Preview

What Moral Theory Does Craig Object To Grounding Morality Case Study

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
756 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
What Moral Theory Does Craig Object To Grounding Morality Case Study
1. What moral theory does Craig attempt to defend?
1. If God exists, then we have a sound foundation for objective moral values and duties.
2. If God does not exist, then we do not have a sound foundation for objective moral values and duties.

Craig believes that if there is a God then we have a foundation for what should be considered right, and what should be considered wrong. But if there is no God, then we have nothing to base our morals off of.

2. What view of morality is held in common by both Craig and Harris?
They were not arguing on the topic of whether god exists or not. They were arguing about “There are objective moral values and duties.”

Neither of them is arguing on the topic of whether or not there is a God, but are
…show more content…
Why does Craig object to grounding morality in the natural world?
Craig objects to grounding morality in the natural world because in the natural world it is more about survival of the fittest. Craig compares humans to animals, who only act on animal nature.

5. How does Harris define “Good” and why does Craig object to this definition?
Harris defines good as “that which supports the wellbeing of conscious creatures”. Craig see this definition as gives meaningless term to define “good” without any support

6. Why does Craig say natural science cannot give moral duties?
Craig points out that natural science is fact based and centered. Facts just are, facts are neither moral nor immoral.

7. Why does Craig say it makes no sense to say someone “ought” to do something on a naturalistic model?
The naturalistic model is not based on the morality. There is no moral standing for what “ought” to be done.

8. Harris says that belief in God is not necessary for a universal morality, and worse it can be a source of what?
Harris says that belief of GOD can be a source of a moral blindness

9. How does Harris answer the objection that science cannot speak to values?
Harris believes that science speaks to values by stating that science is to maximizing human
…show more content…
What does Harris say is the minimal standard of moral goodness?
Harris says that the minimal standard of moral goodness is to avoid the worst possible misery for everyone.

11. What is Harris’ argument for moral truth in the context of science?
Harris argues that since we are able to think about good and evil, by use of our consciousness it is directly related to science.

12. What is the difference between Moral Ontology and Moral Semantics? foundation of objective moral values and duties, whereas Moral Semantics questions the meaning of moral terms.

13. Does Craig agree that religion is not necessary for a universal morality?
No, Craig argues that without religion there is no moral foundation to form any objective morals off of.

14. What does Craig accuse Harris of doing with respect to the word “good”?
He argues that he has not put forth the argument to prove that if atheism were true, there would be something objectively wrong with what a psychopath does.

15. What claim does Craig say Harris must defend, and why can’t it be defended?
Craig makes the claim that Dr. Harris wants to build a foundation for moral values and duties based off of independent human thinking. But Craig says that he cannot find one, because it turns into a game of “says

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Clifford argues that actions cannot be separated from belief, therefore any belief held without adequate evidence caries the potential for morally blameworthy consequences.…

    • 566 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    On April 4, 2009 at Biola University, there was a debate regarding the existence of God between William Lane Craig and Christopher Hitchens. This debate was very interesting because both philosophers felt strongly about their opinion. William Lane Craig was first to speak and discussed his side of the debate very clearly. Craig stated that he believed in religion and philosophy. He also made it lucid that he believes that there are no good arguments that atheism is true, but there are a myriad of arguments that prove that theism is true.…

    • 453 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Argumentative Essay on “The Ethics of Belief” PHIL 2641 Online – Section 001 February 13, 2008…

    • 779 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Though, if God does not exist, theists will enjoy fixed happiness, while atheists will too enjoy fixed happiness. In this situation too theists will still in a way have it better because of the comforts of religion. Religion brings it followers a sense of belonging, comfort, happiness, and brings people together. With religion though, one is restricted in certain activities that an atheist could partake in. With atheism or agnosticism you aren’t rewarded in a sense with these benefits that religion brings. Pascal basically says that it is wrong to be an atheist as there is not possible chance to win the prize in the end. Therefore it is rational to believe in…

    • 1565 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    IV. Lewis expounds on the Christian dogma and answers some of man’s questions about God. (47-59)…

    • 930 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    William Lane Craig argues in Reasonable Faith that, if life ends in a grave, that it does not matter whether someone has been a good or bad person because one’s “destiny” is not related to how a person behaves, thus someone has no motivation to live life as a good person. McCloskey argues that not believing in a God is more comforting when someone you love or yourself is going through a hard time or is suffering from a terrible disease. Rather than believing in a God who is purposely allowing the person to suffer through whatever they are going…

    • 1490 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    2. What reasons does Peter Singer give for his view that ‘differences between humans and animals’ are irrelevant to considerations of the moral ‘equality for animals’?…

    • 993 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    2. Moral concepts can’t be formed by abstraction from any empirical knowledge or, therefore, from anything contingent.…

    • 570 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Apol 104 Worldview

    • 562 Words
    • 3 Pages

    4. Morality – The Christian worldview defines what is right and wrong “based upon God’s holy standard” (Weider, L. & Gutierrez, B., 2011). We were given Ten Commandments that we are to obey. The Bible is filled with examples of how we are to conduct ourselves. We are to strive to be Christ like. (John 13:34) (Romans 2:15) 55…

    • 562 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Sam Harris believes he has identified a fatal flaw in contemporary thinking about morals and human values. For Harris, we are suffering from an epidemic of moral relativism, wherein most people, including secular academics, feel as though science and values are destined to belong to separate realms of thinking; science in the objective, morality stuck in the subjective. This notion of questions of morality not having right or wrong answers is seen as dangerous, Harris argues there are real answers to life 's most important questions, and these answers can promote human flourishing much more than our accepted pattern of ignorance. The general claim made is that there are empirical facts to be known about the connection between values and…

    • 1965 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Kants Moral Argument

    • 454 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Point 4, Therefore seeing saw we cannot there must be a rational moral being who has the power to bring moral worth and happiness together.…

    • 454 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Moral Truth

    • 522 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In the chapter on moral truth, Harris explains moral truth with the use of science. He states in the book “science can, in Principe, help us understand what we should do, and should want-and, therefore, what other people should do and want in order to live the best lives possible. “In other words, He believes that like science, there are right and wrong answers to moral truth. He then explains that science should help us answer moral questions. His other idea is that science is based on our best guess of what it is and moral truth is the same. Moral truth is also just our best guess of what is right and wrong. Harris is trying to say that moral truth, like science, can have a framework in which we believe is correct, but can always change.…

    • 522 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Objective Morality

    • 3369 Words
    • 14 Pages

    My purpose in writing this is to argue for the existence of an objective morality based entirely on rational and scientific reasoning. By "objective morality" I do not simply mean that morality exists in the sense that various societies consider various actions to be immoral. What I mean is that certain actions are inherently right or wrong regardless of what any society thinks about them. In other words, I mean that there is an "objective morality" which exists independently of human beliefs and human civilization. There are many people who have the opinion that it is not possible to believe in such an objective morality without also believing in concepts such as God or an eternal soul. I believe that they are wrong. I will attempt to show that an objective morality exists and that this morality is the same regardless of which religion, if any, is correct.…

    • 3369 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    “Science contributes moral as well as material blessings to the world. Its great moral contribution is objective, or the scientific point of view. The means doubting everything except facts; it means hewing to the facts, lets the chips fall where they may.” (163)…

    • 506 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Sartre Existentialism

    • 600 Words
    • 3 Pages

    21) The consequences of this are that life and values are stripped of their a priori meaning. With the absence of god all possibility of finding values in a heaven of ideas disappears along with him. "Nowhere is it written that we must be honest, that we must not lie…," (22) or that man must be anything besides what he wills himself to be. What strips life of it's a priori meaning and causes man to be forlorn is that everything is permissible if God does not exist… because neither within him nor without does he find anything to cling to" (22). Without the existence of God man loses the ability to make excuses for himself and is condemned to the responsibility of his own…

    • 600 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays