Naturalism, Theism, and Moral Ontology: A Reply to William Lane Craig

Naturalism, Theism, and Moral Ontology: A Reply to William Lane Craig April 29, 2016

(Reposting since this seems to be so popular. So far as I am aware, neither WLC nor anyone else has responded to this.)

Abstract: This paper considers William Lane Craig’s metaethical argument for God’s existence. Roughly, the argument is that the existence of objective moral values provides strong evidence for God’s existence. I consider one by one Craig’s various reasons in support of the argument’s major premise, namely, that objective moral values and the nonexistence of God are at odds with each other. I show that Craig’s supporting arguments play fast and loose with the meaning of objectivity, and that they have no force whatsoever. I conclude that Craig’s argument does not succeed in showing that the existence of objective moral values, by itself, makes God’s existence more probable than not.

Related Posts:

 Recommended Posts from Other Sites:

Recommended Debates:

"Would you like to address the natural law argument against homosexuality? That doesn't invoke scripture. ..."

Leviticus and Homosexuality – Part 10: ..."
"One view is that Leviticus proscribes male-male incest where male-female incest is proscribed.Also that it ..."

Leviticus and Homosexuality – Part 10: ..."
"Okay, well clarification may be good anyway."

(DRAFT) C.S. Lewis’s Moral Argument for ..."
"Michael, Lewis really does call the non-theistic view the "materialist" view. That is his label, ..."

(DRAFT) C.S. Lewis’s Moral Argument for ..."

Browse Our Archives