(March 12, 2016 at 8:32 am)MysticKnight Wrote:(March 12, 2016 at 8:08 am)bennyboy Wrote: MK, I believe the expression you are looking for is "circular logic." And yes, this does seem to be a case of circular logic.
Double implications exist.
A -> B
B -> A
Therefore A <->B.
It's not circular reasoning. It's that both imply one another.
If there existed a child, there existed a parent.
If there existed a parent, there existed a child.
That's a double implication in the definition of child and parent.
The same can be true of morality because of it's relationship to God as the source.
It's circular reasoning because your premise does not provide independent evidence for your conclusion. You must already believe your conclusion of god existing and being the source of morality, in order for your premise that objective morality exists and comes from god, to be true.