AS134: Moral Arguments, with Jeffery Jay Lowder, Part 2
Serious Inquiries Only
Thomas Smith
4.6 • 1.1K Ratings
🗓️ 7 May 2015
⏱️ 62 minutes
🧾️ Download transcript
Summary
Much more with Jeffrey Jay Lowder! This time we get even deeper into the arguments, and I get to try out a couple of thoughts I've been having on Jeff. It was a real treat to have an expert on to be able to bounce some ideas off of. This is of course in addition … Continue reading AS134: Moral Arguments, with Jeffery Jay Lowder, Part 2
The post AS134: Moral Arguments, with Jeffery Jay Lowder, Part 2 appeared first on Atheistically Speaking.
Transcript
Click on a timestamp to play from that location
| 0:00.0 | You're listening to, atheistically speaking. Oh, Hello and welcome to Atheistically speaking. This is episode 134 with your |
| 0:37.5 | host Thomas Smith. We are continuing the interview with Jeffrey J. Lauter. |
| 0:42.0 | Very interesting stuff. In this segment, it's a bit |
| 0:45.2 | long because there was so much to talk about. We could have kept going forever and I really |
| 0:50.9 | can't wait to have them back. But in this segment, I get to try out a few of the things |
| 0:55.5 | that have been rattling around my old Nagan |
| 0:57.9 | with as regards moral arguments. |
| 1:00.7 | And it was really exciting to get to talk |
| 1:02.4 | to someone who was really an expert on it and we'll see how that went. |
| 1:06.0 | So let's get right to it. No time to waste. Well, let me take a step. Doesn't he define it as true whether or not you and I agree on it? |
| 1:27.4 | Isn't that just how I've heard him do it in debates? |
| 1:30.0 | Yeah, so he does say that, but then the problem is that in philosophy there are two competing definitions of objectivity that are consistent with that definition and one of them addresses his |
| 1:46.0 | point about moral ontology and the ontological foundation for morality and the other definition of objectivity has nothing to do with it. |
| 1:57.0 | And by some weird chance or coincidence, the philosophers that he had been debating who were familiar with all of this, |
| 2:07.4 | when they would hear him talk about objective moral values, they would immediately think of the definition of objectivity that has nothing to do with |
| 2:16.2 | ontology. But Craig's argument is about ontology. And so I blame, I partially blame Craig for doing a lousy job of explaining what he means by objective moral values. |
| 2:28.5 | So when he says that there are objective moral values, it is true that he says that there are things |
| 2:35.2 | like charity or justice or love |
| 2:38.8 | that are objectively morally good |
| 2:42.2 | in the sense that they would be morally good even if all human |
| 2:46.8 | beings were brainwashed into thinking that they were bad or things like rape are morally wrong and they would continue to be wrong even if all |
| 2:57.2 | human beings were brainwashed into believing that they are morally good. |
... |
Please login to see the full transcript.
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Thomas Smith, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.
Generated transcripts are the property of Thomas Smith and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.
Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.