Why the moral argument fails

by Guest Sat Jul 29, 2017 12:23 pm

Of all the arguments for the existence of God, there is one argument (or one style of argument) that I have never had any sympathy with and never understood why anyone has any sympathy with, and that is the moral argument. It seems to me and has pretty much always seemed to me (at least as long as I have reflected on the issue) that the claim that moral phenomena depend for their existence on God is pretty clearly false. I want to emphasize that this is not just an intuitive reaction, it is a considered judgement. The idea that God is somehow the foundation of moral reality strikes me as one of the strangest, not to mention most unfortunate, ideas that humans have ever come up with.

By “moral argument” I mean to include any argument that involves any claim that some aspect of moral phenomena depends on God, or any inductive argument to the effect that some aspect of moral phenomena makes it more likely that God exists. Of course, there are many types of moral argument, and, limited as I am, I cannot hope to have exhaustive knowledge of every version of every argument that falls under the umbrella of “the moral argument.” What I can say is that I have never come across anything that falls under that umbrella that has seemed remotely convincing. But lest this become merely an exercise in Jason expressing uninteresting biographical facts about himself, I will try to explain what is so unconvincing about the moral argument.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/secularoutpost/2017/07/27/moral-argument-fails/

Plenty more to read on the link

by veya_victaous Sun Jul 30, 2017 3:01 am

Yet ironically many atheist use the fact they can counter the moral argument as their primary reason for atheism (they even use this when no moral argument is being presented)

clearly an enlightened scientifically minded individual would see that the moral argument being a fallacious argument with no basis in reality to being with, cannot define the existence or non existence of a divine aspect in reality.

by Guest Sun Jul 30, 2017 4:51 am

veya_victaous wrote:Yet ironically many atheist use the fact they can counter the moral argument as their primary reason for atheism (they even use this when no moral argument is being presented)

clearly an enlightened scientifically minded individual would see that the moral argument being a fallacious argument with no basis in reality to being with, cannot define the existence or non existence of a divine aspect in reality.

Incorrect.

Most atheists are open to the reality they could be wrong. Yet have the ability to challenge views.
Religiosity, does not allow for this

by Sponsored content

Why the moral argument fails

Why the moral argument fails

Re: Why the moral argument fails

Re: Why the moral argument fails

Re: Why the moral argument fails