Atheist Professor Challenges Frank on Objective Morality — Transcript

Full transcript

1. 0:00Uh it's unfortunate it's not a debate.
2. 0:03I've debated guy and William Lane Craig
3. 0:06and Bert Spalding here, but this isn't a
4. 0:09debate. So I have to limit what I have
5. 0:12to
6. 0:13[Music]
7. 0:15say. Ladies and gentlemen, this is this
8. 0:18is Dr. Dr. Bruce Russell who's been
9. 0:20teaching philosophy here at Wayne State
10. 0:23University since 1978.
11. 0:25Wow.
12. 0:30Dr. Russell, go ahead, sir. Thank you
13. 0:32for coming. By the way, there are
14. 0:34several things I agree with you on, and
15. 0:37I'm glad you you defended them. Namely,
16. 0:40this kind of independence of truth and
17. 0:43the endorsement of logic, we're on on
18. 0:47board there with each other. And the uh
19. 0:50acceptance of the principle of
20. 0:52non-contradiction, of course. And I
21. 0:55actually although some people might be
22. 0:57surprised think that miracles are
23. 1:00possible. The questions for me are not
24. 1:04just about truth but only mainly about
25. 1:07justification.
26. 1:09So truth is the object of my beliefs but
27. 1:13whether I hold them or not depends on
28. 1:16what evidence I have for them. So, I
29. 1:19actually have an answer to your question
30. 1:21that you pose to atheists like me. If
31. 1:25Christianity were true, would you accept
32. 1:28it or believe it? And my answer is no.
33. 1:31That's the wrong question. If it were
34. 1:34rational to believe it's true, I would
35. 1:37accept it. Yeah, that's what I mean by
36. 1:38the question. Okay. Yeah, just to be
37. 1:40clear. Mhm. So now the ones I don't
38. 1:43agree with are your answers to the God
39. 1:46exists and the resurrection
40. 1:49issues. And I can't do this here. Of
41. 1:53course I do it in my philosophy religion
42. 1:55class. Go through all those traditional
43. 1:58cosmological teological moral arguments
44. 2:01and they're all open as philosophers
45. 2:04know to very serious criticism. I can't
46. 2:07do all that here. It's unfortunate. It's
47. 2:10not a debate. I've debated guy and
48. 2:13William Lane Craig and Bert Spalding
49. 2:16here, but this isn't a debate. So, I
50. 2:19have to limit what I have to say. The
51. 2:22general picture is there are arguments
52. 2:23for the existence of God and there's a
53. 2:26problem of evil, which I think is a
54. 2:28killer argument against not your
55. 2:31version. Another argument for me, mine.
56. 2:35So I'm just going to focus on one of the
57. 2:38arguments four, but you can ask me about
58. 2:41other ones if you wish. It's a matter of
59. 2:43time. Yeah, go ahead. So the moral
60. 2:46argument. So this is an one I thought
61. 2:49was the worst case that William Lane
62. 2:51Craig and Guy and many other theists
63. 2:55make because I think there are necessary
64. 2:59moral truths that you can know by
65. 3:03understanding the concepts. I think it's
66. 3:07necessarily wrong making to rape
67. 3:09someone. I think it's wrong to betray a
68. 3:13friend. I think it's wrong to exploit
69. 3:16people. I think it's wrong to harm
70. 3:18people just for the fun of it and so on.
71. 3:21We agree. The question is what justifies
72. 3:24that being wrong? The answer is it's a
73. 3:26conceptual truth like the truth that
74. 3:30knowledge requires true belief or the
75. 3:34truth that um well I don't know 2 + 2 is
76. 3:40four. That doesn't mean that everyone
77. 3:43always believed these necessary truths.
78. 3:46I think it's a necessary truth that
79. 3:48slavery is wrong. That of course doesn't
80. 3:51mean that everybody believed it. But
81. 3:54there are many examples in logic and
82. 3:56math where people believe false things
83. 4:00and only later came to see that there
84. 4:03were truths that were necessary truths
85. 4:07that they thought were false. Right? But
86. 4:10those we're right now we're talking
87. 4:11epistemology. How do you know something?
88. 4:14The question is by knowing the
89. 4:16understanding the concepts as in math
90. 4:20and in logic and in
91. 4:23epistemology. I gave that example. How
92. 4:26do I know that if you know something
93. 4:28it's true? The answer is because the
94. 4:31very concept of knowledge implies that's
95. 4:35so right. knowledge as you know I'm just
96. 4:40doing this for the audience okay how you
97. 4:42know something's called epistemology but
98. 4:44the object you're knowing deals with
99. 4:46ontology the question is if there is no
100. 4:50god what is the standard that says
101. 4:53murder is wrong and rape is wrong and
102. 4:55love is good and why are we obligated to
103. 4:58obey it if there is no god there's
104. 5:00that's equivalent to the question for me
105. 5:03how do we know that 2 plus 2 is four if
106. 5:06there's know God. The answer is we know
107. 5:09that 2+ 2 is four independent of our any
108. 5:13kind of evidence or knowledge of God
109. 5:16because we understand the concepts and
110. 5:19though morality is not about numbers.
111. 5:22It's about wrongness and there are
112. 5:24certain concepts that are linked
113. 5:27necessarily to wrongness like rape and
114. 5:30exploitation and the one the list I
115. 5:32partly went through. Right. The the
116. 5:34question is, why is it wrong to rape or
117. 5:38murder if there is no God? There is no
118. 5:42purpose to life and we're just overgrown
119. 5:45germs. We're just, as someone said,
120. 5:49we're either God imagers or we're
121. 5:52clever, murderous monkeys fighting for
122. 5:55control over the banana supply. I don't
123. 5:57That's a That's a false dichotomy. Why
124. 6:01Why is it though, Dr. Russell? Why is it
125. 6:03wrong to say or why is it why do we have
126. 6:06a moral
127. 6:07obligation if there's no purpose to
128. 6:09life? Oh, because we can have
129. 6:12obligations that are not tied to
130. 6:14purposes. We're not all consequentialist
131. 6:17about morality, but so you can have, you
132. 6:21know, breaking a promise can be wrong.
133. 6:24uh you know if you be well look this is
134. 6:27a question I think you're asking me is
135. 6:29why is 2 plus 2 equal four that makes no
136. 6:33sense if you agree that it's
137. 6:35conceptually necessary that if you rape
138. 6:39somebody you do something wrong then it
139. 6:41makes no sense to ask well how can it be
140. 6:44wrong if there's no purpose in life or
141. 6:47so forth well okay well first of all you
142. 6:50might be surprised maybe not to learn
143. 6:51that I believe math is grounded in the
144. 6:53nature of God as Well, because you don't
145. 6:55think that math is a human conception,
146. 6:58do you? I I No, I think it's a human
147. 7:01discovery. They just are truths. There
148. 7:03are always You're discovering truth, but
149. 7:06not It doesn't take God's God to for
150. 7:09those truths to exist. 2 plus two would
151. 7:12equal four, regardless of whether God
152. 7:15exists or not. Well, how would it how
153. 7:18would 2 plus 2 equal four be true if
154. 7:21nothing existed?
155. 7:24Well, if nothing existed, I mean, even
156. 7:26the proposition 2 plus 2 is 4, it
157. 7:29couldn't be. But there's a proposition 2
158. 7:31plus 2 equals 4 that's necessarily true.
159. 7:36And and so there are propositions as
160. 7:38well as lecterns and microphones and
161. 7:41professors.
162. 7:43Okay. But my contention is nothing would
163. 7:46exist unless God existed. As Linet said,
164. 7:48if there is no God, why is there
165. 7:50something rather than nothing at all?
166. 7:51And I think math is actually an argument
167. 7:53for a mind. And the idea that our
168. 7:58universe is mathematically describable,
169. 8:01I think, points back to a mind who
170. 8:03created and sustains this universe.
171. 8:05Well, you assume that things, you know,
172. 8:08there must be some reason for things to
173. 8:11exist. But there needn't be reasons for
174. 8:13necessary truths to exist. Certainly
175. 8:16there needn't be the reasons you cite,
176. 8:19namely that life has to have some other
177. 8:21lily purpose in life. That those truths
178. 8:24could exist. Uh why is why do they
179. 8:28exist? Because they're necessary truths.
180. 8:31That's necessary. Why why is anything
181. 8:33necessary if there is no God? Well, why
182. 8:37is it I mean, don't you think I don't
183. 8:38know. This seems like a killer example
184. 8:40to me, but you don't take it as one.
185. 8:42That it's necessarily true that 2 plus 2
186. 8:45is four. That if you know something,
187. 8:47what you know is true. Um that it's uh
188. 8:51wrong to rape people. It's wrong. I
189. 8:54agree with all that. I agree with you
190. 8:56and I are on the same page, Dr. Russell,
191. 8:58that all those things are true. My
192. 9:00question is what grounds those truth?
193. 9:03Because you're not a materialist, are
194. 9:04you? No. Okay. So, how do you ground
195. 9:06immaterial reality?
196. 9:08How why is there something rather than
197. 9:10nothing? Do you mean no immaterial
198. 9:11reality? How do you ground the laws of
199. 9:13logic, the laws of mathematics, the laws
200. 9:15of morality if there's no God? How are
201. 9:18those things grounded? Because actually
202. 9:20they're the best explanation of what we
203. 9:22discover when we start investigating
204. 9:25math and logic and right. But you're
205. 9:26talking epistemology again. I'm talking
206. 9:28ontology. Why do those things exist to
207. 9:30discover to begin with? I'm Well, okay.
208. 9:33I'm giving you a reason to believe why
209. 9:35they exist. I thought you asked me for
210. 9:37that why they ex why we should believe
211. 9:40they exist is because they best explain
212. 9:43our discoveries when we start doing math
213. 9:46and logic and all you're giving are
214. 9:49evidential arguments every one of your
215. 9:51argument isn't doesn't guarantee truth
216. 9:54it's an evidential argument so I'm
217. 9:56giving an evidential argument to think
218. 9:58that there are necessary math logic
219. 10:01truths and truths about epistemology and
220. 10:04ethics well I'm using the laws of logic
221. 10:08and my senses in order to discover
222. 10:10truths outside of myself. But you're not
223. 10:12using just logic and your senses. You're
224. 10:15using something like inference to the
225. 10:17best explanation. Yes. Well, so am I.
226. 10:20I'm using inference of the best
227. 10:22explanation to explain why you should
228. 10:25believe that there are logical,
229. 10:28mathematical, and ethical truths that
230. 10:31are necessarily true, which means true
231. 10:34in every possible Well, I agree they're
232. 10:36true in every possible world, but I just
233. 10:38don't see any grounding on it on
234. 10:39atheism. Why? You you just But that
235. 10:42means you just
236. 10:44rejected my inference the best
237. 10:47explanation argument for their existence
238. 10:50that has no implications about God. Hey
239. 10:52guys. Hey guys, please. Please go ahead.
240. 10:55Sorry. Sorry, sir. Go ahead. I was
241. 10:57thinking I said you just rejected my
242. 11:00inference to the best explanation why we
243. 11:02should believe that there are math,
244. 11:04logic, and moral truths independently of
245. 11:08the existence of God. I'm asking for the
246. 11:10grounding of those things. Obviously,
247. 11:11math and logic are not moral issues.
248. 11:14Morality is an obligation. The only
249. 11:16arguments you give for the grounding
250. 11:19that in God are inferential arguments
251. 11:22just of the same sort but with different
252. 11:25conclusions. You have onlogical
253. 11:28conclusions that are based on inference
254. 11:30of the best explanation. And I have
255. 11:33exactly the same kind of argument to
256. 11:38infer that there are necessary truths
257. 11:41that don't require God's existence.
258. 11:43Well, that's where we disagree. I I I I
259. 11:46can't see how there's any obligation if
260. 11:49we're just overgrown germs. Huh. If if
261. 11:52if we're not just we're not just
262. 11:54overgrown germs. We're we're people with
263. 11:58brains. And having brains enables us to
264. 12:01have certain emotions and thoughts and
265. 12:04so forth that make us distinct from a
266. 12:07lectern or a mouse. Yes, that's true.
267. 12:10The question is how did we get here? And
268. 12:13if we got here by a blind process, it
269. 12:15doesn't matter how big of our brains
270. 12:17are. They're just different in
271. 12:19degree. And there's no overall arching
272. 12:22purpose to life. It makes no difference
273. 12:25in the end whether we murder one another
274. 12:27or we love one another. Oh, no. That
275. 12:28doesn't follow at all. You just rejected
276. 12:31my arguments that said there are
277. 12:33necessary moral truths. All right. Well,
278. 12:35okay. Thank you, Dr. Russell. Yes. Thank
279. 12:37you. We can talk some more later, but I
280. 12:39appreciate you coming.
281. 12:43[Music]