Skip to content

The Rationality of Theism 8: The Moral Argument


I’m still working on investigating all of the claims here, but the moral argument seems to suffer from a few key flaws.

1. It assumes that there are objective moral values “floating out there” like souls, which has not been established.There is rarely argument for this assertion, outside of saying that our moral intuitions provide us with “properly basic” beliefs, or by intuition pumping- “So you’re saying that Hitler wasn’t absolutely wrong?” Of course we all don’t like Hitler, so any sort of nuance would be seen as a failure of character. Boo to intuition pumping here.

2. Even if there are objective moral values, God fails to ground them.Again, there is no real argument showing how God can be the foundation of values outside of saying things like “moral values flow naturally from a theistic universe.” Euthyphro does well as a first answer. The argument that goodness in based in God’s character pushes the question back. Is there something more basic that makes God’s character good, or are actions good because they are based in God’s character? The argument that this idea of “good” is arbitrary still stands. God could murder a billion people, and this would be “good” by nature.

I’m still figuring out how to best put this. It gets mixed up the deeper it gets, but I think the case can be made fairly clearly with some practice.
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: