[ Reposting from Friday. ]

I know you are a seasoned apologist but wondered if you will be using Hume’s is-ought fallacy, and Harris’ appreciation of correspondence theory, to question Harris on what his real ought corresponds to in reality, since humans are imperfect.

Here are a couple links that explain the connection between Hume’s is-ought and Plato’s justified-true, and another one resolving the Euthyphro Dilemma:
1. Hume’s is-ought, Plato’s true-justified, Euthyphro’s dilemma and Gettier’s problem
2. Is-ought fallacy and justified, true belief
3. Natural law, divine command and Euthyphro’s dilemma resolved (using Hume’s is-ought distinction)

Here is a Philosophers’ Carnival I did on Harris’ Landscape when it was released back in October:
Philosophers’ Carnival CXV

Here are two links to where I show that the Golden Rule encompasses all the major theories in Ethics: Moral Truth Litmus and Appendix G:  Synthesizing Golden Rule Variations and Competing Ethical Theories.  In sum, how we should ‘be’ (virtue theory), what we should ‘do’ (conduct theory), the ultimate ‘end’ (consequentialism) is Golden Rule love: treat the Other as self (self=Other).

I have many more related articles and of course can explain my thoughts if you have any questions. I just bought a couple of your books (saw your debate with Dawkins) so, not having read them yet, I don’t know if you already know all of this. You are probably bombarded by many, many messages like this one.  But, if you have time, any feedback you offer would be sincerely appreciated.

So looking forward to the debate. Do you know of a live-streaming link in advance? I haven’t been able to find one. Blessings! :)