In one of my classes this morning a group presented on William Lane Craig and one of the arguments he used in a debate with Pigliucci. The argument goes as follows:
1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist
2. Objective values do exist
3. Therefore, God exists
I think this may help us when considering how we know what goodness is or even if God is good. It is true that language encapsulates an idea and when considering such a hard topic language becomes a hindrance, but if we know God’s nature then it does not matter how we tie it into our language.
The model above can be altered slightly (in terms of defining objective moral values):
1. If God does not exist, the distinction between good and evil does not exist
2. The distinction between good and evil exists
3. Therefore, God exists
But we are not arguing whether God exists; rather, we wish to know whether God is good. But as Lewis points out, we love and worship God because he is good. So if God exists, why can’t we simply assume he is good? Calvin’s sensus divinitatus, or sense of divinity, may be enough proof of God’s existence—we have within us a sense that God exists. In a similar way, we have within us a sense that God is good. Does it matter then how we define good? We know God cares for us and loves us, just as we love and worship him, so why is that not enough?
Regardless, the models above show that we have within us a sense of right and wrong, a sense of what is good and what is evil. This proves God’s existence, for if God did not exist we would not see a distinction between good and evil. Also, we are made in God’s image. This means that we have will and intellect—in other words, God made us in his image with will and intellect because his intention for us is to know his Truth, or at least part of it. These senses within us—these beliefs that we have which have no obvious basis or reasoning behind them—prove God’s existence. But more than that, I believe they show that God is good. And even if we do not define good in the same way as God does because his judgment is far better than ours, we should remember that language is a gift from God. Although language is unable to fully encapsulate the meaning we feel, there is no reason to believe that God would trick us or lead us astray by creating within us this sense that he is good. As Lewis points out, we only see a shadow of God’s goodness so we do not fully comprehend everything, but this shadow allows us to know God is good.
-Holly
2 comments:
Do you not see that the very premise of Craig's argument is flawed? Why exactly is it the case that if god doesn't exist then objective moral values do not exist?
Plato's dialog, the Euthyphro, makes an excellent argument that there is no connection whatsoever between gods and morality, even if gods existed.
Also, just for the sake of discussion, one could challenge Craig on his second premise as well: how does he know that "objective values do exist"? According to whom, based on what evidence?
Timothy Keller's The Reason for God addresses the reasoning behind objective moral values. Objective moral values exist because we all have a sense of what is right and what is wrong. One may argue that there are culturally-based moral beliefs, but if we accept that then there is no basis for comparing moral beliefs of different cultures. Then how can we explain that if one culture, for example, believes it is morally right to abuse women to keep them in their place, that we still disagree with such a notion? We all have inherent dignity and it is wrong to violate the equal dignity of other human beings (Michael J. Perry).
So objective moral values do exist. But they exist because someone had to be the judge of what was right and what was wrong. According to Arthur Leff, if there is no God, then all moral statements are arbitrary and internal--there can be no external moral standard. But obviously there are moral standards that span across different cultures. So there must be an origin of moral objective values, and this origin is God. Otherwise, if God did not exist, then there has to be some other source for objective moral values and the evidence for a source other than God is overwhelmingly small.
Post a Comment