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
    Under naturalism, evolution is an unguided process select... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Metaphysical naturalists face serious difficulty providing a plausible evolutionary account of how human moral judgments could have epistemological warrant

    Under naturalism, evolution is an unguided process selecting for survival-enhancing traits

    Natural TheologyProblem of Evil
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    Natural TheologyProblem of Evil

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge2 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Natural Theology
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Metaphysical naturalists face serious difficulty providing a plausible evolution...There is no mechanism under naturalism that would reliably align survival-tracki...

    Similar

    Under metaphysical naturalism, the evolutionary process is unguided88%If metaphysical naturalism is false, the evolutionary process need not...85%Street's evolutionary debunking argument against moral realism depends...78%Rejecting metaphysical naturalism provides a viable path for moral rea...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: moral-arguments-god
    View source passageHide passage
    Street’s argument has also been challenged by such critics as Russ Shafer-Landau (2012). However, her argument, and similar arguments, have been acknowledged by some moral realists, such as David Enoch (2011) and Erik Wielenberg (2014) to pose a significant problem for their view. Enoch, for example, even though he offers a response to Street’s argument, evidently has some worries about the strength of his reply. Wielenberg, to avoid the criticism that in a non-theistic universe it would be extr

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective