What Moral Theory Does Craig Object To Grounding Morality Case Study
1. What moral theory does Craig attempt to defend?
1. If God exists, then we have a sound foundation for objective moral values and duties.
2. If God does not exist, then we do not have a sound foundation for objective moral values and duties.
Craig believes that if there is a God then we have a foundation for what should be considered right, and what should be considered wrong. But if there is no God, then we have nothing to base our morals off of.
2. What view of morality is held in common by both Craig and Harris?
They were not arguing on the topic of whether god exists or not. They were arguing about “There are objective moral values and duties.”
Neither of them is arguing on the topic of whether or not there is a God, but are …show more content…
Why does Craig object to grounding morality in the natural world?
Craig objects to grounding morality in the natural world because in the natural world it is more about survival of the fittest. Craig compares humans to animals, who only act on animal nature.
5. How does Harris define “Good” and why does Craig object to this definition?
Harris defines good as “that which supports the wellbeing of conscious creatures”. Craig see this definition as gives meaningless term to define “good” without any support
6. Why does Craig say natural science cannot give moral duties?
Craig points out that natural science is fact based and centered. Facts just are, facts are neither moral nor immoral.
7. Why does Craig say it makes no sense to say someone “ought” to do something on a naturalistic model?
The naturalistic model is not based on the morality. There is no moral standing for what “ought” to be done.
8. Harris says that belief in God is not necessary for a universal morality, and worse it can be a source of what?
Harris says that belief of GOD can be a source of a moral blindness
9. How does Harris answer the objection that science cannot speak to values?
Harris believes that science speaks to values by stating that science is to maximizing human …show more content…
What does Harris say is the minimal standard of moral goodness?
Harris says that the minimal standard of moral goodness is to avoid the worst possible misery for everyone.
11. What is Harris’ argument for moral truth in the context of science?
Harris argues that since we are able to think about good and evil, by use of our consciousness it is directly related to science.
12. What is the difference between Moral Ontology and Moral Semantics? foundation of objective moral values and duties, whereas Moral Semantics questions the meaning of moral terms.
13. Does Craig agree that religion is not necessary for a universal morality?
No, Craig argues that without religion there is no moral foundation to form any objective morals off of.
14. What does Craig accuse Harris of doing with respect to the word “good”?
He argues that he has not put forth the argument to prove that if atheism were true, there would be something objectively wrong with what a psychopath does.
15. What claim does Craig say Harris must defend, and why can’t it be defended?
Craig makes the claim that Dr. Harris wants to build a foundation for moral values and duties based off of independent human thinking. But Craig says that he cannot find one, because it turns into a game of “says
1. If God exists, then we have a sound foundation for objective moral values and duties.
2. If God does not exist, then we do not have a sound foundation for objective moral values and duties.
Craig believes that if there is a God then we have a foundation for what should be considered right, and what should be considered wrong. But if there is no God, then we have nothing to base our morals off of.
2. What view of morality is held in common by both Craig and Harris?
They were not arguing on the topic of whether god exists or not. They were arguing about “There are objective moral values and duties.”
Neither of them is arguing on the topic of whether or not there is a God, but are …show more content…
Why does Craig object to grounding morality in the natural world?
Craig objects to grounding morality in the natural world because in the natural world it is more about survival of the fittest. Craig compares humans to animals, who only act on animal nature.
5. How does Harris define “Good” and why does Craig object to this definition?
Harris defines good as “that which supports the wellbeing of conscious creatures”. Craig see this definition as gives meaningless term to define “good” without any support
6. Why does Craig say natural science cannot give moral duties?
Craig points out that natural science is fact based and centered. Facts just are, facts are neither moral nor immoral.
7. Why does Craig say it makes no sense to say someone “ought” to do something on a naturalistic model?
The naturalistic model is not based on the morality. There is no moral standing for what “ought” to be done.
8. Harris says that belief in God is not necessary for a universal morality, and worse it can be a source of what?
Harris says that belief of GOD can be a source of a moral blindness
9. How does Harris answer the objection that science cannot speak to values?
Harris believes that science speaks to values by stating that science is to maximizing human …show more content…
What does Harris say is the minimal standard of moral goodness?
Harris says that the minimal standard of moral goodness is to avoid the worst possible misery for everyone.
11. What is Harris’ argument for moral truth in the context of science?
Harris argues that since we are able to think about good and evil, by use of our consciousness it is directly related to science.
12. What is the difference between Moral Ontology and Moral Semantics? foundation of objective moral values and duties, whereas Moral Semantics questions the meaning of moral terms.
13. Does Craig agree that religion is not necessary for a universal morality?
No, Craig argues that without religion there is no moral foundation to form any objective morals off of.
14. What does Craig accuse Harris of doing with respect to the word “good”?
He argues that he has not put forth the argument to prove that if atheism were true, there would be something objectively wrong with what a psychopath does.
15. What claim does Craig say Harris must defend, and why can’t it be defended?
Craig makes the claim that Dr. Harris wants to build a foundation for moral values and duties based off of independent human thinking. But Craig says that he cannot find one, because it turns into a game of “says