(November 10, 2016 at 2:24 am)theologian Wrote: If morality is about good and bad, and good and bad is about our goal, and if our true goal is God, then if there is no God, there can be no objective morality for man.
If morality developed as a way of preserving the species (in other words, if our true goal is not God), then it would not be advantageous for it to be absolute. But I still think that you are working backwards. Are particular actions good/bad because God says they are good/bad? Or is God only recognizing actions as good/bad because they are objectively so? If God says "action A is bad" but later orders a person to commit that act, is the latter good even though God has identified it as bad in a general sense?
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
-Stephen Jay Gould
