Summary Of Science Can Answer Moral Questions By Sam Harris

What does it all mean?

In lecture one “The Study of Ethics”, it states philosophy is less about the answer and more about the question. Through these series of questions, I initially assumed that every answer held validity and is correct in its own right, which they can debatably be deemed as so. So it led me to ask ”what is the sense of questioning when there is no definite answer”. Then I found their use is to challenge ourselves, in the sense of checking our perspectives in the everyday encounters we face, along with recognizing our privilege, and expanding our moral parameters. I thought, without these self-evaluations we would essentially lose touch with our humanity. We could all possibly be operating to solely fulfill our vices with
Now, that comparison is a bit extreme, as their values obviously contrast on the spectrum of righteousness and rational, but what about the everyday person, who leads a relatively fair life, by societal standards. They go to work, they visit their family to celebrate the holidays, they have no spouse but they do have a dog named lucky, but they have goals that actually define their happiness, and they’re not necessarily motivated by helping the welfare of others. Are they living a less fulfilling life for not dedicating their existence to their family, a potential spouse, or even the strangers they pass on their way to work every morning? Are they as wrong as Ted Bundy for not being as “right” as the Dalai Lama? Often it seems we live in a black and white world, where our options are ultimately reduced to either being right or wrong, but most of us lead our lives in a shade of gray. Are we wrong for doing so as well? I mean, I doubt it, but then again it depends on one's values and philosophies on