(March 2, 2018 at 9:02 am)polymath257 Wrote:(March 2, 2018 at 1:33 am)stretch3172 Wrote: Yes we are indeed the moral agents, and as such we already have an intuitive sense of what's ethical and what's not, which seems to be what you're alluding to. I also accept that human well-being is fundamental to morality, but where we must disagree is at the point concerning who has the right to "decide the issue." According to Christianity, God created all of creation "from Him and through Him and for Him" (Rom 11:36). I must bite the bullet and say that God created mankind for Himself and therefore has the authority to legislate morality, while we remain free to consider it rationally and better understand it for ourselves. I don't think we need God to behave like decent, moral people, but God does play a role in how we can properly understand and apply ethical principles.
And that is where I strongly disagree. Even *if* there is a GOd that created the universe, the fact that I am a conscious being in a society of conscious beings gives me and us the power to decide, not God.
For example, suppose that at some point we are able to create artificial intelligence. Would we have the right to dictate what rules an AI society would have for themselves? I'd say no, resoundingly.
If we can use our intellect to arrive at ethical principles that work for us, that is all that is required. Pleasing a deity just because that deity made us is a very poor basis for morality.
I grant God the authority, not only because I was created for the purpose of His glory, but also because He understands morality itself better than I ever could. Like a captain's superior knowledge of sailing and navigation qualifies him to legislate orders for his crew to follow, God's perfect knowledge makes Him better qualified to legislate principles of morality to people. However, God does not take away our freedom to obey or ignore Him. Suppose your hypothetical AI society was grossly ignorant of moral principles and systematically cheated, raped, tortured and killed one another (assuming they are sufficiently advanced to do this). Wouldn't our superior knowledge of morality qualify us to suggest better ways for them to improve their society and give them the freedom to accept or reject them?
