A question about the moral argument for the existence of God
Hello Rabbi, I have a question regarding the argument from morality. The side that favors the existence of God claims that an objective point of reference in reality is needed for morality to be objective and not subjective. What if I come and argue that just as logic is objective and exists in reality, so too does morality operate in the same way. For example, the moral law “It is forbidden to harm others for one’s own pleasure” can be argued to exist like other logical laws that exist, such as the law of non-contradiction, and that these objective moral laws, in contrast to logical ones, also oblige us (because otherwise it is not morality…).
Thank you in advance.
I discussed this in a conversation with David Enoch, who himself brought up this analogy. I replied to him that the principles of logic do not exist anywhere in reality. They are just ways of describing connections and relationships between concepts and claims. I have written here more than once about the fact that the concept of ‘law’ is used with a different meaning in science and law compared to logic. See also column 456, which describes the debate. See also column 457. I think I made a delicate point there regarding moral laws, which on the one hand are a priori and do not depend on reality and could not be different (even God is subject to them), but without it they have no validity. See ibid.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
