A science of morality?

1. Humanism and happiness A science of morality?

2. What is it to be happy? “Prejudice apart, the game of push-pin is of equal value with the arts and sciences of music and poetry. If the game of push-pin furnish more pleasure, it is more valuable than either” • J. Bentham: The Rationale of Reward (1830) • We can’t know what brings us most pleasure unless we’ve tried many options • Immediate argument for education, and against repression of any sort

3. Marginal satisfactions • In terms of marginal utility, a unit of pushpin could be equal to a unit of poetry for me • But perhaps there are goods that are preferable for everyone? • And if so, maximising those goods seems a rational strategy for the species as a whole, or perhaps for sentient creatures generally.

4. What causes unhappiness (at least, according to religion)? • Lack of belonging/community? • But perhaps we’d be as happy in sports/book clubs without the (circular) argument that metaphysical purpose is required. • Meaning/purpose? • We all have these – again, why do we need a metaphysical one? • Wonder/mystery? • Isn’t it obviously the case that there’s more of this for secularists? • Eternal life? • Not much different from being offered a 400% return after a month’s investment...

5. What actually causes unhappiness? • Unfulfilled desires? But who says you would have those desires, other things being equal? • The source of most conflicts reduce to resource scarcity (or asymmetries in allocation) • What is morality for? • So much of morality may simply be welfare economics • In that we have less reason to treat each other badly – and therefore cause unhappiness – if we all have what we need

6. Morality: Traditional definitions • For ordinary persons: a simple accident of geography • But one that is privileged – dogma and prejudice which has been allowed to become axiomatic • Even non-religious morality has this character – heuristics and scripts are attractive

7. Why the holy handbook fails • Provides easy answers to issues that can/should be compelling • And moral confusion where there should be none – euthanasia, gay marriage, abortion • More importantly, it cripples our moral sensibilities • And forces us to buy into pushpin, not poetry

8. Without god @Periyon Without God I have nothing else to live for... @SupaBaddizI Without God I am nothin, have nothin, && will never be able to accomplish nothin! @Rieno2 Without God, I wouldn't know how it feels to LIVE... @BellaKerber Without God, life has no meaning .. @taylormatthews Without God there can be no knowledge, good, evil, hope or joy. @DJFoRenZic_JA: Without god, there is no life! @iK00lKiDd Without God there is no me... • Do Stockholm syndrome and abusive spouses come to mind? • These viewpoints demonstrate a vested interest in human misery and suffering • Or drug pushers – make you dependent, and then sell you the only solution. Is the life of an addict to be admired or emulated?

9. There are consequences • The “greener” people are, the more likely they are to lie and cheat • Feeling virtuous does not correlate with actual virtue • Confirmation bias: we over-value the good we do and undervalue the harm • “Our own moral priorities always, uniquely, earn double points” - Baggini

10. By contrast • Secular folk understand that morality is complex • And are perhaps less complacent about difficult choices – and perhaps in the end more virtuous as a result of more careful deliberation • But how do we know what to do, without the holy handbook?

11. The State of Nature • Consider analogy to sport, and our incentive for following rules • What does this say in terms of moral rules being “true”? • We escape the state of nature by agreeing to not harm each other • And morality consists of the rules that make social living possible at all

12. Morality - a matter of prudence? • Social insurance • The utility of believing in objectivity: mutual reinforcement, weakening of opposition • So yes, simple (or not, really) social engineering • Even secularists have perhaps confused the usefulness of the narrative of objectivity with actual objectivity • And rejecting objectivity does not entail relativism

13. Morality from rationality • Defining morality as necessarily objective is an illegitimate way to privilege religion • We don’t have any non-pragmatic reasons to be good – and we don’t need any • We don’t want morality to be grounded in empathy or altruism – why? • Suffering still gives us reasons to act, via game-theory, evolutionary psychology, etc. – enlightened self-interest

14. Deriving “ought” from “is” • Sam Harris and the welfare of sentient creatures • Controversy regarding “scientific morality” • But what else can it be? Why is morality held to different standards than other forms of knowledge? • We can reach justified conclusions – for now – and change our minds later (in light of new evidence) • So, moral reasons not different from other reasons • They are grounded in rationality, and motivate us like other reasons do.

15. Culture and morality Moral virtue & happiness also a educational and political achievement • Education contributes to respect and self-respect (or can – cf. the 4th “R”) • Secure & stable political system necessary for appropriate incentives • Takes broader culture to even identify some lapses of virtue

16. Religion as addiction • The reflective vs. automatic systems • Ignoring contradictions • Confirmation biases • Sunk-cost fallacies • In short, a case study of heuristics gone wrong • And a recipe for unhappiness, in that conflicts between belief and the world are inevitable – more so in multicultural environments

17. Broader issues • Has the species outgrown religion? Will we ever do so? • Can we handle the responsibility of rational choice? • Can a theory be cogent, yet not recommended? Compare to equality of persons • The usefulness of heuristics in moral behaviour • Should humanism aspire to becoming a grand narrative, to tap into these heuristics?

18. Where are we now? • Trying to fit foundationalism into a globalised world • With no way of knowing right from wrong except mere habits – and our habits come from another world, and another time • No moral theory perfectly satisfactory • A long-term project • Knowing, without knowing that you know – all science is hypothetical, why not morality? • Moral ideas are always up for debate – but we apply inconsistent standards to happiness and welfare questions • Applying critical standards, as with all “knowledge”

19. There is a danger • Even though atheists are divorcing less than Christians (Non-Denominational 34%; Mainline Protestants 25%; Atheists 21%) • They are having fewer kids • Unfortunately, education correlates with both atheism and fewer kids (on the whole, perhaps not unfortunate) .... • But proportionally, we’re shrinking

20. Which means that • Liberal secularism and high-birth rates are (indirectly) contributing to the spread of fundamentalism • The assumption that modernity leads inexorably to a lessening of religious belief may be wrong – and we have to work hard • Even the secular role-model, Europe, not safe - most population growth via immigrants, who show higher fertility rate and are also religious • And tend to become more so when confronted by Western secularism • Religion takes on an ethnic, protective character, and becomes more fundamentalist. • So work harder. Not at having kids (please) – but at conversion/persuasion

21. Happiness? • If a pretty poster and a cute saying are all it takes to motivate you, you probably have a very easy job – the kind that robots will be doing soon. • And while some myths (maybe, that your friends actually like you) can contribute to flourishing, those that don’t need to be rooted out • Science can help us here – not necessarily to derive moral principles, but as a policeman to detect the ones that make no sense, or do not conduce to human flourishing.