It seems like ever since
Plato wrote the dialogue called “Euthyphro” around 400 B.C. the Euthyphro
dilemma periodically resurfaces as an atheist argument against the idea that
God grounds morality. The Euthyphro dilemma has recently resurfaced in the
debate between William Lane Craig and Alex Rosenberg and in an article in Aeon
by Troy Jollimore entitled “Godless yet good” which was mentioned in the New
York Time’s “The Stone” series. The dilemma that Socrates posed to Euthyphro in
the dialogue goes something like this: does God arbitrarily decide that a
particular action is immoral or does God declare that a particular action is
immoral because it is inherently so? If an action such as murder is arbitrarily
chosen as wrong by God then why is it necessarily wrong? If murder is
inherently wrong then there is no need for God to command that it is wrong. The
problem is that this argument is a false dilemma. A third option is that
objective morals and duties flow out of God’s perfectly good being. So, God is
the metaphysical ground for the existence of objective morals and duties. The truth is that the Euthyphro dilemma has been a dead argument for some time now.
Thursday, February 21, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)