Do right and wrong exist?

Posted on May 29, 2016 by Dave Alexander (formerly ukuleledave)

The word wrong only exists if we have some kind of morality — and for that, you need God. Of course, you need God for a lot of other things, too.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Do right and wrong exist?

  1. The Isaiah 53:5 Project says:
    May 29, 2016 at 4:12 pm

    Thanks for sharing this

    Like

    Reply
  2. Former Commenter says:
    May 29, 2016 at 9:06 pm

    God’s holiness is the pivot point for all behavior; moral law is but a limited expression of that holiness. Any unholy behavior is an offence to a holy God, but when we devalue holiness we lose the ability to evaluate behavior in light of His holiness. It’s way beyond any notion of mere right or wrong.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply
  3. AJ Fornicarius Hoc says:
    May 31, 2016 at 7:53 am

    Sorry, but neither logic nor objectivity are strong suits with the original author. This is actually a glorified feldtchart, because only answers that lead to the result desired by the author appear.

    To a non believer, it appears that you’re saying that only the fear of punishment makes a rule worth obeying, and I don’t see how a sane person could really believe that. There are all sorts of consequences that entail from bad decisions and evil behavior without anyone else taking action to punish the miscreant. In Christianity, at least, punishment (and reward) from God is held for the afterlife; this is generally invoked when a person asks why a loving God would allow pedophiles to exist, much less evade lightning strikes. Or why babies get cancer. If God is not to blame for the bad things that happen, He is clearly not to be credited, much less praised, for the good. The entity responsible for pediatric brain cancer and conjoined twins and pedophiles is not fit to set a moral code for others.

    Like

    Reply
    • one handle and stick to it says:
      May 31, 2016 at 10:53 am

      As a fellow religious skeptic, I think AJ’s made a reasonable criticism.

      Disclosure: I first heard the “flowchart-argument” when I was a new Christian and read CS Lewis’s “Mere Christianity” 30 years ago. At the time, the logic seemed to me obviously right. Then I became a religious skeptic. Then Lewis’s argument no longer seemed to me obviously right. I have a philosophically-minded Christian friend, and we’ve been over this argument in all sorts of ways for 25 years(!). I sense that *both* sides are missing something vital about the *other* sides’ point of view/perspective…but I don’t know what this missing je ne se quois is yet! lol

      Nowadays, I tend to look at a “meta-question” about the flowchart-argument: “How come absolutists think non-absolutists are making an OBVIOUS mistake in logic? And how come non-absolutists think absolutists are making an OBVIOUS mistake in their assumptions about so-called “relativism”?” (For an example of a non-absolutist who thinks the flowchart-argument makes an obvious mistake, see Stanley Fish’s essay ‘Postmodern Warfare’ from 2002 in Harper’s Magazine.) The best guy I know who’s trying to be an “honest broker” on helping each side understand the other is Simon Blackburn in his little book called “Truth: A Primer.” It’s a dense read, but IMHO helpful in places. 🙂

      Like

      Reply
      • AJ Fornicarius Hoc says:
        May 31, 2016 at 12:59 pm

        It occurs to me that saying the existence and error of Nazi Germany prove that morality is necessarily inspired by the Divine, is about the same as saying the existence of the Lada proves that BMWs are Divinely inspired. That we can do wrong is not, to me, proof that only a deity can decide what is right.

        Like

  4. agiledog says:
    May 31, 2016 at 10:39 am

    The other major flaw with these feldcharts is that they only allow for “objective moral facts” to come from government, society, or God. I believe this is wrong – just as our inalienable rights, (our “natural rights”) are bestowed upon us by our “simple” existence as free people, we, those same free, responsible, self-aware, intelligent free people, observe that are “natural moral facts” – things that are right or wrong regardless of who does them or what some people thing.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a comment