In 2009 I participated in a symposium, “Toward a Common
Morality,” held at the United Nations Building in New York, that reflected the growing
interest among scientists and philosophers in showing that science—particularly
neuroscience—provides a foundation, not only for understanding morality, but
also for improving it. In this essay I shall examine three books that are part
of this trend: Experiments in Ethics, by Kwame Anthony Appiah; The Moral
Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values, by Sam Harris; and
Braintrust: What Neuroscience Tells Us about Morality, by Patricia S.
Churchland. These three books put forward quite different perspectives about
the relationship between science and morality, which suggests that neuroscience
has nothing to add to our understanding of morality as a code of conduct that
everyone should follow. However, neuroscience may help explain why some people
behave as they do in situations that call for moral decisions or judgments.
In 2009 I participated in a symposium, “Toward a Common
Morality,” held at the United Nations Building in New York, that reflected the growing
interest among scientists and philosophers in showing that science—particularly
neuroscience—provides a foundation, not only for understanding morality, but
also for improving it. In this essay I shall examine three books that are part
of this trend: Experiments in Ethics, by Kwame Anthony Appiah; The Moral
Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values, by Sam Harris; and
Braintrust: What Neuroscience Tells Us about Morality, by Patricia S.
Churchland. These three books put forward quite different perspectives about
the relationship between science and morality, which suggests that neuroscience
has nothing to add to our understanding of morality as a code of conduct that
everyone should follow. However, neuroscience may help explain why some people
behave as they do in situations that call for moral decisions or judgments.