...TWO KINDS OF MORAL ARGUMENTS CONCERNING THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (1) Theoretical moral arguments: Arguments that conclude that it is reasonable to believe that God exists because His existence is the best explanation for the existence, nature, and our knowledge of objective moral truths. Such arguments assume or try to defend the view that there are objective moral truths. (2) Practical moral arguments: Arguments that conclude that one ought to believe because of the moral value (intrinsic value, value to the believer and/or value to others) of believing that there is a God. We have already encountered this distinction in the readings by Lois Hope Walker and G.E. Moore. C. S. Lewis’s moral arguments are mostly of the theoretical kind. C. S. Lewis’s Main Argument Lewis’s Premise (1): Everyone knows, and so believes, that there are objective moral truths. Lewis: People blame, praise, and try influence things on the basis of the belief that certain things are really right and wrong – in some objective sense. And it really is obvious that, e.g., cruelty is wrong. Objection 1: Many people deny that there is any objective right or wrong. Lewis: They are always inconsistent in that they go on believing and asserting such that, e.g. some actions are unfair and that there is sometimes such a thing as the “objectively right side” in a war. Objection 2: Our sense of morality is just a “herd instinct” that has developed (perhaps by evolution). Lewis:...
Words: 1167 - Pages: 5
...Moral paralysis, according to Sehen, “she should have no confidence in her moral judgments; she should have no idea when to allow suffering and when not to allow it, and she should also be unwilling to make moral judgments concerning the actions of others. For example, if any of us knew that the Holocaust was going to happen ahead of time, we would warn people, help the Jewish people, anything to prevent the tragedy from occurring or lessen the outcome. But in the belief that God is all knowing and all powerful, God chose not to prevent this from happening. Why? Clearly, God knows something that all of us do not. That is the dilemma that we are faced with known as moral paralysis. We know that morally, these tragedies and events are wrong, but there is nothing that we could or should do about it because God does not prevent them from happening and if God is not willing to stop these tragedies from happening then there is a reason for this and surrender our notions because we believe in God’s word and guidance. One might question on the meaning of “good” in this case if we are to set aside our morals. Sehen replies to this argument stating, “If the goodness of God is to be judged by different, and unknown, standards, then the word “good” no longer has its ordinary meaning when applied to God, and theists...
Words: 1111 - Pages: 5
...Moral Arguments for the Existence of God Name Institution Date Introduction Moral arguments around the existence of God constitute a diverse group of arguments that reason from a certain angle of moral life or morality to God’s existence, with the general understanding of God as a morally good creator. It is important to note that moral arguments are interesting considering the fact that one has to give attention to all the philosophical issues that are handled under Metaethics in order to effectively evaluate the soundness of such arguments. On the other hand, they are important considering their dominance in famous apologetic arguments in support of religious belief. The connection that apparently exists between religion and morality tends to uphold the claim that there is need for a religious foundation that can define moral truths, or that such truths can be best elaborated by the existence of God, or some actions or qualities of God. This essay focuses on the various types of moral arguments, with the intention of drawing on the distinction between practical and theoretical or pragmatic moral arguments. As such, this paper asserts that from the moral perspective, mortal obligations constitute of rules that are imposed by a supreme being that can only be explained by a Godly figure. Moral Arguments for the Existence of God There are various moral arguments that have been established in support of the existence of God, some of which will be discussed in this section...
Words: 1511 - Pages: 7
...philosophers over many centuries. One of the arguments for God’s existence comes from the belief that the type of God that would exist is an all just and all-knowing supernatural being that has laid down objective moral laws for humans to follow. This is called the moral argument. In this paper I argue that the moral arguments does not stand against objections when trying to prove God’s existence. This paper has five parts beginning with a thorough outline and explanation of the moral argument (1). Next I will present four objections and the theists reply to them. First is that morality doesn’t depend on God’s existence only the belief in God (2). Second, that one cannot be truly...
Words: 1547 - Pages: 7
...Kant’s moral argument focuses on the notion that God must exist to provide structure to the moral universe. Technically he did not believe that is was possible to prove the existence of God through rational or empirical means. It is important to outline two key ideas before explaining the details of the moral argument. These ideas centre around his assumptions of the universe: that the universe was fair; and that the world around us is fundamentally rational. He begins with the unspoken assumption that the world is fair, owing to the dominance of the enlightenment belief that the universe was fundamentally knowable through reason. It is important to note that Kant began a new way of looking at knowledge. He believed that we could know the world through reason in a prior synthetic way. This was a complete change from how the world had been view previously and was known as Kant’s Copernican revolution. In essence Kant believed in two separate worlds of knowledge: noumenal and the phenomenal worlds. The noumenal world is the world as it truly is without being observed. It is fundamentally unknowable because the act of observation changes the very thing that we observe. It is as though human beings have a specific set of spectacles that cannot be taken off and like the proverbial rose tinted ones they change our perception of the world around us. This personalised view of the universe is the phenomenal world. However, what is key to explaining Kant’s moral argument is the fact that...
Words: 1159 - Pages: 5
...The moral argument for God’s existence depends on the belief in an objective, and absolute moral law, which has an absolute mind as its basis. If that is true, and there must be an absolute mind as the basis of moral law, that mind is God. It seems apparent that the moral argument begins and ends with the assumption that everyone must recognize and adhere to a universally accepted moral code, an ideal state of what is right and therefore, also the ability to determine what is wrong. In each instance where there is conflict or an argument between us about what is right and what is wrong, there has to be an attempt to look to a higher source (moral law), that we assume everyone is aware of and is beholden to (Miller, Jones p 287). There is...
Words: 265 - Pages: 2
...“On Health and Welfare, Moral Arguments Can Outweigh Economics” article was published on New York Times, the main idea of this articles is deserving and undeserving people regarding the government support. The issues surrounding welfare including health care insurance reform are contentious and difficult to resolve. The early form of welfare was specifically targeted aid to single women with children or people who could demonstrate a need and the ability to maintain minimal assets of their own. Even now, and after a long way of conflict, Congress continues to debate and reform programs. It still brings with it the same intensity, controversy, and conflicting opinion it did years ago. The poor have been always exanimated and categorized into...
Words: 635 - Pages: 3
...One strength of compatibilism is that it provides a basis for universal, enforceable laws; this strength is based on reason. The causes behind our choices are internal to the agent. Our choices flow from our desires and are not determined by any other factor. This gives us a certain degree of responsibility. I may choose to hit my friend Alex on the head and it seems fair that Alex will blame me for doing so. This argument also supports the argument for moral responsibility. To add further weight to the soft determinist argument, there is another reason used to support view that we are responsible for our choices. Without determinism, we could never be morally responsible because our choices would be random – they would be uncaused – and meaningless. Without free will and determinism, there could not be moral responsibility. Many people in today’s society...
Words: 669 - Pages: 3
...For years, many philosophers have been concerned with finding a criterion of moral rightness. Indeed, a core issue in moral philosophy involved identifying whether universally moral values existed or not. Accordingly, this essay will demonstrate that, although the relativist stance on the philosophical problem may seem quite compelling, the universalist one ultimately proves itself to be the most applicable and reasonable. In other words, moral universalism will win over cultural relativism inasmuch as the relativist will fail to provide compelling responses to the universalist’s objections, as this essay will further explain. However, to balance out the debate, I will additionally highlight the benefits that the relativist theory brings to...
Words: 1487 - Pages: 6
...On page 53 of MP, Barcalow says “Subjectivists say nothing is “really” right or wrong.” Meaning that whatever an individual believes in is considered true for said individual. A moral subjectivist thinks that moral belief of every person is considered true by them. However, this truth is subjective instead of objective; meaning that a moral subjectivist thinks there are no moral facts, no objective moral truths or moral standards that everyone can be held against. The first reason supporting moral subjectivism is the argument that moral beliefs are based on feelings. This argument says that since moral beliefs are based on feelings, rather than reason, and feelings, as they are subjective, cannot be judged as right or wrong. Hence, moral beliefs...
Words: 612 - Pages: 3
...Essay Ethics Essay 3a) i) examine the arguments for and against the view that morality is independent of religion? ii) To what extent are these arguments convincing I am going to examine the arguments for and against the view that morality is independent on religion, by examining the argument from both sides, then looking at their strengths and weaknesses and then I will conclude with my line of argument. The first argument I am going to examine is for the statement, which is Plato’s Euthyphro. Plato stated that “is something good because God says its good or does God say it is good because it is good”. This means that do we do good things because God says is good or do we do good things so than God says that it is good. Another argument I am going to examine, is for the statement, and it is an argument based on a group of people called Anti-Theists. They don’t believe in God, so they agree with the statement. However, Anti-Theists like Richard Dawkins say that anyone who believes in religion or in a god is an extremist and it clouds and distorts your view on morality. The next argument that I am going to examine is what some people in the world think, but it is based around Cultural Relativists, who say that if morality was decided for by God then he could say one day to murder somebody and it would be fine. This would then agree with the statement above. An argument I’m going to examine is The Devine Command Theory. This argument goes against the statement as it says...
Words: 697 - Pages: 3
...Kant’s moral argument focuses on the notion that God must exist to provide structure to the moral universe. Technically he did not believe that is was possible to prove the existence of God through rational or empirical means. It is important to outline two key ideas before explaining the details of the moral argument. These ideas centre around his assumptions of the universe: that the universe was fair; and that the world around us is fundamentally rational. He begins with the unspoken assumption that the world is fair, owing to the dominance of the enlightenment belief that the universe was fundamentally knowable through reason. It is important to note that Kant began a new way of looking at knowledge. He believed that we could know the world through reason in a prior synthetic way. This was a complete change from how the world had been view previously and was known as Kant’s Copernican revolution. In essence Kant believed in two separate worlds of knowledge: noumenal and the phenomenal worlds. The noumenal world is the world as it truly is without being observed. It is fundamentally unknowable because the act of observation changes the very thing that we observe. It is as though human beings have a specific set of spectacles that cannot be taken off and like the proverbial rose tinted ones they change our perception of the world around us. This personalised view of the universe is the phenomenal world. However, what is key to explaining Kant’s moral argument is the fact that...
Words: 2616 - Pages: 11
...particular view of non-cognitivism is mostly targeted by the wishful thinking argument. I will then outline the main problem brought up by the wishful thinking argument. I will then outline the expressionist’s responses to the wishful thinking argument using David Enoch and James Lenman’s solutions to the problem, and show the flaws in their arguments. Therefore I will come to the conclusion that the wishful thinking argument is a valid objection to non-cognitivism. Non-Cognitivism Non cognitivism is the objection to the claim the moral facts express belief. According to this view they are not either true or false, neither do the assert anything about the world. Seeing as moral facts cannot be seen as true and no one can have knowledge of something that is not true, non-cognitivism implies the moral knowledge is impossible. The three main forms of non-cognitivism are; prescriptivism, emotivism and expressivism. In this essay I will be addressing the problems found in the expressivism branch of non-cognitivism. Expressivism Expressivism is the view that sentences about moral facts are not to descriptive terms, and do not relate to the real world problems. They are used for expressing either positive or negative attitude towards the object of the sentence. The Wishful-thinking argument This is an argument that rejects non-cognitivism presented by Cian Dorr (2002). The outline of this argument is the fact that we can come to a conclusion about how the world is, based on our...
Words: 1686 - Pages: 7
...The paper should have four parts. 1) State your thesis clearly and summarize your argument for it. Your argument will almost certainly be made up of both ethical and empirical claims. For example, suppose you want to argue that “There should be a legal limit on the climate-affecting emissions individuals are allowed to produce through their lifestyle choices”. (This is just an example: again, you can write about whatever issue you care about.) This thesis is obviously an ethical claim: the second word is should. But to argue for it, you’ll need empirical claims too. For example, you might need to give your reader reason to think there’s a feasible way to enforce such a limit, etc. So, in this first section, you’ll give a brief statement of what you’re arguing for and the primary claims you’ll use to make the argument.The more concise and well-organized this section is, the more it will be like section 1 in an ‘A’ paper. 2) Use the second section to explain the ethical basis for your argument. The ethical basis for your argument is the moral reason to accept your thesis. (Of course, it might be moral reasons not moral reason; still, you should use fewer claims instead of more if at all possible.) If you want to argue that there should be a legal limit on emissions, the moral basis for your argument might take all kinds of different forms. You might ground your argument in standard utilitarianism: e.g. that enforcing such limits will produce more happiness than going without...
Words: 800 - Pages: 4
...Can one be Moral and not believe in God Tomeka Lynch PHI208 Jeffrey Porter 7/7/13 Abstract “A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hopes of reward after death ” (Albert Einstein) Religion is about beliefs and individual views that relate to what they believe is ethical/unethical, none of those state you are less moral if you are not religious, however I can understand how confusing this could be based on the teachings of the bible and some of the plagues and deaths that was brought about by Jesus/God. I personally like the quote from Einstein. From the time that man could think, the question has been asked “where do we come from”, “how did we get here”, and “is there a God”? The question of the existence of God has been a long time debate between believers and non-believers. There are only two logical answers to the question of Gods’ existence, either God does exist or God does not exist. This paper will explore the arguments for and against the existence of God as well as explain some of the arguments that are used to come to these conclusions. Theodicy arose from the attempts to answer the question of the existence of God. St. Anselm formed the first ontological argument and believed that -Ontological arguments are arguments, based on...
Words: 1743 - Pages: 7
