Unbelievers and the Problem of Morality

Always interesting to encounter a reformed take. From Triggermanblog:

Back in 2018, I ran across a brief paper by philospher Stephen Maitzen titled, “Atheism and the Basis for Morality”. Upon reading it, I sat down and began analyzing various points raised in the paper and began formulation a response.

For that response, I composed a brief abstract, in that I noted,

[W]hen one cruises the numerous ethical papers and texts, terms like “common morality” or “ordinary morality” litter the discourse. The matter at issue is not to be seen as one of nuance, or mere perspective, but of considerable foundational importance. In order to lodge a complaint, one is assuming a basis upon which such a complaint is even possible.

Since it is always good to bring back up points for consideration, I am going to reach back into the blog and repost that analysis.

In the introduction I noted that moral claims are, first and foremost, knowledge claims saying, “in order to be true [moral claims] require a referent in order to be meaningful.” In the second entry, it was noted that while Maitzen speaks of theistic theodicies in general, he doesn’t interact with general theodical responses, but with responses that are decidedly Christian in scope. In the third entry of the series, I summarized and offered analysis of the objections that Maitzen raised based upon his concept of “god”. The next subsequent entries in the series take on Maitzen’s arguments directly, first by demonstrating that, in spite of an open rejection of the doctrine of the Fall of Man, Maitzen needs it and smuggles it into his assumptions; second that assumes God’s injunctions and laws in order to argue for any moral response; and third how Maitzen not only assumes a general theism in order to make moral claims, but presupposes a decidedly Christian worldview to do so before wrapping it up.