Darwinism and the Moral Argument for God

[_epiginosko]

I read an interesting, albeit a tad rambling, blog on the Huffington Post regarding the argument of Morality being a reflection of God vs social evolution:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-ruse/darwinism-and-the-moral-a_b_657119.html

I'm curious to know how many here believe that morality can only be attributed to a Divine Creator, or if anyone has any thoughts about the idea of morality as a socially evolved concept?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Hello,

I believe, in order to have a starting point, we would need to agree on what is, exactly, Morality?

For myself, Morality is necessity born out of practicality. The problem, then, is to agree on universal practicalities/necessities. This is virtually impossible ergo human Morality is a posteriori knowledge gained through individual need. In other words, what is good for the goose isn't necessarily good for the gander.

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

[Guest]

Ruse unfortunately isn't very clear about distinguishing two very different kinds of moral arguments.

The first kind argues that moral truth requires grounding in the existence of a God; moral truth exists; therefore God exists.

The second kind argues that because we have some sense of morality - a moral organ if you will - it follows that this is most reasonably explained by a designer.

The first kind of argument is the traditional moral argument for God. The second kind is a special kind of teleological argument.

Both arguments are widely believed by laymen while being widely viewed as discredited by professionals in the relevant fields.

Because Ruse isn't clear about clearing this up despite talking about both kinds of arguments, I think it's very easy to get lost in his essay unless you have some background to know what he is discussing. Evolution can do a lot to explain why we have a moral sense without explaining the nature of moral truth. We could have an evolved sense of morality without there being objective moral truths, for instance.

Yet another reason to not be a fan of Ruse.

[Guest]

It seems to me that the root of "morality" is a common mammalian trait; species which give live births, or carry their young in a marsupial sack, and feed their young with the production of milk. In many cases, there seems to be a genetic bond between the parent and offspring which makes the parent want to nurture and protect their young. I believe this is the root of what we call morality, and that our modern moral codes have socially evolved from that. It doesn't seem to me that God is a necessary part of this evolution.

Now that I think about it; the "protect and nurture" gene actually seems to pre-date mammals, as it can also be observed in most species of birds.

[_sethpayne]

I read an interesting, albeit a tad rambling, blog on the Huffington Post regarding the argument of Morality being a reflection of God vs social evolution:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-ruse/darwinism-and-the-moral-a_b_657119.html

I'm curious to know how many here believe that morality can only be attributed to a Divine Creator, or if anyone has any thoughts about the idea of morality as a socially evolved concept?

I am a theist. However, I do believe that morals and ethics can, and do exist separate from God. Essentially I believe that things (people, objects etc...) have value in themselves completely separate from how they were created.

http://www.sethpayne.com/?p=438

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Hello,

When a male lion comes into a pride, kills a rival's cubs, and procreates with his new harem is that moral? He is acting within his natural mandate.

When a polar bear commits infanticide in order to stave off starvation, is that moral? He is acting within his natural mandate.

When a human female aborts her fetus is she being immoral? What is her mandate?

I'm very serious when I ask, "What is morality?"

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

[_EAllusion]

I'm very serious when I ask, "What is morality?"

That's not a broad question or anything:

http://www.amazon.com/Blackwell-Ethical ... 063120119X

It's aging a bit, but it's still one of my favorite texts I've read on the subject.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I'm very serious when I ask, "What is morality?"

That's not a broad question or anything:

http://www.amazon.com/Blackwell-Ethical ... 063120119X

It's aging a bit, but it's still one of my favorite texts I've read on the subject.

Hello,

Interesting. I added it to my to-purchase list.

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4ME

[_Aristotle Smith]

I read an interesting, albeit a tad rambling, blog on the Huffington Post regarding the argument of Morality being a reflection of God vs social evolution:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-ruse/darwinism-and-the-moral-a_b_657119.html

I'm curious to know how many here believe that morality can only be attributed to a Divine Creator, or if anyone has any thoughts about the idea of morality as a socially evolved concept?

I am a theist. However, I do believe that morals and ethics can, and do exist separate from God. Essentially I believe that things (people, objects etc...) have value in themselves completely separate from how they were created.

http://www.sethpayne.com/?p=438

I used to think that too, now I'm not sure. The problem is that so much of atheistic morals and ethics ends up looking like Christianity with the embarrassing parts removed. To the extent that it doesn't look like that (such as the "ethics" of Peter Singer) it ends up not looking ethical to me.

So while I suppose in a purely theoretical sense ethics can be short of its theological baggage, it practice that theoretical ethics generally arises from a Christian culture.

Just to be clear I am only speaking about western ethical systems, I am utterly ignorant of eastern ethical systems.

[_Darth J]

I think that morality is perfectly compatible with



Oh.......

I seem to have misread the title of this thread. Whoops.