The Moral Argument for God

[athrock]

I'm not so sure this is correct. Let me play angel's advocate for a moment...

The question is not WHERE the standard of morality comes from but whether such a standard applies to all people at all times.

SUBJECTIVE morality is that which may be true for you but not for me or true at one point in time but not another.

OBJECTIVE morality is that which is true always and everywhere.

So, if a supreme being is the standard by which we measure (and derive?) morality, then that morality is still objective in that it applies equally to everyone everywhere - regardless of the source.

Here's an analogy: the measure of a portrait painted by an artist is how closely the completed work resembles the person portrayed. If it is does capture the appearance well, we say that the portrait is a "good" likeness. Otherwise, we question the skill of the artist (impressionists and Picasso notwithstanding). But the measure of the portrait is the actual person being painted. Now, imagine a room full of art students all painting the same model who is posed in the center of the studio. The students may capture the model's features with varying degrees of accuracy and skill, and we would judge that painting to be the best which most closely resembles the model in real life.

Similarly, it seems to me that when we measure whether an act is good or evil, we do so against an absolute standard of right and wrong that does not depend upon cultural differences or personal preferences. And we make our judgments regarding good and evil, right and wrong, against an absolute standard. 

That which is the highest good is what theists call "God".

If God does not exist, then what is the basis for objective morality? Or does it even exist?

In order to be objective, it would have to apply to this god as well. Which it apparently doesn't. Killing is wrong, unless Yahweh gets angry because you picked up sticks on the wrong day of the week. If there's a maker of laws that doesn't abide by their own laws, then they're being a hypocrite.

Well, this would be an interesting discussion, but it doesn't necessarily apply to THIS discussion. As an atheist, you've just stated your objection to the Judeo-Christian version of a supreme being...but not necessarily to the idea of a god who has not done all those horrible things, agreed?

So, what is your objection to the moral argument as it attempts to prove the existence of a generic, non-Biblical god?

The idea that there is objective morality is debatable. I'd say there is objective information from which we can derive our morality, but morality itsself is subjective.

So, something can be good for you but not for me and vice-versa?