Head to Head with Hemant Mehta

Last updated on: July 23, 2012 at 10:27 am by Leah Libresco

Head to Head with Hemant Mehta 2012-07-23T10:27:13-04:00 Leah Libresco

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Last week, I got to do an interview/argument with fellow Patheos blogger and Friendly Atheist Hemant Mehta on Justin Brierley’s podcast Unbelieveable! You can stream the podcast from Justin’s website or you can download it from iTunes. This is probably my favorite media thing I’ve done so far, since I find it easier to express myself in the context of an argument than I do in the scope of a conventional “How do you feel?” interview. It’s easier to realize when you’re not being clear when you have a sparring partner.

We cover a lot of ground and I’m much too lazy to transcribe or summarize, so I’m just going to give you a teaser by expanding on one part of our discussion. At some point during the show (kicking off around minute thirty), I was asking Hemant if he thought moral claims were more like aesthetic preferences (“I prefer Sondheim to Andrew Lloyd Webber”) or more like empirical facts about the world (“Greenland is out of scale on this map”). He pretty much ended up picking the latter, since, in the example we ended up on, he and I agreed that our claim that women and men were of equal moral worth was more correct than the claim of, say, a Taliban leader that women were worth less.

I wanted to go from there to talking about Hemant’s heuristic for judging that one moral claim was truer than another (Where did his yardstick come from? How does he check that his yardstick is accurate? What is the yardstick measuring? etc). On the way to that discussion, Hemant said something that I didn’t really have time to follow up on, but I want to highlight it here.

Me: Is there something that [the Taliban] is missing? Are they missing out on a fact that would tell them that’s not true [that women are worth less than men]? Is that an arbitrary distinction and you just don’t share that belief but there’s not a reason they should share yours?

[…]

Hemant: What’s the reason other than that some religious person told them otherwise or they interpreted some holy book as being right so they’re just following that step?

Justin: I suppose what Leah’s asking is what grounds your belief in the equality of human beings.

Hemant: I didn’t realize that needed justification. To say that people ought to be treated equally, that we ought to live by that golden rule so we can live a better life, to me, none of that stuff requires justification. To say that anything deviated from that, you’ve got to have a really good reason to say that you’re superior to someone else, that someone else deserves the same rights you do. As soon as you start making claims like that, you’d better have a good reason for it.

From there we got onto a discussion of where the heuristic for ‘better’ life came from and what you do when people report high subjective satisfaction with a stable system that you believe to be wrong, so I didn’t get to follow up on the first thing Hemant said in response to me.

It sounded like he was saying that everyone starts out with the right beliefs (or a certain subset of right beliefs) and it is necessary that they be deceived (whether intentionally or unintentionally) in order to end up wrong. Based on what Hemant said, I would guess he thinks the default set of beliefs hews pretty closely to a lot of our shared beliefs.

What I’m really curious about is how he thinks you can check if you’re being deceived. Are the Taliban just supposed to notice because some of their morality is grounded in an appeal to authority? They probably think it’s borne out by their subjective lived experience as well. How should Hemant and I each notice our incorrect moral beliefs?

The other big question I have is why does Hemant think our default beliefs are so close to the ideal? As I’ve said before, I don’t expect that evolution is necessarily optimizing for ethics. So how is it that we’re getting so good at this? What kind of data is our reason responding to?

If Hemant has time to expand on this, I’d be delighted to continue the conversation. I’d also be especially interested in the perspectives of some of the atheists commenters.

Atheism

Conversion

Debates

Epistemology/Philosophy

whence moral law?

Previous Post

July 22, 2012

Conceding a Point is Not a Slippery Slope

Next Post

July 24, 2012 Play Along with Rationality Camp at Home!

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 7 Quick Takes Apologetics Atheism Book Conversion Debate Tactics Debates Epistemology/Philosophy Housekeeping Ideological Turing Test Marriage Morality in Practice Parsing Catholicism Possibly Heretical Radio Reviews/Recommendations Sequence Index Spiritual Practice Uncategorized

Select a Month April 2017 March 2017 January 2017 December 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

I was a scribe skilled in the Law, and I set my heart to study, practice, and teach it. Who am I?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Samuel Nehemiah Solomon Ezra