Podcast Episode Summary

Podcast: LSE: Public Lectures and Events
Episode: With Good Reason – a debate on the foundations of ethics
Date: December 6, 2012
Host/Chair: Jonathan Derbyshire

Overview: Main Theme and Purpose

This episode brings together a diverse panel—Angus Ritchie (priest and theologian), Julian Baggini (philosopher and atheist), and Mark Vernon (agnostic writer)—to debate the fundamental question: What are the foundations of ethics? Specifically, the panel considers whether ethical truths (moral realism) are best explained by theism, whether secular alternatives suffice, and how these questions intersect with morality’s public role and everyday practice.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Angus Ritchie: The Moral Realist & Theist Explanation

(04:27–13:53)

• Moral Realism: Ritchie argues that in practice, humans act as moral realists, operating as though moral truths exist independently of opinion or culture.
• Atheism's Explanatory Challenge: He contends that atheism cannot satisfactorily explain why humans are able to know objective moral truths, since evolutionary advantages do not align with moral truth (e.g., protecting the vulnerable isn't always adaptive).
• Theism as Explanation: Theism, he suggests, offers a robust account: humans can perceive moral truths because they (and the world) are created with a loving purpose, allowing harmony between moral faculties and moral reality.
• Key Quote:

  “We all behave like moral realists. We may or may not defend the position... but we all act as if there's something we're trying to get right.” (05:44, Ritchie)

2. Julian Baggini: Secular Perspectives & Critique of Moral Realism

(14:03–21:46)

• Questioning Moral Realism: Baggini challenges the binary between moral realism and mere preference, suggesting morality includes objective, factual aspects (like suffering) without entailing real truths akin to scientific facts.
• Empathy and Reason: He claims that empathy and rational consistency are enough for morality to get traction in the world, and sees no need for religious metaphysics to explain moral motivation.
• Design Argument Flaws: He critiques the “designed for morality” argument by pointing out human moral failings and the slow development of ethical insight even under theism.
• Public Square: Baggini emphasizes the importance of justifying moral positions using language and reasons all citizens can debate, regardless of religious background.
• Key Quote:

  “I struggle to see why this dichotomy is so appealing... You can fully accept there’s plenty of objective, factual stuff involved in morality without them being like scientific truths.” (15:15, Baggini)

3. Mark Vernon: Moral Imagination, Virtue Ethics, and Transcendence

(21:50–31:55)

• Moral Imagination: Vernon proposes a broader view, focusing on the kind of people we are becoming, not just right and wrong acts—looking at moral energy rather than certainty.
• Objective Good & Virtue Ethics: He draws on the tradition of virtue ethics and moral imagination to suggest that goodness draws us toward itself; moral emotions, not just rationality, play a foundational role.
• Transcendence and Tradition: He observes that religious traditions are more comfortable embracing transcendence, the sense that goodness is beyond us, and integrating moral formation, mistakes, and beauty.
• Key Quote:

  “We’re drawn towards [goodness] because it promises a fuller flourishing of what it is to be human.” (24:07, Vernon)

4. The Place of Religion in Public Ethical Discourse

(31:55–39:09)

• Ritchie: Religious people can and should offer rational arguments for their ethical beliefs. “Apologetic” arguments help religious views be taken seriously in the public square.
• Baggini: In public debate, meta-ethics (“backstory”) is less relevant than practical, negotiable reasons accessible to all.

5. Moral Language: Tracking Truth vs. Imagination

(39:09–43:09)

• Imagination and Emotion as Resources: All agree that morality encompasses imagination and emotions, shaped by literature, film, and the arts, and that using only logical argument “misses the point.”
• Key Agreement:

  “Moral philosophy, actually, I think a lot is done through fiction and literature. All that’s true, and...we don’t have to divide on whether we believe in God or not.” (41:47, Baggini)

6. Meta-Ethics and Everyday Morality

(43:09–47:53)

• Theory vs. Practice: While few act from moral theory, bad theories can justify evil; most everyday moral action is habitual, not theoretical. Reflection and practical wisdom (the Greek phronesis) are crucial.

7. Evolution, Progress, and Moral Diversity

(60:13–66:17)

• Evolution of Morality: The panel discusses whether evolving morality supports realism or relativism.

  • Ritchie: Moral progress is evidence for objective reality; we critique past and future generations.
  • Baggini: Moral beliefs shift with social and factual understanding, but neither realism nor anti-realism has a monopoly on progress.

• Are Some People More Moral Than Others?

  • Vernon and Ritchie: Yes—moral exemplars exist, and storytelling captures their complexity.

8. The Challenge of Motivation

(69:47–73:36)

• Secular Motivation: Baggini responds that “Why be moral?” can’t always be answered by further argument—eventually, it grounds in empathic response and socialization.
• Ritchie: Moral claims exert a “binding” force; the nature of that claim is what’s in dispute.

9. The Tragic Dimension and Hope

(85:05–87:21)

• Moral Tragedy: Ordinary decency is easy to understand, hard to live. Human weakness, societal temptation, and tragedy (the Coen Brothers’ films cited) reveal why morality is a continual challenge, not merely a matter of theory.

• Key Quote:

  “Moral decency is something which is much less complicated than moral theory, but much more difficult to live than we might think.” (87:21, Baggini)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments (with Timestamps)

• On our commitment to moral realism:

  “We all behave like moral realists. We may or may not defend the position... but we all act as if there's something we're trying to get right.” (05:44, Ritchie)

• On secular objectivity in morality:

  “Suffering is real... Morality gets going from objective elements—empathy and consistency—but not the same as scientific truths.” (16:55, Baggini)

• Design argument skepticism:

  “If our moral faculties were so well-designed, you’d expect us to get things right a bit more.” (18:45, Baggini)

• Imagination and transcendence in morality:

  “What’s objective points beyond our own immediate concerns... The good draws us as much as we pursue the good.” (24:07, Vernon)

• On relating theory and practice:

  “You need kind of a bad moral theory to be truly bad a lot of the time, I think.” (46:20, Baggini)

• On humility and faith:

  “If you think you’ve got it [all]... you’re worshipping an idol… God calls everything into question.” (57:04, Vernon)

Selected Timestamps for Key Segments

• 04:27 – Ritchie opens with summary argument for moral realism and theistic explanation
• 14:03 – Baggini responds, critiquing moral realism and defending secular moral objectivity
• 21:50 – Vernon introduces moral imagination and virtue ethics
• 31:55 – Public square: metaphysics vs. practice
• 39:09 – Moral language: “tracking truth” vs. imagination and emotion
• 60:13 – Q&A: evolution, progress, and the implications for morality
• 69:47 – Q&A: What is the reason for being moral without God?
• 85:05 – Q&A: The tragic element in ordinary morality

Conclusion

Consensus and Tension:
All agree morality engages with objective structures (whether facts, suffering, or traditions). Disagreement centers on whether this demands a metaphysical foundation (theism), or if secular reason, empathy, and imagination suffice.
The interplay of rationality, emotion, culture, and transcendence—and humility about our limited grasp of the good—remain central to the debate.

Ending thought:

“Moral decency is much more difficult to live than we might think.” (87:21, Baggini)

For further engagement:

• Angus Ritchie’s From Goodness to God: Why Religion Makes Sense of Our Moral Commitments and its longer version From Morality to Metaphysics (OUP)
• Theos Think Tank
• LSE Public Events Series

Hashtags: #LSethics

[Summary by LSE Film and Audio Team podcast summarizer. For more public lectures and events, visit the LSE website.]