PhilRel - notes - day07-moral1

PhilRel - notes - day07-moral1 - Craig's Moral Argument for...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Craig's Moral Argument for God's Existence 1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist. 2. Objective moral values do exist. 3. Therefore, God exists. Moral standards Standards for the moral evaluation of persons, of their intentions, of their characters, of their actions. Etiquette and taste and convention vs. morality Objectively correct moral standards Not what everyone actually thinks. Rather, what a person would think if her beliefs were true. A few points to keep in mind The claim that there are objectively correct moral standards does not imply that there is universal agreement about moral questions. that our moral beliefs are not socially and culturally conditioned. that we should be intolerant of people who disagree with us. that we should blame people who grew up believing something different from us. That there are no exceptions to moral rules. The claim is only that some moral standards are objectively correct. Some hard questions If there are objective moral standards, How can we know what they are? Why is there so much disagreement about morality? What makes moral claims objectively true? Craig focuses on is issue. He thinks that God's existence and commands somehow makes moral claims true. Why does it matter if there is no God? How does that undermine morality? "... if there is no God, what's so special about human beings? They're just accidental byproducts of nature that have evolved relatively recently on an infinitesimal speck of dust lost somewhere in a hostile and mindless universe and that are doomed to perish individually and collectively in a short time." (18) The idea seems to be that if there is no God, then human life lacks the kind of value that makes it wrong for us to treat each other badly. Why? What makes human life valuable? Is it what we are? Or is it how we came into being? Another line of argument: God as Supreme LawGiver Moral laws, like civil ones, require a lawmaker. This suggests a simple version of the Divine Command Theory of morality Moral standards are created by God's commands. They hold because, and only because, God says so. The Euthyphro dilemma Does God command it because it is right? Or is it right because God commands it? Moral Values and Principles God is subject to an independent moral standard. GOD God commands it because it is right. GOD A simple Divine Command Theory of morality Moral Values and Principles It is right only because God commands it. What if God commanded cruelty? Would that make it right? Surely not. But then the Divine Command Theory is false. A more careful statement of the objection 1. If the Divine Command Theory is true, then there is a possible situation in which cruelty would not be wrong viz., one in which God commands it. 2. There is no possible situation in which cruelty is not wrong. 3. Therefore, the Divine Command Theory is false. Possible responses 1. Reject premise 1, on the grounds that God could not command cruelty. 2. "Bite the bullet" and deny premise 2, simply admitting that God could make cruelty right by commanding it. ...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 02/28/2008 for the course PHIL 1600 taught by Professor Wesleymorriston during the Fall '07 term at Colorado.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online