DOCSLIB.ORG

Kant's Change of Heart: Radical Evil and Moral Transformation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kant's Change of Heart: Radical Evil and Moral Transformation Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Dissertations Theses and Dissertations 2013 Kant's Change of Heart: Radical Evil and Moral Transformation Christina Drogalis Loyola University Chicago Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss Part of the Ethics and Political Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Drogalis, Christina, "Kant's Change of Heart: Radical Evil and Moral Transformation" (2013). Dissertations. 512. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss/512 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 2013 Christina Drogalis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`IS?JKG%BH%6>AIJ%*MQTIEB>H %%%%%%%%%%^a %%%%%%,BHCQJIA%.D>BTKG%LKAGQG%0AIMQIJ%8A>CAKGG %%%%%%%%%%\^ %%%*`?JIBHBHC%EDK%5BUUKAKHTK4%-DK%+IMBTIJ%*LBJ%.JIBS %%%%%%%%%%\a %%%%%%8IAIJJKJG%FKEPKKH%EDK%!"#$%$&'/IHM%EDK%0"123456$76/&8/0&92#6 ////////// //////////b< ///'KP%$G?KTEG%>U%6>AIJ%5KLKJ>?SKHE%BH%EDK%!"#$%$&' //////////ba //////1H>PBHC%ODIE%(E%6KIHG%E>%FK%6>AIJJ@%0>>M %%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%a; %%%%%%&HMKAGEIHMBHC%EDK%"LKAT>SBHC%IG%8>GGBFJK%U>A%&G%E>%$TT>S?JBGD %%%%%%%%%%a= %%%.>HTJQGB>H %%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%ab ./$8-*+%-/+**4%O/*-/*+%-/*%")*+."6('0%"3%+$5(.$!%*)(!%(,%$% %%%6"+$!%8",,(7(!(-# %%%%%%%%%%aa %%%(HEA>MQTEB>H %%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%aa %%%-DK%6>SKHEG%>U%.DIHCK%BH%EDK%"LKAT>SBHC%+IMBTIJ%*LBJ %%%%%%%%%%]_ %%%%%%-DK%+"6$'':'%/.D>BTK %%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%<;: %%%%%%-DK%6>AIJ%+KFBAED %%%%%%%%<;= %%%%%%-DK%.I?ITBE@%E>%(S?A>LK%EDK%6>AIJ%O>AED%>U%8IAEBTQJIA%$TEB>HG %%%%%%%%<<: %%%&HMKAGEIHMBHC%-DKGK%6>SKHEG%>U%.DIHCK%IG%8>GGBFJK %%%%%%%%<<^ %%%%%%&HMKAGEIHMBHC%EDK%8>GGBFBJBE@%>U%EDK%+"6$'':'%%.D>BTK %%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%<<\ %%%%%%&HMKAGEIHMBHC%EDK%.I?ITBE@%E>%(S?A>LK%EDK%6>AIJ%O>AED%>U%"QA%$TEB>HG %%%%%%%%<:= LB %%%%%%-DK%*?BGEKS>J>CBTIJ%8A>FJKS%>U%&HMKAGEIHMBHC%EDK%8>GGBFBJBE@%>U%EDK%6>AIJ%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%+KFBAED %%%%%%%%<:a %%%%%%&HMKAGEIHMBHC%EDK%.>HMBEB>HG%U>A%EDK%8>GGBFBJBE@%>U%EDK%6>AIJ%+KFBAED4%$%6IEEKA %%%%%%%%%>U%7KJBKU %%%%%%%%<:] %%%%%%%%%$%+KLBKP4%-DK%'KKM%U>A%6>AIJ%7KJBKU%IHM%/>?K %%%%%%%%<=; %%%%%%%%%-DK%+>JK%>U%6>AIJ%7KJBKU%BH%EDK%.IGK%>U%EDK%6>AIJ%+KFBAED %%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%<=^ %%%(G%5BLBHK%$BM%EDK%"HJ@%(MKI%EDIE%.IH%XQGEBU@%6>AIJ%/>?Kc %%%%%%%%<_: %%%%%%5>KG%1IHE%-DBHR%EDIE%7KJBKU%BH%5BLBHK%$BM%BG%EDK%"HJ@%,>JQEB>Hc %%%%%%%%<_= %%%%%%-DK%8>GGBFBJBE@%>U%$H>EDKA%(MKI%5>BHC%EDK%,ISK%O>AR %%%%%%%%<_a %%%.>HTJQGB>H %%%%%%%%<^< ./$8-*+%3"&+4%-/*%8!$.*%"3%+$5(.$!%6"+$!%(68+")*6*'-%('% %%%1$'-2,%-/*"+#%"3%6"+$!%5*)*!"86*'- %%%%%%%%<^= %%%(HEA>MQTEB>H %%%%%%%%<^= %%%-AIMBEB>HIJ%OI@G%>U%+KIMBHC%EDK%8JITK%>U%+IMBTIJ%6>AIJ%(S?A>LKSKHE %%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%<^_ %%%/>P%+IMBTIJ%6>AIJ%(S?A>LKSKHE%BG%,BEQIEKM%BH%1IHE2G%$TT>QHE%>U%6>AIJ%%%%%% %%%%%%5KLKJ>?SKHE %%%%%%%%<\^ %%%%%%-DK%-BSKJKGGHKGG%$ACQSKHE %%%%%%%%<\\ //////-DK%6BGEIRK%>U%.>HUJIEBHC%EDK%-P>%,EICKG %%%%%%%%<b: %%%.>HTJQGB>H %%%%%%%%<b\ ."'.!&,("' %%%%%%%%<bb +*3*+*'.*%!(,- %%%%%%%%<a< )(-$ %%%%%%%%<ab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email protected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email protected])/1?*1/?*3/@--+/*>G+B4.-CA-C/@</)*+</>B))-+1*1B53D/ E</1*G6+A/*/>*5-F,./.BBG/*1/0*+123/C-3>56=16B+/6+/1?-/!"#$%$&'/BF/?B4/*/=-53B+/>*+/ BH-5>B)-/5*C6>*./-H6.;/4-/>*+/F6+C/1?-/3B,5>-/BF/1?-3-/*==*5-+1/C63>5-=*+>6-3/B5/)B)-+13/ BF/,+>.*561</6+/?63/)*JB5/)B5*./4B5G3D/!+C--C;/6F/4-/,+C-51*G-/1?63/>*5-F,./-K*)6+*16B+;/ 4-/46../F6+C/1?*1/0*+123/6+15BC,>16B+/BF/1?-/[email protected])/BF/5*C6>*./-H6./*+C/?63/3B.,16B+/1B/ BH-5>B)6+A/61/15*+3FB5)3/?63/-*5.6-5/*>>B,+1/BF/)B5*./C-H-.B=)-+1;/6+3BF*5/*3/61/
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil (Selections)
    Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil (selections) This is an excerpt from Beyond Good and Evil, a book written by Nietzsche in 1886, consisting of about three hundred aphorisms on various subjects. The central theme of this book is the problem of morality—how we should act. The startling conclusion Nietzsche draws in the book is that we ought to jettison the altruistic morality that society and religion has imposed on us, the morality in which we demonstrate care and concern for the welfare and well-being of others, and instead institute a new morality centered around the self, a new self unfettered by social norms and the “slave morality” of what Nietzsche calls the “herd.” The final culmination of this new morality which lies “beyond good and evil” can be found in the final chapter titled “What Is Noble?” According to Nietzsche, to be noble means to see oneself as the center and origin of all value. In fact, the terms “good” and “bad” originally designated simply what the aristocracy did and did not value. For Nietzsche, “life is precisely the will to power,” and historically members of the aristocracy exercised their will to power by exploiting common people and using them as they saw fit. Nietzsche calls the morality of the ruling aristocracy a “master morality. ” He contrasts this kind of morality with “slave morality,” which arose when common people tried to make their inferior and despicable lives more bearable by exalting as virtues such qualities as kindness, sympathy, selflessness, patience, and humility (the cornerstones of Christian morality). Slave morality gave rise to the pair of terms “good” and “evil,” which Nietzsche contrasts with the “good” and “bad” of master morality.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Good and Evil—1
    Nietzsche & Asian Philosophy Beyond Good and Evil—1 Beyond good and Evil Preface supposing truth is a woman philosophers like love-sick suitors who don’t understand the woman-truth central problem of philosophy is Plato’s error: denying perspective, the basic condition of all life On the Prejudices of Philosophers 1) questioning the will to truth who is it that really wants truth? What in us wants truth? Why not untruth? 2) origin of the will to truth out of the will to untruth, deception can anything arise out of its opposite? A dangerous questioning? Nietzsche sees new philosophers coming up who have the strength for the dangerous “maybe.” Note in general Nietzsche’s preference for the conditional tense, his penchant for beginning his questioning with “perhaps” or “suppose” or “maybe.” In many of the passages throughout this book Nietzsche takes up a perspective which perhaps none had dared take up before, a perspective to question what had seemed previously to be unquestionable. He seems to constantly be tempting the reader with a dangerous thought experiment. This begins with the questioning of the will to truth and the supposition that, perhaps, the will to truth may have arisen out of its opposite, the will to untruth, ignorance, deception. 3) the supposition that the greater part of conscious thinking must be included among instinctive activities Nietzsche emphasizes that consciousness is a surface phenomenon conscious thinking is directed by what goes on beneath the surface contrary to Plato’s notion of pure reason, the conscious
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem of Evil in Augustine's Confessions
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 2011 The rP oblem of Evil in Augustine's Confessions Edward Matusek University of South Florida, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the American Studies Commons, and the Philosophy Commons Scholar Commons Citation Matusek, Edward, "The rP oblem of Evil in Augustine's Confessions" (2011). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/3733 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Problem of Evil in Augustine’s Confessions by Edward A. Matusek A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: Thomas Williams, Ph.D. Roger Ariew, Ph.D. Joanne Waugh, Ph.D. Charles B. Guignon, Ph.D. Date of Approval: November 14, 2011 Keywords: theodicy, privation, metaphysical evil, Manichaeism, Neo-Platonism Copyright © 2011, Edward A. Matusek i TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract iii Chapter One: Introduction to Augustine’s Confessions and the Present Study 1 Purpose and Background of the Study 2 Literary and Historical Considerations of Confessions 4 Relevance of the Study for Various
    [Show full text]
  • God and the Problem of Evil Notes
    Theodicy: God and the Problem of Evil Introduction Theodicy: From the Greek words for God (theos) and justice (dikē) - It is an attempt to vindicate divine goodness and providence in view of the existence of evil. Three facts that seem to be in tension: 1. God is all-good 2. God is all-powerful 3. Evil exists “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” – David Hume Summary: How do we defend the facts that God is good and God is powerful if he allows the holocaust, child-molestation, infanticide, wars, terrorism, cancer, rape, etc. Attempts to solve this tension 1. Simply deny that God is good. Problems 1 John 1:5 - This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. Psalm 106:1 - Praise the Lord! Oh give thanks to the Lord, for he is good, for his steadfast love endures forever! Psalm 119:68 - You are good and do good; teach me your statutes. Nahum 1:7 - The Lord is good, a stronghold in the day of trouble; he knows those who take refuge in him. James 1:13 - Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one.
    [Show full text]
  • Theodicy: an Overview
    1 Theodicy: An Overview Introduction All of us struggle at one time or another in life with why evil happens to someone, either ourselves, our family, our friends, our nation, or perhaps some particularly disturbing instance in the news—a child raped, a school shooting, genocide in another country, a terrorist bombing. The following material is meant to give an overview of the discussion of this issue as it takes place in several circles, especially that of the Christian church. I. The Problem of Evil Defined Three terms, "the problem of evil," "theodicy," and "defense" are important to our discussion. The first two are often used as synonyms, but strictly speaking the problem of evil is the larger issue of which theodicy is a subset because one can have a secular problem of evil. Evil is understood as a problem when we seek to explain why it exists (Unde malum?) and what its relationship is to the world as a whole. Indeed, something might be considered evil when it calls into question our basic trust in the order and structure of our world. Peter Berger in particular has argued that explanations of evil are necessary for social structures to stay themselves against chaotic forces. It follows, then, that such an explanation has an impact on the whole person. As David Blumenthal observes, a good theodicy is one that has three characteristics: 1. "[I]t should leave one with one’s sense of reality intact." (It tells the truth about reality.) 2. "[I]t should leave one empowered within the intellectual-moral system in which one lives." (Namely, it should not deny God’s basic power or goodness.) 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Evil in the Personal Experience of St. Augustine
    RUCH FILOZOFICZNY LXXVI 2020 2 Agnieszka Biegalska University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn, Poland ORCID: 0000-0002-5653-9684 e-mail: [email protected] DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/RF.2020.024 Our heart is restless until it rests in you. St. Augustine, Confessions* Evil in the Personal Experience of St. Augustine The most disturbing issue that permeates all of St. Augustine’s work is the question of the existence of evil, experiencing it and inflicting it. Giovanni Papini claims that Augustine, “before he found himself in finding God, […] had to exhaust the experience of evil to the very depths”.1 This remark redirects our thinking about Augustine’s under- standing of evil from the field of theoretical considerations to the realm of his personal experience of evil, where his philosophical and theologi- cal thought seems to be rooted. For many years, Augustine experienced evil and inflicted it himself. In the Confessions we read: “our life was one of being seduced and seducing, being deceived and deceiving, in a vari- ety of desires. Publicly I was a teacher of the arts which they call liberal; privately I professed a false religion – in the former role arrogant, in the latter superstitious, in everything vain”.2 A sense of persistence in false- hood and iniquity, noticed by Augustine quite late, a few years before his death in 430 (if one can consider his Confessions as a testimony to this important moment) and his desire to know the truth about himself, * Saint Augustine, Confessions, transl. with an introduction and notes by Henry Chadwick (USA: Oxford University Press, 1991), 1, i (1).
    [Show full text]
  • The Human Conscience As a Determinant of Morality: It’S Implication for the Nigerian Society
    International Journal of Philosophy and Theology September 2014, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 219-234 ISSN: 2333-5750 (Print), 2333-5769 (Online) Copyright © The Author(s). 2014. All Rights Reserved. Published by American Research Institute for Policy Development DOI: 10.15640/ijpt.v2n3a15 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.15640/ijpt.v2n3a15 The Human Conscience as a Determinant of Morality: It’s Implication for the Nigerian Society Patrick Eluke1 Abstract Human conscience has been severally described as the judge of human morality in every society. The way individuals in the Nigerian Society behave is predicated on the type of conscience they possess. Human conscience is that part of one’s mind that tells one whether his or her actions are right or wrong. Conscience varies from certain, doubtful, and perplexed, scrupulous to lax conscience. The good conscience undoubtedly implies the absence of fault, constant practice of good works and insistence on honorable behavior. This paper, therefore, seeks to survey types and they directly correlate with our different actions in the Nigerian Society today. This paper adopts descriptive method in order to achieve its objectives. 1. Preamble “Conscience is seen by some scholars as the source of moral knowledge or the source of moral reason, while others see it merely as a name for more feelings approval or disapproval of actions either as a result of psychological or social conditioning.”1 (Peschke K.H. Christian Ethics, moral Theology in the light of Vat. 2 Vol. 1 1986 p. 152.) This view is held by various scholars especially by both philosophers and non- philosophers.
    [Show full text]
  • The Philosophy of the Good and the Evil in the Teachings of Leo Tolstoy and Hannah Arendt
    Svetlana Klimova THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE GOOD AND THE EVIL IN THE TEACHINGS OF LEO TOLSTOY AND HANNAH ARENDT BASIC RESEARCH PROGRAM WORKING PAPERS SERIES: HUMANITIES WP BRP 150/HUM/2017 This Working Paper is an output of a research project implemented at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE). Any opinions or claims contained in this Working Paper do not necessarily reflect the views of HSE Svetlana Klimova1 THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE GOOD AND THE EVIL IN THE TEACHINGS OF LEO TOLSTOY AND HANNAH ARENDT2 The main subject of this article is devited of analyses a problem of Good and Evil in the teaching of Leo Tolstoy and Hannah Arendt. each in his epoch and by a similar way, got to the back of contradictions between “reasonableness”, “morality” and a human behavior in the state and society though they approached them from the opposing points of view. The approach of Tolstoy was Christian-ethical while that of Arendt was philosophic-political. Their congeniality is attributed to the fact that the ethics of Tolstoy and the policy of Arendt are built on a common theoretical ground, i.e. the philosophical anthropology of Kant. In the “man-state” opposition, Tolstoy revealed the ethical prerequisites to creation of the totalitarian ideology, and Arendt showed up the historical, political and inhuman essence of the totalitarianism phenomenon as such. Key words: Good, Evil, radical and banality evil, a philosophical anthropology of Kant , consciousness, the mass society and the mass man, “Eichmann as man” and “Eichmann as Nazi official,” independent thinking. JEL Classification: Z 1 National Research University Higher School of Economic (Moscow, Russia); Department of Philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Asymmetry of Good and Evil
    Comp. by: Vasanthi Stage : Proof ChapterID: 0002526678 Date:6/5/15 Time:06:26:31 Filepath://ppdys1122/BgPr/OUP_CAP/IN/Process/0002526678.3d Dictionary : OUP_UKdictionary 15 OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – FIRST PROOF, 6/5/2015, SPi 1 The Asymmetry of Good and Evil PHILIP PETTIT The thesis of this paper is that there is a marked difference between doing good and doing evil—in particular, doing good and doing evil to others—as we conceive of these actions in everyday life. Doing good to others often means doing them good robustly—controlling for good effects—whereas doing evil rarely has such a robust or modal character. This asymmetry thesis has a number of implications and I will concen- trate in particular on one.1 This is that it enables us to make sense of the Knobe effect, so-called: the effect, as it appears, whereby we are generally more willing to ascribe intentionality in cases where people do evil than in otherwise similar cases where they do good. The paper is in five sections. In the first I look at some important issues in the ontology of behavior, distinguishing between the acts or deeds whereby we produce effects and the actions or doings whereby we control for effects. In the second I show how we expect those who do good to others to control robustly for beneficial effects, being prepared at the limit to pay a cost in self-interest for securing that result. In the third I argue that we do not have the same expectation with those who do evil to others; they may aim at bringing about bad effects but not generally at any cost in self- interest.
    [Show full text]
  • SPINOZA's ETHICS: FREEDOM and DETERMINISM by Alfredo Lucero
    SPINOZA’S ETHICS: FREEDOM AND DETERMINISM by Alfredo Lucero-Montaño 1. What remains alive of a philosopher's thought are the realities that concern him, the problems that he addresses, as well as the questions that he poses. The breath and depth of a philosopher's thought is what continues to excite and incite today. However, his answers are limited to his time and circumstances, and these are subject to the historical evolution of thought, yet his principal commitments are based on the problems and questions with which he is concerned. And this is what resounds of a philosopher's thought, which we can theoretically and practically adopt and adapt. Spinoza is immersed in a time of reforms, and he is a revolutionary and a reformer himself. The reforming trend in modern philosophy is expressed in an eminent way by Descartes' philosophy. Descartes, the great restorer of science and metaphysics, had left unfinished the task of a new foundation of ethics. Spinoza was thus faced with this enterprise. But he couldn't carry it out without the conviction of the importance of the ethical problems or that ethics is involved in a fundamental aspect of existence: the moral destiny of man. Spinoza's Ethics[1] is based on a theory of man or, more precisely, on an ontology of man. Ethics is, for him, ontology. He does not approach the problems of morality — the nature of good and evil, why and wherefore of human life — if it is not on the basis of a conception of man's being-in-itself, to wit, that the moral existence of man can only be explained by its own condition.
    [Show full text]
  • Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil.Pdf
    Leo Strauss Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil A course offered in 1971–1972 St. John’s College, Annapolis, Maryland Edited and with an introduction by Mark Blitz With the assistance of Jay Michael Hoffpauir and Gayle McKeen With the generous support of Douglas Mayer Mark Blitz is Fletcher Jones Professor of Political Philosophy at Claremont McKenna College. He is author of several books on political philosophy, including Heidegger’s Being and Time and the Possibility of Political Philosophy (Cornell University Press, 1981) and Plato’s Political Philosophy (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010), and many articles, including “Nietzsche and Political Science: The Problem of Politics,” “Heidegger’s Nietzsche (Part I),” “Heidegger’s Nietzsche (Part II),” “Strauss’s Laws, Government Practice and the School of Strauss,” and “Leo Strauss’s Understanding of Modernity.” © 1976 Estate of Leo Strauss © 2014 Estate of Leo Strauss. All Rights Reserved Table of Contents Editor’s Introduction i–viii Note on the Leo Strauss Transcript Project ix–xi Editorial Headnote xi–xii Session 1: Introduction (Use and Abuse of History; Zarathustra) 1–19 Session 2: Beyond Good and Evil, Aphorisms 1–9 20–39 Session 3: BGE, Aphorisms 10–16 40–56 Session 4: BGE, Aphorisms 17–23 57–75 Session 5: BGE, Aphorisms 24–30 76–94 Session 6: BGE, Aphorisms 31–35 95–114 Session 7: BGE, Aphorisms 36–40 115–134 Session 8: BGE, Aphorisms 41–50 135–152 Session 9: BGE, Aphorisms 51–55 153–164 Session 10: BGE, Aphorisms 56–76 (and selections) 165–185 Session 11: BGE, Aphorisms 186–190 186–192 Session 12: BGE, Aphorisms 204–213 193–209 Session 13 (unrecorded) 210 Session 14: BGE, Aphorism 230; Zarathustra 211–222 Nietzsche, 1971–72 i Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil Mark Blitz Leo Strauss offered this seminar on Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil at St John’s College in Annapolis Maryland.
    [Show full text]
  • Where Do Good and Evil Come From? Peter Kreeft
    WHERE DO GOOD AND EVIL COME FROM? PETER KREEFT I’m going to argue for the existence of God from the premise that moral good and evil really exist. They are not simply a matter of personal taste. Not merely substitutes for “I like” and “I don’t like.” Before I begin, let’s get one misunderstanding out of the way. My argument does not mean that atheists can’t be moral. Of course atheists can behave morally, just as theists can behave immorally. Let’s start then with a question about good and evil: ‘Where do good and evil come from?” Atheists typically propose a few possibilities. Among these are evolution, reason, conscience, human nature, and utilitarianism. I will show you that none of these can be the ultimate source of morality. Why not from evolution? Because any supposed morality that is evolving can change. If it can change for the good or the bad, there must be a standard above these changes to judge them as good or bad. For most of human history, more powerful societies enslaved weaker societies, and prospered. That’s just the way it was and no one questioned it. Now we condemn slavery. But based on a merely evolutionary model, that is an ever-changing view of morality, who is to say that it won’t be acceptable again one day? Slavery was once accepted, but it was not therefore acceptable. And if you can’t make that distinction between accepted and acceptable, you can’t criticize slavery. And if you can make that distinction you are admitting to objective morality.
    [Show full text]