through the years. it's been witness to a lot of learning for me...

still, i feel that i need a home for my photography -- so from now on, i'll be posting my pictures on the journal on my reworked website. if you like my photos, you might decide to follow me there!

my first post is here -- check it out!

as for this blog, i'm not sure what will happen. i don't think i'm willing to let it go, and certainly i'll keep it as an archive, but i need some time to figure it out.

for those of you that pop in from time to time, thanks for the visits and encouragement.

Saturday, April 09, 2011

sam harris vs william lane craig - april 7 2011

does goodness come from god?


  1. I've always thought of human rights (a nice secular way to frame morality) as a cognitive tool akin to the wheel or even better - a chimpanzee using a blade of grass to obtain ants from an ant hill to eat.

    Mr Craig uses the strawman argument a bit on his second point. I'd say love is a social/biological construct but that doesn't demean my experience of love at all.
    It seems he's saying: Morality based on natural processes can't be true because to be true morality must be based on the supernatural.(?!)

    Ha! And then he blathers about morality being no more important than your hands or one's feet. Let me tell you my friend, our thumbs and the fact we walk on two feet are pretty important evolutionary steps. We wouldn't be human without them.

    Then he talks about bees, and what if intelligent bees ruled the earth. Of course, these hypothetical female uber-bees would be killing drones and thinking it moral until some kind of bee Reformation would occur and drones would fight a long bloody war to obtain their rights. The drones wouldn't be beholden to some Bee God to get their morality, either. They would fight the 30 Year Drone War to save their own skins.

    Is this section as black and white as I think or am I totally wrong?,

  2. if you try to make a point-by-point rebuttal of all of WLC's arguments, you'll end up writing a book about a few minutes of talk. harris very rightly didn't even try, but focused on some key concepts, which, of course, craig failed to even understand. this is why he celebrates his failure of perception as a big win.

    i think craig has a skewed sense of values and morality -- twisted-ly justifying the atrocious, making a career of pursuing high school-ish debate points and completely missing the kind substantial insights harris makes and he's lucky to even hear. i have no understanding of what kind of mental abuse a human must have been subjected to in order to develop such a convoluted aberration of reality.