Moral Argument

Definition

The moral argument is a philosophical assertion that posits the existence of God as the best explanation for the presence of objective moral values and duties in the world. This argument suggests that if objective morality exists, then there must be a transcendent source, typically identified as God, who instills these moral truths. The moral argument connects ethics, human behavior, and the divine, asserting that without God, there would be no basis for absolute moral standards.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The moral argument has been articulated by various philosophers including Immanuel Kant and contemporary defenders like William Lane Craig.
2. It often operates on the premise that humans have an innate sense of right and wrong, suggesting a universal moral law accessible to all people.
3. Critics of the moral argument often argue that morality can be explained through secular means such as evolutionary biology or social contract theory.
4. The argument typically includes three main premises: if God does not exist, then objective moral values do not exist; objective moral values do exist; therefore, God must exist.
5. Discussions around the moral argument often engage with topics like ethics, human rights, and the implications of atheism on moral understanding.

Review Questions

• How does the moral argument establish a connection between God and objective moral values?
  • The moral argument connects God to objective moral values by asserting that if such values exist, they require a transcendent source for their authority. This means that if there are universal morals that apply to all humans regardless of context, then these morals must stem from a divine being who is the ultimate standard of goodness. The argument suggests that without God, morality would be subjective and contingent on individual or societal preferences.
• What are some common criticisms of the moral argument and how do they challenge its validity?
  • Common criticisms of the moral argument include the assertion that morality can be grounded in human nature, social contracts, or evolutionary processes rather than in a divine being. Critics argue that objective morals can emerge from human interactions and societal needs rather than necessitating God's existence. Additionally, some suggest that if morals were solely based on divine command, it could lead to morally questionable actions being deemed acceptable if they align with God's will.
• Evaluate how the acceptance or rejection of the moral argument impacts broader discussions about ethics and morality in society.
  • The acceptance of the moral argument suggests that ethical systems need a foundation rooted in a higher power, influencing debates around laws, human rights, and societal norms. If people believe in a divine source for morality, it can lead to stricter adherence to ethical codes aligned with religious teachings. Conversely, rejecting the moral argument often encourages secular ethical frameworks based on reason and human experience, prompting discussions about how societies can create moral systems without reliance on divine authority. This shift can influence policies, laws, and social justice movements.

Related terms

Objective Morality: The belief that certain moral principles are universally valid and not dependent on individual or cultural perspectives.

Moral Realism: The view that there are moral facts or truths that exist independently of our beliefs or perceptions about them.

Divine Command Theory: The ethical theory which asserts that what is morally right is determined by God's commands and that moral obligations arise from God's will.