The Moral Argument

1
The Moral Argument

• For the existence of God

2
As humans do we have a moral conscience or a
feeling of obligation?

• A child falls into a deep lake.
• No one else is around.
• Should you jump in and try to save her?
• You cant swim.

3

• The Moral Argument for the existence of God
  suggests that God is the best solution to the
  question as to why we feel that we should behave
  morally.

4

• Or put another way, if there were no God to
  judge, award places in heaven or punish then why
  would anyone act against their own self interest?

5
Break down of the argument

• Proposing
• Aquinas
• Kant
• Newman
• Owen
• Trethowan

• Opposing
• Freud
• Fletcher
• Dawkins

6
Aquinas

• NB Aquinas did not mention the term moral
  argument, but what he says seems to fit well.
• In his fourth way Aquinas argues that as humans
  we all experience things that are true, noble,
  good and valuable.
• These things must take their reality from things
  that are true, noble, good and valuable.
• Infinite regression is not possible and so there
  must be something which is the most true, noble,
  good and valuable.
• This is what we
  call God.

7
John Newman

• The reason we have a conscience is because God
  has given us this mechanism so that we know how
  to do good.
• If, as is the case, we feel responsibility, are
  ashamed, are frightened, at transgressing the
  voice of conscience, this implies that there is
  One to whom we are responsible, before whom we
  are ashamed, whose claim upon us we fear.
• Grammar of Assent (1870)

8
BUT many would disagree with this idea that there
are binding moral laws that can only be explained
by the existence of God

• Cultural relativism Right and wrong differs from
  one culture to another
• Emotivism When a person states that an act is
  wrong they are only expressing their own emotion
  or attitude
• Evolution Humans who are kind are more likely to
  survive. This characteristic is passed on
  genetically.

9
Immanuel Kant God is required for morality to
achieve its end

• Gods existence cannot be proved but is implied
  by our experience of morality
• Our experiences show that people feel obliged to
  act in virtuous and good manner
• True virtue should be rewarded by happiness
• Kant talks of the summum bonum (highest good)
• Ought implies can it must be possible to
  achieve the summum bonum if we are to feel
  obliged to reach it
• While humans can achieve virtue, they have no
  power to ensure that virtue coincides with
  happiness
• Thus there is a need to postulate the existence
  of God as a way of bringing virtue and happiness
  together
• This proportioning does not take place before
  death so there must be life after death

Much of this should be familiar from ethics
10
Criticisms of Kants Moral Argument

• According to Kant, ought implies can. If Kant
  means that it is possible to bring about the
  summum bonum logically then just because it is
  not a logical contradiction to accept this does
  not mean that it factually happens. If Kant meant
  that it does factually happen then we may ask
  why?.

11

• Why assume that only God can bring about the
  highest good?
• Brian Davies An Introduction to the Philosophy
  of Religion asks Why not a pantheon of angels?
  (1982, p96)

12

• Why assume that virtue must be rewarded with
  happiness?
• Sense of duty may be explained without reference
  to God. We may be socialised into a sense of
  duty

13
Is there an unconditional and objective moral law?
Why do we need to attain the summum bonum?
14
Freuds critique of Kants Moral Argument

• Our sense of moral duty is caused by the
  psychological conflict between our most basic
  desires and the controlling influences of society
  and our parents
• The subconscious part of the mind is called the
  super ego

15

• Freud said that our subconscious desires (such as
  sex and aggression) are very powerful and can be
  dangerous
• If unchecked, such behaviour would be ultimately
  self-destructive as it is incompatible with
  survival within society

16

• According to Freud, the role of the ego or
  conscious part of the mind is to control our
  desires within the limits placed on us by
  society.
• Restraining our desires causes tension, however,
  resulting in the creation of the super-ego.

17

• Rather than directing our aggression outwards
  towards others, the super-ego internalises it,
  reflecting it back upon ourselves
• This is the voice of conscience which restricts
  our behaviour and banishes our innermost desires
• It is also the source of guilt as our super-ego
  punishes us when our desires become too strong

18

• So Freud argued that what Kant thought of as an
  objective moral law is really generated by our
  minds as a result of the conflict between our
  deepest desires and society

19

• Freud also argued that our consciences are
  created by the rules of our parents.
• Parents are the first people to limit a childs
  behaviour.
• The standards and ideals of the parents are
  internalised by the super-ego.
• This undermines Kants idea of an objective
  moral law as the demands of our conscience are
  relative to the expectations of our parents.

20
Freud and the Oedipus Complex

• The conscience is linked with the parents
  relationship with the child and so will be
  influenced by the sexual trauma of the Oedipus
  complex.
• When a boy desires his mother sexually, the
  super-ego internalises the perceived anger of
  the father and the frustrated desires of the
  child.
• For Freud, this explains why feelings of guilt
  are so strongly felt with sexual desire.

21
Evaluation of Freud

• Agree there is no objective moral law -
  even those who claim that there is can sometimes
  allow exceptions.
• Kant says that the categorical imperative allows
  for no exceptions to the rules (e.g never lie).
• But others (e.g.WD Ross) allow some points to
  take precedence (such as the need to protect
  life)
• So there are exceptions to rules???

22

• Cultural relativists argue that the
  differences between groups and cultures show that
  there is no objective moral law morality is
  based on the expectations of a society. In a
  different context different rules will be
  enforced.

23
Freuds view of conscience can be criticised

• There are more likely explanations than the idea
  of an ego and super ego.
• For example, Erikson and Fromm suggest our moral
  awareness is based on a recognition that certain
  things should be protected because they are of
  value to us. Stealing may be classed as evil
  because we value our possessions. This shows that
  moral obligation may be formed by us on our own
  it is not just the result of other peoples
  expectations we have to apply our own reason.

24
Brian Davies criticises Kant

• Kant says ought implies can it is not logical
  to aim for something out of our reach.
• Davies disagrees. We might aim for something even
  though achieving it is unlikely

I am going to aim for an A grade a AS philosophy
25
Brian Davies also

• Even if the Summum Bonum implies the existence of
  God it does not prove it.
• Why cannot a top-ranking angel do the
  job?....why not a pantheon of very clever,
  Kantian-minded angels?