Why there is no supernatural morality: response to Miller's opening statement

Area of Science:

• Philosophy of Religion
• Meta-ethics
• Theology

Background:

• The concept of objective morality is often debated.
• Some philosophical arguments posit a supernatural source for objective moral truths.
• Defining the nature of this supposed supernatural entity is crucial for the argument.

Purpose of the Study:

• To analyze the claim that objective morality necessitates a supernatural foundation.
• To critically evaluate the definition of a supernatural moral law-giver, specifically God.
• To explore the implications of such a definition for the existence of objective morality.

Main Methods:

• Philosophical argumentation and conceptual analysis.
• Examination of theological attributes (omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent).
• Critical evaluation of the link between divine attributes and moral objectivity.

Main Results:

• The argument for objective morality hinges on a specific, potentially contentious, definition of God.
• The proposed supernatural source is characterized by traditional monotheistic attributes.
• Skepticism is raised regarding the necessity and coherence of this divine moral law-giver.

Conclusions:

• The reliance on a specific supernatural entity for objective morality warrants further critical scrutiny.
• The definition of God presented may not be universally accepted or logically required for objective morality.
• The argument's foundation is questioned, suggesting alternative perspectives on moral objectivity may be needed.