Exploring the Foundations of Morality: What is the role of a god? Part 1
Tuesday, September 18th, 2007 at 11:25 am
Originally uploaded by Wan Hung Lo
This topic has been on my mind a lot lately, especially as it seems to be key to religious people’s hatred of atheism; that is that without god defining for us what is right and wrong, society would degenerate into wanton rape and murder. This argument just seems silly to me at face value, but I’ve been exploring lots of different arguments, and here are some interesting quotes, and various references I’ve come across.
I’m not a student of Philosophy, but I’m a voracious consumer of information. I’m not really drawing conclusions, just sharing ideas and comments on them. Anyway, here is the first part:
Plato’s Euthyphro argument against morality as a thing defined by god is summed up in this passage:
“Where there is holiness (god) there must also be justice (morals), and where justice (morals) is present, holiness (god) may be absent.”
If god were to say murder is right we would still understand that murder is wrong, and therefore god would be wrong. It is explained here in greater detail, and also Thomas Aquinas’ counter argument that “God’s perfect nature explains morality”. Plato’s argument is also explained by Colin McGinn in Jonathan Miller’s “The Atheism Tapes”.
So, Plato says god CANNOT define morals and Aquinas argues that god CAN define morals, but not that god MUST define morals as far as I understand it. I haven’t read Aquinas myself, so if anyone can educate me otherwise regarding his argument for including god in the foundation of morals, please do.
September 22nd, 2007 at 6:29 pm
Aquinas’ view is the moral truths are necessary truths in the same way that the truths of mathematics and logic are necessary. But he also thinks they depend on God. The laws of logic, mathematics, and morality all have their foundation in God’s nature. God doesn’t choose them, as some versions of divine command theory have it. But it’s also not completely independent from God, as the usual alternative position has it. It’s thus a moderating view between those two extremes. Morality is explained by God but not simply by God’s choice, will, or commands.
Now the question you started out with is completely different. That’s not about what makes morality true. It’s about whether people who happen to be religious will have a different (or a similar) sort of life as people who happen not to be. You might well think that God’s nature explains morality or even that God’s will or commands explain why moral truths are true, yet without thinking someone must be religious or even a theist at all to follow the correct moral code. It entirely depends on what the correct morality is. If the correct morality involves a moral obligation to follow God, then atheists of course fail in that key requirement. But if there is no such obligation, then atheists may well be very moral people. Someone can hold to either view while thinking God is the explanation of moral truth.
September 22nd, 2007 at 7:42 pm
Thanks, after reading that and then RE-reading your post, I’ve got a little better handle on Aquinas there…
I don’t think I was arguing about whether atheists or theists have a different type of life or a different moral code, but whether or not the absence of god allows for a moral capacity in man…
September 22nd, 2007 at 9:50 pm
Even on the last point, I think you could mean two things. You could be looking at whether the non-existence of God allows for a moral capacity by providing a ground for morality. On the other hand, you could ask whether (presuming theism) those who don’t follow God have genuinely moral capacities. For instance, Augustine didn’t think anyone naturally can be a moral person but needs God’s help to act out of proper motivations, which put God as the most important priority. But he did think people without God in their life can do things that we call moral, e.g. saving people’s lives, telling the truth, and so on. He just didn’t think the moral element is present unless God is genuinely at work in the person’s heart. I think it’s worth being clear that that issue is not the same one as whether God is the actual ground of morality or whether morality is independent of God’s existence, nature, and/or will.