Q&A: An Argument for the Existence of God (or for Belief in Him?)
An Argument for the Existence of God (or for Belief in Him?)
Question
What does the Rabbi think of the following argument:
1. There is an obligation to act morally.
2. The existence of ethical values is possible only if God exists.
Therefore:
3. There is an ethical obligation to believe in God.
Answer
The conclusion is incorrect, and it also does not follow from the premises. The conclusion that does follow from them is:
3. Therefore God exists.
This is the moral argument, which was explained in The First Foundational Principle, Conversation 4, Part 3.
Discussion on Answer
I know what you were trying to do, and I wrote that you failed.
There is an ethical obligation to uphold the values of the aliens’ religion.
Upholding the values of the aliens’ religion is possible only if one believes in the aliens’ religion.
Therefore: there is an ethical obligation to believe in the aliens’ religion.
Here the conclusion does follow, doesn’t it?
No. It may be that there is no way to uphold that religion despite the obligation. For example, if in your view the facts it includes are not true.
Right, but I wasn’t trying to argue for the moral proof. I wasn’t trying to claim that God actually exists, only that there is an obligation to think that He does. Because if there is an obligation to be moral, and morality is possible only if God exists (say, if only religion can serve as a source for genuine social morality), then there is an obligation to believe in God, no?