Comments for
Frederick Choo

Saint Louis University Natural Theology Conference

Christopher Holland

September 9, 2023

The Divine Goodness Argument.

(P1)
Theism is true. (For reductio)
(P2)
Moral error theory is true. (For reductio)
(P3)
If theism is true, then God instantiates the moral property of being good.
(P4)
If moral error theory is true, then God does not instantiate the moral property of being good.
(C1)
Therefore, God instantiates the moral property of being good and God does not instantiate the moral property of being good. (Lambert 2022, 5)

The Conceptual Argument for
Theism-Entails-Goodness (P3)

If our concept of God includes moral goodness, then for any possible world in which God exists, there would be moral properties, and so moral error theory must be false. Therefore, theism is incompatible with moral error theory.

— Frederick Choo

The Conceptual Argument for
Theism-Entails-Goodness (P3)

1.
Our concept of God includes moral goodness.
(e.g. We talk about a three-omni being includes omnibenevolence.)
2.
If our concept of God includes moral goodness, then for any possible world in which God exists, there would be moral properties (so, there is no possible world in which moral error theory is false).
∴ 3.
Theism is incompatible with moral error theory.

My Survey Response

Questions 1–3

  • Philosophy graduate student
  • Specialize in philosophy of religion
  • Theist (Abrahamic religion)

Question 4

I think that the God of traditional western monotheism (God-TWM), must be

  • Omnipotent
  • Omniscient
  • Omnibenevolent
  • Creator of everything
    in the universe
  • Worship-worthy
  • The greatest possible being*
  • Necessarily existing*
  • Immaterial, and
  • Eternal or Timeless.
Table 1: Theism vs. Traditional Western Monotheism
Scenario God God-TWM
1. Not-Perfectly-Good yes no
2. Not-All-Powerful yes no
3. Not-All-Knowing yes no
4. Creator-of-Almost-Everything yes no
5. Moral-Error-Theory-World yes yes
6. Epistemic-Error-Theory-World yes yes
7. Normative-Error-Theory-World yes yes

The Conceptual Argument for
Theism-Entails-Goodness (P3)

1.
Our concept of God includes moral goodness.
(e.g. We talk about a three-omni being includes omnibenevolence.)
2.
If our concept of God includes moral goodness, then for any possible world in which God exists, there would be moral properties (so, there is no possible world in which moral error theory is false).
∴ 3.
Theism is incompatible with moral error theory.

Sources

Chalmers, David J. 2002. “Does Conceivability Entail Possibility?” In Conceivability and Possibility, edited by Tamar Gendler and John Hawthorne. Oxford University Press.
Lambert, St.John. 2022. “Is Theism Compatible With Moral Error Theory?” European Journal for Philosophy of Religion, ahead of print, January 28. https://doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.2022.3485.
Oppy, Graham. 1992. “Is God Good by Definition?” Religious Studies 28 (4): 467–74. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034412500021867.