Atheist Revolution

Another Problem with Rooting Morality in God

Posted: 09 Jun 2009 03:33 AM PDT

Regardless of their favored argument for believing in their particular god, many Christians seem particularly fond of criticizing atheists on moral grounds. Such Christians often believe that all atheists seek the complete eradication of their religion and are likely to oppose this primarily on moral grounds. Specifically, such Christians claim that moral order is somehow dependent upon their god, or at least upon continued belief in their god. Of course, making such a claim requires them to dismiss or simply ignore evidence that predominately secular societies are not necessarily dysfunctional, but we can set that aside for now to examine an often neglected counterargument. As we will see, insisting that morality comes from their god creates an important philosophical problem for Christians.

Most of you are at least somewhat familiar with Plato and Socrates, even if only by name. Students of Western philosophy may even recall Euthyphro's dilemma from Plato's dialog Euthyphro. Plato presents the following dialog between Socrates and Euthyphro where Socrates is trying to understand a critical implication of that has become a central plank in the contemporary Christian worldview:

Socrates: And what do you say of piety, Euthyphro? Is not piety, according to your definition, loved by all the gods?

Euthyphro: Certainly.

Socrates: Because it is pious or holy, or for some other reason?

Euthyphro: No, that is the reason.

Socrates: It is loved because it is holy, not holy because it is loved?

In essence, Euthyphro's dilemma is this: Is something good simply because god(s) say so, or does god(s) say something is good because of some other quality?

Using Euthyphro's dilemma as a starting point, Bertrand Russell presents us with the following in Why I Am Not a Christian and Other Essays on Religion and Related Subjects:

If you are quite sure there is a difference between right and wrong, you are then in this situation: Is that difference due to God's fiat or is it not? If it is due to God's fiat, then for God Himself there is no difference between right and wrong, and it is no longer a significant statement to say that God is good. If you are going to say, as theologians do, that God is good, you must then say that right and wrong have some meaning which is independent of God's fiat, because God's fiats are good and not good independently of the mere fact that he made them. If you are going to say that, you will then have to say that it is not only through God that right and wrong came into being, but that they are in their essence logically anterior to God.

Add this to the many difficulties involved in the common Christian claim that human morality is somehow rooted in their particular god.

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Acknowledging Some Good Christians

Posted: 08 Jun 2009 03:16 PM PDT

Image via Wikipedia

Many of us often lament how few Christian moderates speak out against Christian extremism. When one comes along who is willing to do just that, recognition is due. Thus, I would like to credit Dwight KcKissic, pastor of Cornerstone Baptist Church in Arlington, TX, for stepping up to denounce Wiley Drake, our most recent Idiot of the Week, for praying for the death of President Obama. McKissic has also called on Southern Baptist leaders to do the same.

I would also like to commend former reproductive rights opponent, Frank Schaeffer, for taking responsibility and apologizing for his role in contributing to the murder of Dr. George Tiller. Schaeffer acknowledges his role in helping to create the milieu of hate which fosters violence toward those who practice reproductive medicine.

I'm not holding my breath for Fox "News" to follow Schaeffer's example, but I will certainly give them credit if they do so.

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

RWANDAN ATHEIST

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Atheist Revolution

Atheist Revolution

0 comments:

Blog Archive