Unbelievable?
For the full video, further episodes, updates & bonus content sign up http://www.thebigconversation.show
Harvard academic and atheist Steven Pinker debates Nick Spencer of Christian think tank Theos.
This excerpt from their Big Conversation on “The Future of Humanity: have science, reason and humanism replaced faith?” sees them debate the uses and abuses of evolutionary theory in the 20th Century.
The Big Conversation is a unique video series from Unbelievable? featuring world-class thinkers across the Christian and atheist community. Exploring science, faith, philosophy and what it means to be human.
The Big Conversation series:
Jordan Peterson & Susan Blackmore https://youtu.be/syP-OtdCIho
Steven Pinker & Nick Spencer https://youtu.be/Ssf5XN5o9q4
Derren Brown & Rev Richard Coles https://youtu.be/IxMLwQToAKo
John Lennox & Michael Ruse https://youtu.be/yrnXdzQRISM
Daniel Dennett & Keith Ward https://youtu.be/mongL_2KMGg
Peter Singer & Andy Bannister – https://youtu.be/JiM8ul3oRxE
The Big Conversation is produced by Premier in partnership with the Templeton Religion Trust
Videos, updates, exclusive content https://www.thebigconversation.show/
For weekly debates between Christians and sceptics subscribe to the Unbelievable? podcast https://www.premierchristianradio.com/unbelievable
Source
Any morality that fails to take evolution into account and isn't eugenic will end in catastrophy. Communism being the most obvious example.
We've also seen "what happens" when you base your morality on theocracy; it was, and is, an absolute human rights disaster.
The thing is that social darwinism is ignorant of Darwinism itself (Natural Selection). Evolution isn't a straight road as social darwinists claim; it's a tree with branches that are equally adapted to their respective condition.
Think of it like this: Humans are smarter than gorillas, but gorillas are damn well stronger. Does this mean one species is objectively superior to another?
CHRISTIAN VS STEVEN PINKER
So Steven Pinker is another name for Atheist???
The validity of a scientific theory is not in any way influenced by its utility in politics. The phrase "survival of the fittest" is not a way we should behave in society.
This isn't a response to this clip per se, more of a response to theists who argue against evolution by referencing Social Darwinism.
Nick Spencer’s comment on evolution and how it’s hard to reverse the effects of natural selection on behaviours and constructing an ethical system are off. The origins of a particular psychological mechanism and manifestations of it are two separate things. As Pinker has stated in The Better Angels, we may have violent and destructive impulses but that doesn’t mean they will necessarily manifest in behaviour. We use external things like institutions and laws to tame those impulses, along with internal ones like self-control.
For the full debate, more episodes and bonus clips sign up http://www.thebigconversation.show
Who are these guys? Biblical Creationists have dealt with these questions long ago.
Nick needs the learn the difference between evolution and culture. Culture is the groups coming together for common ground and benefit. It is also important to realize that evolution is responsible for many good impulses not just bad. So culture and morality is about regulating impulses not making up impulses out of thin air.
Does Nick know that his whole argument is just spin doctoring? Or does he really believe his own nonsensical diatribe?
Some thoughts for Steve. Never argue with a fool because They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. ?Richard Dawkins would have just told Nick how stupid his whole argument is.
(((Steven Pinker)))