Re: How to Think About Naturalism

Tim Ikeda (timi@mendel.Berkeley.EDU)
Wed, 8 Mar 1995 13:18:09 -0800

>>>Let's test the theist's answer: If God will let you escape
>the consequences of doing something even though He says it is
>"wrong", what is to prevent a theist from doing it if it benefits
>them? Is such a situation possible or is the theist never
>confronted with this problem?>>
>
>PMFJI -- I will assert that nothing prevents me from doing so.
>Nothing prevents me from treating my wife & offspring as
>2nd class people either. Except that I love them and doing so
>would hurt me more than them! Same argument for my God.

Exactly. What really prevents people from expressing a
desire that would break a moral "code" is another desire
(And I don't mean this to sound cynical). These other desires
could be "love", fear of punishment, a sense of guilt (eg. bad
self-image), or any of a host of reasons. What I want to suggest
is that one who believes in God does not exclusively own the
patent on love for others or on reasons to follow moral codes.

>Paul's arguments in Romans seems to cover this situation.
>Even as a non-C, I think I understood him.

Agreed. These arguments are general and could work for theists
and atheists alike.

Suggesting that the source of moral codes matters is essentially
an argument from authority. A source cannot by itself be used
justify an assertion.

Regards, Tim Ikeda (timi@mendel.berkeley.edu)