Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    A successful moral argument for God's existence requires ... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    A successful moral argument for God's existence requires both defending the objectivity of morality and demonstrating that theism best explains that objectivity.

    Natural Theology
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The proponent of a moral argument must defend the reality and objectivity of the moral feature being appealed to.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The proponent must also defend the claim that this moral feature is best explained by God.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Demonstrating the strength of a theistic explanation may require pointing out weaknesses in rival secular explanations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moral objectivity can be established on purely naturalist grounds (e.g., Railton's reductive naturalism, Parfit's non-naturalism) without invoking theism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If secular accounts adequately ground moral objectivity, the theistic explanation becomes explanatorily idle, violating Ockham's Razor.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A successful moral argument therefore requires not merely pointing out weaknesses in rivals, but showing theism adds irreducible explanatory power—a burden rarely met.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The Euthyphro dilemma, formalized by Plato and revived by Mackie, shows divine command theory renders morality either arbitrary or independent of God.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If moral facts are independent of God's will, theism explains nothing about their objectivity that a secular Platonism does not already explain more parsimoniously.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The two-part requirement collapses because demonstrating moral objectivity actively undermines the necessity of the theistic explanatory step.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Natural Theology

    Related

    A successful moral argument therefore requires not merely pointing out weaknesse...Both components are essential to the moral argument.Demonstrating the strength of a theistic explanation may require pointing out we...If moral facts are independent of God's will, theism explains nothing about thei...
    +6 moreShow less
    If secular accounts adequately ground moral objectivity, the theistic explanatio...Moral objectivity can be established on purely naturalist grounds (e.g., Railton...The Euthyphro dilemma, formalized by Plato and revived by Mackie, shows divine c...The proponent must also defend the claim that this moral feature is best explain...The proponent of a moral argument must defend the reality and objectivity of the...The two-part requirement collapses because demonstrating moral objectivity activ...

    Similar

    The proponent of a moral argument must defend the reality and objectiv...85%Only after establishing moral realism can the theist argue that morali...84%An argument for God's existence can be constructed from moral obligati...82%The moral argument for God's existence is not obviously question-beggi...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: moral-arguments-god
    View source passageHide passage
    It is easy to see then that the proponent of a moral argument has a complex task: She must defend the reality and objectivity of the feature of morality appealed to, but also defend the claim that this feature can be best explained by God. The second part of the task may require not only demonstrating the strengths of a theistic explanation, but pointing out weaknesses in rival secular explanations as well. Both parts of the task are essential, but it is worth noting that the two components cann
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit