Skip to main content

Recently, the issue (or non-issue) of "objective morality" has been the rage in religious discussions, thanks largely to the highly overrated Wm. Lane Craig. He uses it as an alleged proof of God.

Personally, I believe there is no such thing, nor should there be.

Regardless, from where do morals come? Are they a function of our evolved minds, or do they exist alone, or are they dictated by the gods?

Plato had no reason to know about evolution. Although it was discussed in his time, it was merely a matter of speculation. It was innocent of systematic information. It took Darwin to examine data toward a systematic explanation.

From Wiki: The Euthyphro dilemma is found in Plato's dialogue Euthyphro, in which Socrates asks Euthyphro: "Is the pious (τὸ ὅσιον) loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?" The dilemma has had a major impact upon the philosophical theism of the monotheistic religions, but in a modified form: "Is what is morally good commanded by God because it is morally good, or is it morally good because it is commanded by God?

Plato has a good point. If morality exists alone, and God must adhere to it, there is no reason for God when it comes to morality. We can bypass God and search for the root morality. Nonesuch has been identified.

If God dictates morality, then morality is fluid, and subject to God's whim. He can change his mind, and morality, as he pleases. The difference in Old Testament and New Testament morality is just one example of this. It lays waste, however, to the notion of objective morality.

So, from where comes morality?
--For at least 100,000 years, humans have pondered the stars. Do orangutans ponder them now?--
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Another one of Plato's dialogs may help. Meno and Socrates debate whether virtue (morality) is objective and, if so, can it be taught. Socrates' conclusion is that it is teachable in a way; only God can teach it, but we can help. He describes virtue as "right opinion" or "right belief", which is where we get the word "orthodoxy". It sounds a lot like religious faith.

It is very odd that on one hand you doubt objective morality, but on the other you used a universal standard of morality to judge the God of the Bible when you said:

"The nature of god, as revealed in the bible, is hardly something to emulate or revere... He sanctions genocide, filicide, incest, rape, racism, torture, and a host of other uglies of which you are aware."

If we are honest with ourselves, we know we all believe in objective morality. I've never heard a sane person argue that raping a child can be justified in any way whatsoever. It is always wrong. Regardless of time, place, or culture.
hahahahahaha!

I did.

Darn, I'm good.

To continue:
quote:
It is very odd that on one hand you doubt objective morality, but on the other you used a universal standard of morality to judge the God of the Bible when you said:

"The nature of god, as revealed in the bible, is hardly something to emulate or revere... He sanctions genocide, filicide, incest, rape, racism, torture, and a host of other uglies of which you are aware."

If we are honest with ourselves, we know we all believe in objective morality. I've never heard a sane person argue that raping a child can be justified in any way whatsoever. It is always wrong. Regardless of time, place, or culture.



Is my morality universal? Or is it merely human?

I'm honest with myself and you, and there is no unversal, objective morality, other than possibly the Golden Rule. Even that is suspect.

If there was a universal or objective morality, wouldn't it be found more often? Would it not be in place all around the world? Would it not be the default morality in the absence of all others?

There's no such thing. Honestly, if god was responsible for morality, wouldn't you think it would be more conspicuous?

This reminds me of "god-given rights". If there was any such thing, wouldn't more people around the world enjoy human rights?

There's no god-given morality and no god-given rights. The concept of human rights was invented in the Enlightenment and publicized by Thomas Paine.
You seem to be very confused by this whole morality thing.

Here is what you said in June:

quote:
I think I will agree with C.S. Lewis in his assessment that human morality is all essentially the same. That would make perfect sense in an evolutionary-psychological way. I'm no psychologist, but I know that evolutionary psychology is a valid subject and I've read a piece or two on it.

If this is the case, then there is "moral" and "immoral". Morality follows our innate morality, and immorality is when we disregard that innate morality. The Neo Nazis are immoral, in that they hate people they do not know, they're guilty of bigotry, they crave violence upon fellow humans, etc. These traits would not be conducive to the human solidarity and cooperation required for the common survival. The case is easily made, even if difficult to quantify, that the morals of the Neo-Nazis are inferior to that of America as a whole.


What have you done with with the BJBG we all know and love? Are you his evil twin? Oh yeah, right, there is no good or evil... his morally-confused twin?
I'm flattered that you are such a scholar of my writings.

I continue to think that evolutionary morality is the closest thing we have to objective morality, but that is a far different thing than the god-given morality of W. L. Craig. He believes god bestowed us morality by fiat.

Even if morality is subjective, and it is, there are greater and lesser moralities. We must make such judgments. We have no choice.

The Old Testament is chock-a-bloc full of atrocities endorsed or commanded by God. We discount them now. Why?

Morality?

It's surely not the morality of God, since he was responsible for those immoralities.

Jesus told his true followers to abandon their families. He cursed a fig tree for failing to bear fruit out of season. He dammed [sic] affluence and thrift, even for one's family's sake. But we discount these qualities of the man. Why?

Morality. Innate, human morality.

From wherever morality comes, it surely does not come from god.

By what morality do we pick and choose the actions of God? Surely not his.
Chuck,

Not only that, but morality is a huge subject. I do not claim to have the answers to its origins.

My writings are designed to foster discussion. I don't mind being contradictory or even vague. Even wrong. The subject is too complex to pigeonhole.

Only the religiously stupid would do that. For what it's worth, I do not put you into that category.

Plato discussed morality 2500 years ago, to an inconclusive end. Shall we do better here and now?

Not that it's impossible. We know more than Plato did about many things.
quote:
If we are honest with ourselves, we know we all believe in objective morality. I've never heard a sane person argue that raping a child can be justified in any way whatsoever. It is always wrong. Regardless of time, place, or culture.


I agree, Chuck, but the Bible, corrupted by the whims of men, certainly states that it is acceptable to invade the cities of God's enemies and take their virgins as wives and kill the rest including running babies through with swords and or bashing them upon the rocks according to the command of God Himself.

Unless, of course, those passages were written by men, for men, then it all makes sense and certainly can be taught as a lesson on how morality has evolved since those times.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×