Atheistic Moral Realism – Part 4

Here, once again, is William Craig's MOVE (Moral Objective Values Exist) Argument:1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist. 2. Objective moral values do exist. Therefore: 3. God exists.I am considering one possible objection, namely rejection of, or doubt about, premise (1). Atheists who are inclined towards moral realism or belief in objective moral values will be inclined to challenge premise (1) rather than premise (2).Craig raises three objections to what … [Read more...]

Atheistic Moral Realism – Part 3

William Craig's MOVE argument is simple:1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.2. Objective moral values do exist.Therefore:3.  God exists.One obvious atheistic objection would be to reject or cast doubt on premise (2).  If one rejects or doubts that objective moral values exist, then this argument will fail to be persuasive.Another possible objection is to reject or cast doubt upon premise (1).  Some atheists accept moral realism, and thus believe t … [Read more...]

Alex Rosenberg’s 2012 Argument for Nihilism

wlEmoticon-smile.png

  In his 2012 book, The Atheist’s Guide to Reality, Alex Rosenberg defends an argument for nihilism.[1] In this article I want to evaluate his argument. Definitions Before we turn to his argument, we first need to understand how Rosenberg defines his terms. Let us begin with the word “scientism.” In his own words, Rosenberg defines “scientism” as follows. But we’ll call the worldview that all us atheists (and even some agnostics) share “scientism.” This is the conviction that [1] the … [Read more...]

Atheist Ethicist on Evolution and Morality

The Atheist Ethicist has been writing a nice series on morality and evolutionary ethics. Posts (so far) include: “Evolution Accounts for Morality?” “Concerning Evolution and Morality” “Evolution and Two Conceptions of Morality” “Evolution, Morality, and Objective Values” “The ‘Necessity’ of an Evolved Moral Sense” “Evolution, Altruism, and Morality” “Evolved Sentiments and Moral Content” “The Immorality of ‘An Evolutionary Basis for Morality’” “Evolution and ‘D … [Read more...]

Thoughts about Plantinga’s Interesting Paper on “Naturalism, Theism, Obligation, and Supervenience”

I’ve been studying Plantinga’s very interesting paper, “Naturalism, Theism, Obligation, and Supervenience.” (See here for Ex-Apologist’s very brief post about it.) Plantinga’s stated goal is to show that metaphysical naturalism cannot accommodate realism about moral obligation by "displaying the failure of the most natural way of arguing" that metaphysical naturalism can accommodate moral realism, viz., supervenience. There are many things about this paper which I find interesting … [Read more...]

AdamHazzard’s Quick Parable Comparing Atheistic and Divine Command Theoretic Metaethics

I just read this in the combox on Randal Rauser’s blog. An atheist and a divine-command theorist are approached by someone who says to them, "God is telling me to kill my child. Am I crazy?"The atheist doesn't hesitate. "Yes! You need to seek help immediately!"While the divine-command theorist shuffles his feet and says, "Well, that depends. Is your name Abraham?" Is this parable a fair representation of divine command theory?ETA: I’ve posted this because I like the parable. It see … [Read more...]

Herman Phillipse on God, Ethics, and Evolution

[Read more...]

Humanism for Children: A Reply to William Lane Craig

William Lane Craig is right. There has been "a resurgence of interest in arguments for God's existence."  So-called "new atheists" aside, what he fails to mention is that there has also been a resurgence of interest in arguments against God's existence by philosophers like J.L. Schellenberg, Quentin Smith, Paul Draper, Stephen Maitzen, Michael Martin, and many others.Indeed, Craig's biased, selective summary of recent work in philosophy of religion, like many of the arguments for God's … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X