What We Do In Every

All I'm Arguing For Really Is That We Should Have A Conversation Where The Best Ideas Really Thrive, Where There's No Taboo Against Criticizing Bad Ideas, And Where Everyone Who Shows Up, In Order To Get Their Ideas Entertained, Has To Meet Some Obvious Burdens Of Intellectual Rigor And Self-criticism And Honesty-and When People Fail To Do That, We Are Free To Stop Listening To Them. What Religion Has Had Up Until This Moment Is A Different Set Of Rules That Apply Only To It, Which Is You Have To Respect My Religious Certainty Even Though I'm Telling You I Arrived At It Irrationally.

We Can Either Have A Twenty-first-century Conversation About Morality And The Human Well-being - A Conversation In Which We Avail Ourselves Of All Scientific Insights And Philosophical Arguments That Have Accumulated In The Last Two Thousand Years Of Human Discourse - Or We Can Confine Ourselves To A First-century Conversation As It Is Preserved In The Bible.

Science Has Long Been In The Value Business. Despite A Widespread Belief To The Contrary, Scientific Validity Is Not The Result Of Scientists Abstaining From Making Value Judgments; Rather, Scientific Validity Is The Result Of Scientists Making Their Best Efforts To Value Principles Of Reasoning That Link Their Beliefs To Reality, Through Reliable Chains Of Evidence And Argument.

What Would Our World Be Like If We Ceased To Worry About 'right' And 'wrong,' Or 'good' And 'evil,' And Simply Acted So As To Maximize Well-being, Our Own And That Of Others? Would We Lose Anything Important?

Although Many Things Can Be Said In Criticism Of Religious Faith, There Is No Discounting Its Power. Millions Among Us, Even Now, Are Quite Willing To Die For Our Unjustified Beliefs, And Millions More, It Seems, Are Willing To Kill For Them.