Instigator / Pro
0
1525
rating
23
debates
58.7%
won
Topic
#5169
The existence of a objective morality may very well disprove god
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After not so many votes...
It's a tie!
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- One day
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
0
1500
rating
9
debates
33.33%
won
Description
Presuppositions: An objective morality.
Pro's burden of proof since he is making the claim
Con's job is to rebut pro's arguments.
Round 1
So I will make this simply and concise, but first I thank my opponent for this debate.
Euphythro
Simply put ill pose a question to my opponent;
Does god say things are good simply because they are inherently good?
Or are things good simply because god says they are good.
There is a dilemma here, if you appeal to the first option then good & bad transcends god, and is god even god if something is above him?
Well you may appeal to the 2nd option but this makes some issues as well. If you choose this then morality simply put is blurred, since god could simply order something we see as immoral (say murder) as good then it'd be good, not saying that's too big of a issue just quite interesting since morality doesn't appear to work that way. And 2nd (the biggest objection to answer b) is that it means god choose good & bad arbitrarily, which raises question to god's all-wise, all-rational character.
a fascinating argument by my opponent, but here is the thing you have given me two options only, my sir is called FALSE DILEMMA FANTASY, it is indeed incorrect to assume that the god says things are good simply because they are inherently good. Or are things good simply because god says they are good?
I will add a bit of dimension here, neither of these ideas is correct, things are wrong because they are wrong.
Here comes the big ideas, in most religions and ideas of god, he is a figure that has already made this world and written its destiny. In that sense, this argument I am writing is also pre-defined by god, the idea of objective mortality does not defy god because of the very simple idea that god has made and pre-defined the world like a computer program.
WHY WOULD GOD WANT BAD THINGS FOR US
This is a very interesting idea, I will add another dimension to my opponent and that is god is not a figure that only wants good for us, if we assume that god is a figure that uses us for his entertainment and nothing else then the idea of objective mortality doesn't defy the existence of god at all, because god has made that situation already. another interesting aspect that we can add is that we accurately cannot depict god or what god exactly means. this idea adds a lot of dimensions to your previously made argument and henceforth you have only selected two aspects.
ANOTHER INTERESTING ASPECT
What if I put the argument that god is a programmer and we all are a program, that doesn't defy the idea that god created us but simply changes the perspective and idea of perception of god doesn't it? if god is a programmer and we all are a program then this all is pre-defined. and in this case, another interesting aspect opens and that is objective morality is true and is in the way it is expected to be but it is the god that has pre-defined the situation that helps objective morality to take place in the very first first place.
THE NORMAL PERCEPTION OF GOD
If we go over the very normal and accepted vision of god then still it doesn't defy god, here is a reason why. there are various forms of god and in all fairness, almost all of them tell us that things are wrong in the way that god tells us that they are wrong. but here is another idea nowhere in the entire religious text of any religion it is said that god had told them what is right and what is wrong, things are right and wrong for the sake of god, and things are wrong because they are meant to be wrong and god doesn't define what is wrong because again all the records of god are handwritten by a man but this still doesn't defy the existence of god because of a very interesting idea. historically churches and various religious institutions have attempted to gain power with the help of god and make rules in the name of god, this is a medieval concept, and with this idea in mind, your argument falls flat.
god says things are good simply because they are inherently good.
Or are things good simply because god says they are good?
This argument is demolished when we understand that the god you are talking about is not the true god but the perception of humans to attain power in the name of god.
WHAT IS TRUE GOD?
The true god is also a very interesting idea that is self-explanatory, in all of the universes from its creation have seen changes, these changes occur due to the so-called law of physics, and it is the human way of understanding this. from the universe we come to earth we see things and ideas that are wrong and they are wrong factually, without an opinion but what does god have to do with something being wrong in the universe? god is a distant figure that observes all and does something when he feels things are going very wrong. this idea by George Berkeley is the closest idea we have to the true god. here comes another dimension, it could be that god has created everything and written everything but he has made things in the way of a telltale game, every decision you make is pre-defined and will lead to a premade ending, and god just wants to see what choices you make and where do you find your self, let us implement this idea in objective morality. when we do so we realize that things are right and wrong factually without any argument because god has made them in the way to be wrong and right, just like in a telltale game, where you have wrong and right choices and they are bad and good because they can not be argued. After all, they are right or wrong factually. After all, he has made it in the way they are and henceforth, objective morality doesn't defy the existence of god but proves the existence of god.
I hope you like my argument :)
Round 2
a fascinating argument by my opponent, but here is the thing you have given me two options only, my sir is called FALSE DILEMMA FANTASY, it is indeed incorrect to assume that the god says things are good simply because they are inherently good. Or are things good simply because god says they are good?
Well of course id be open to hear another option, and it does look like you gave me one.
I will add a bit of dimension here, neither of these ideas is correct, things are wrong because they are wrong.
Now lets not get ahead of ourselves, this still falls into the same issue as the first option of my false dilemma. To say they are wrong because they are wrong is also saying there is a standard above god himself.
WHY WOULD GOD WANT BAD THINGS FOR US
I dont think bad things happening to us (or even him wanting bad things to happen to us) is necessarily contradictory with god.
This argument is demolished when we understand that the god you are talking about is not the true god but the perception of humans to attain power in the name of god.
Alright, ill be more than happy to hear about your perception
WHAT IS TRUE GOD?
What you described is a almost sort of deistic god (I say almost since you said he intervenes sometimes) but I dont think a deistic god necessarily goes around the argument, since a deistic god can still exist with a objective morality, and if god was watching us like some sort of puppet show, that doesn't mean that it negates the argument per sey.
(I am an atheist and I accepted as I wanted to experience a good challenge my opponent has provided me with a very fascinating challenge, and I would like to thank him for it)
Let's not get ahead of ourselves, this still falls into the same issue as the first option of my false dilemma. To say they are wrong because they are wrong is also saying there is a standard above god himself.
a fascinating argument by my opponent but here is another idea, it doesn't mean that there is a god above the general god we understand., here imagine this, we all are given consciousness by the god and he wants to observe us, we are the little source of entertainment for him, he wants to see what kind of morality we form and how we use it, this makes a very interesting situation pop up, god being the ultimate observer also becomes a figure that can interact with us whenever we want like a telltale game(like a previously said)
I also noticed that you ignored my perception of god, where I imagined him as a program that is experimenting with his powers and seeing what his subjects (us) make in the name of morality and this earth.
What you described is an almost sort of deistic god (I say almost since you said he intervenes sometimes) but I don't think a deistic god necessarily goes around the argument since a deistic god can still exist with objective morality, and if god was watching us like some sort of puppet show, that doesn't mean that it negates the argument per se.
it does, now imagine this, you say that objective morality defies the existence of god but here I took the hypothetical image of a deistic god and he managed to work with the idea of objective morality, the image of god I drew is not completely deistic, but quite the opposite. here let me elaborate, I drew the image of the god that observes and does when things are needed, every time a human is born in this world he designs it or programs it to be unique, and every time he does so he makes sure to interact and fondle with it to add it to the massive playground of this universe. he let us decide the morality, but this doesn't mean that god cannot intervene in it, he has experimented with this universe to get entertainment out of it
I don't think bad things happening to us (or even him wanting bad things to happen to us) are necessarily contradictory with god.
well it has to do a lot with the existence of god, at the end of your first argument you said it raises a question about god almighty, he is still almighty but as a matter of fact, this point proves that god doesn't care about objective morality because he let us humans decide and see what we fathom and observe.
this still doesn't mean that he has no control over our consciousness because after all he made it.
this still disapproves of god, even if sees us as a source of entertainment he is the one that put the seed in our mind to create things and concepts such as morality, he does know what right and wrong are and he plants it in us but lets us pedal and see what we chose as sole morality and motivation of our life. he doesn't stop us as he wants to witness us and observe us.
Round 3
Forfeited
Forfeited