J.P. Moreland’s 1993 Moral Argument for Theism

J.P. Moreland argues that traditional theism is the best explanation for the truth of ethical nonnaturalism in the broad sense, a correspondence theory of moral truth, and the falsity of ethical egoism.[1]Definitionsnon-natural property: an attribute that is not a scientific, physical characteristic of physics or chemistry (e.g., being a C fiber, having negative charge, being magnetic).[2]Moreland's Argument FormulatedWe may represent Moreland’s argument with the following s … [Read more...]

What are the Social, Political, and Moral Implications of Atheism?

This is the subject of debate in the combox at Victor Reppert's blog, Dangerous Idea.LINK … [Read more...]

Richard Carrier’s Does the Christian Theism Advocated by J. P. Moreland Provide a Better Reason to be Moral than Secular Humanism?

Carrier refutes Moreland's claim that theism offers more and better reasons to live a moral life than atheism or secular humanism.LINK … [Read more...]

Wes Morriston’s The Moral Obligations of Reasonable Non-Believers: A special problem for divine command metaethics

The fact that many people do not believe that there is a God creates an obvious problem for divine command metaethics. They have moral obligations, and are often enough aware of having them. Yet it is not easy to think of such persons as "hearing" divine commands. This makes it hard to see how a divine command theory can offer a completely general account of the nature of moral obligation. The present paper takes a close look at this issue as it emerges in the context of the most recent version … [Read more...]

Wes Morriston’s God and the Ontological Foundation of Morality

Ouch! LINK … [Read more...]

Theism, Atheism, and Metaethics

In response to my comments on "Atheist Ethicist: Theism, Atheism, and Blame," Keith Parsons rightfully pointed out an error and an inconsistency in my comments where I had denied that theism has metaethical implications. As is often (if not always) the case in philosophy, a lot of this depends on terminology. And although I responded in the combox on that post, I realized that the issue really warrants its own post.Philosophy of Religion TerminologyLet me begin by rehearsing some terminology, … [Read more...]

Atheist Ethicist: Theism, Atheism, and Blame

This is an old post, but worth linking to now regardless. Alonzo Fyfe at the Atheist Ethicist makes this important point.If you take “atheism” and its counter-part “theism” NEITHER of these are a source of violence or evil. You cannot draw any moral implications from the statement, “It is not the case that at least one God exists” just as you cannot draw any moral implication from the statement, “It is the case that at least one God exists.” They are both behaviorally, morally, and practical … [Read more...]

(ex-apologist) A Euthyphro to Craig’s Argument Against Atheist Significance, Meaning, and Purpose

LINKI noticed this argument and found it worth sharing: 1. Either (a) the purposes God sets for our lives are significant because God wills them, or (b) God wills them because they're significant.2. If (a), then what counts as a significant life is arbitrary.3. If (b), then what counts as a significant life is independent of God---------------4. Therefore, what counts as a significant life is either arbitrary or independent of God. … [Read more...]