Ep. 395 Should the Trump Administration Give Due Process to Illegal Immigrants?
Adam Haman returns, this time discussing with Bob the controversy over sending accused gang members to an El Salvador prison. Should they be given due process? Adam and Bob then discuss the is/ought distinction from ethics.
Mentioned in the Episode and Other Links of Interest:
- The YouTube version of this conversation.
- Glenn Greenwald on due process.
- The HamanNature substack.
- Help support the Bob Murphy Show.
About the author, Robert
Christian and economist, Chief Economist at infineo, and Senior Fellow with the Mises Institute.
Atheist Adam defending objective morality while Christian Bob makes the case against it was not expected – though Bob did fall into the trap of thinking that God can somehow bridge the gap. Even given a Christian God existing, morality is still subjective. You are just preferring to agree with God’s subjective preferences over some other set.
The script flip mentioned around the problem of evil does not really work. When you ask “What standard are you even using to say that evil exists?” the answer is obvious – God’s own standard as stated by his believers, that we are adopting as a premise to the argument.
I don’t know if the idea of god’s subjective preferences makes sense.
The idea of claiming something becomes objective just because God tells you to do it is what makes no sense.
Objective means able to be determined by independent observers. If God says murder is wrong, I cannot independently determine this. I can only take his word for it (or not).
If god is the source of all reality no independent verification is necessary to determine whether his preferences describe reality.
But I agree that human interpretations of god’s preferences are subjective.
That’s simply not what the word “objective” means.
If God declared that vanilla was preferable to chocolate, but you still preferred chocolate to vanilla, it would not be an objective fact that vanilla was preferable and that you were somehow wrong.
Atheist Adam defending objective morality while Christian Bob makes the case against it was not expected
Can you remind me of the time stamps where I made the case against objective morality?
It starts around 48 mins where you describe the is-ought distinction and you never really go on to say any of these arguments are invalid. You only say that God somehow bridges this gap without further explaining why you think so.
We aim to keep y’all guessing! The work is mysterious and important.
these MS-16 accused gang members are from El Salvador. Where else should they go?
Maybe some of them are, but absolutely not for the ones we are discussing.