Q&A: The Proof from Morality
The Proof from Morality
Question
In the fourth booklet, you present a proof that there is a dependence between the claims “moral judgment has meaning” and “God exists.” It seems that only two possibilities were raised that would allow for the existence of morality: subjective morality and morality that is (let’s call it) “divine.” I think there is a third possibility that would also allow moral judgment to have meaning. It could be that there is a fixed system of laws, perhaps even an ancient one, and morality is determined according to it, and based on it one can judge what the moral act is. I don’t think one must necessarily say that a god created this system of laws… Or did you mean that it has no binding force upon us if it was not created by God?
Answer
Indeed. The fact that there are laws does not mean that I will obey them or that I am obligated to obey them. That is the naturalistic fallacy. Beyond that, even if such laws exist, there is still room to ask who or what created them. And even if they are ancient, I explained that there is the principle of sufficient reason.
The question is also why you give it validity. Theoretically, you could ask this about God too. But if it’s some arbitrary book, that sounds to most people less convincing than God.