A recent post about the Euthyphro dilemma has generated quite a bit of discussion, and has left me wondering about a particular aspect of this philosophical puzzle. It is quite common for Christians to argue that God is the only possible basis for objective morality. That seems, however, to be the opposite of Plato’s assumption in writing the dialogue, since there the issue of divine subjectivity on the part of multiple disagreeing deities arises.
I wonder if in many contemporary discussions of this topic online, there isn’t a hidden assumption that positing a single monotheistic God, defined as a necessary being, makes that entity’s morality “objective.” But I personally don’t understand why that should be the case, and think that in fact those who claim this are using “objective” in a very different sense than anyone else.
What do readers think? Does the existence of God provide a basis for viewing morality as something objective rather than subjective? If so, how?
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In