Morality Without Justice

[seer]

The argument goes like this:

(1) Moral behavior is rational.
(2) Morality behavior is only rational if justice will be done.
(3) Justice will only be done if God exists.
Therefore:
(4) God exists.

http://www.philosophyofreligion.info...oral-argument/

In a godless universe, many, if not most, crimes go unpunished. A greedy Hedge fund manager and a Mother Teresa have the same fate - death and dust, so why be a Mother Teresa? No non-theistic moral system can offer universal justice, even potentially, therefore no non-theistic system can be rational.

[The Pixie]

The argument goes like this:




In a godless universe, many, if not most, crimes go unpunished. A greedy Hedge fund manager and a Mother Teresa have the same fate - death and dust, so why be a Mother Teresa? No non-theistic moral system can offer universal justice, even potentially, therefore no non-theistic system can be rational.

This is why we have a legal system that includes punishment for transgressions.

[The Pixie]

It is worth pointing out that the first command is to love God. If you are a Christian, then you love God and you can hope to have all your sins forgiven. Christians generally will go to heaven. Non-Christians do not love God, as they do not think he exists. Non-Christians will all go to hell.

So this supposed justice actually comes down to whether you love God or not. Mother Teresa gets to heaven fine, but whether the hedge fund manager goes to heaven or hell depends on whether he is a Christian when he dies and not on whether he tried to screw the system and all his clients or whether he acted ethically and gave freely to charity.

[Faber]

It is worth pointing out that the first command is to love God. If you are a Christian, then you love God and you can hope to have all your sins forgiven. Christians generally will go to heaven. Non-Christians do not love God, as they do not think he exists. Non-Christians will all go to hell.

So this supposed justice actually comes down to whether you love God or not. Mother Teresa gets to heaven fine, but whether the hedge fund manager goes to heaven or hell depends on whether he is a Christian when he dies and not on whether he tried to screw the system and all his clients or whether he acted ethically and gave freely to charity.

Whether or not Mother Teresa goes to Heaven depends on whether or not she repented of her sins (which we all have) and trusted in Jesus as her savior, not on any good works she had done, and granted she had done many good works.

As for the hedge fund manager, the same principles apply. If he truly loves the Lord God with all his heart, soul, mind and strength, rest assured he wouldn't be out to screw the system or his clients.

[seer]

It is worth pointing out that the first command is to love God. If you are a Christian, then you love God and you can hope to have all your sins forgiven. Christians generally will go to heaven. Non-Christians do not love God, as they do not think he exists. Non-Christians will all go to hell.

So this supposed justice actually comes down to whether you love God or not. Mother Teresa gets to heaven fine, but whether the hedge fund manager goes to heaven or hell depends on whether he is a Christian when he dies and not on whether he tried to screw the system and all his clients or whether he acted ethically and gave freely to charity.

But it is not only about going to heaven, salvation is a free gift offered to any man. But there are degrees of rewards and punishments. I will not receive the rewards of a Paul, and Joe six pack, though lost, would not receive the punishments of a Hitler.

[seer]

This is why we have a legal system that includes punishment for transgressions.

Except it often doesn't work. Many criminals get away with most of their crimes and a Stalin and Mao murder millions and live to a good old age. A godless universe is unjust and makes a mockery of justice and morality.

[The Pixie]

But it is not only about going to heaven, salvation is a free gift offered to any man. But there are degrees of rewards and punishments. I will not receive the rewards of a Paul, and Joe six pack, though lost, would not receive the punishments of a Hitler.

Nevertheless, this supposed justice is very different to what a perfect court would do, because your ultimate fate is prredicated first and foremost on your religious belief. If we heard of an earthly court that determined guilt and punishment on the basis of the accused's beliefs we would consider that to be injust.

Your claim 3:

(3) Justice will only be done if God exists.

... would seem to be utter nonsense because the system Christianity posits is inherently injust.

[The Pixie]

Except it often doesn't work. Many criminals get away with most of their crimes and a Stalin and Mao murder millions and live to a good old age. A godless universe is unjust and makes a mockery of justice and morality.

So?

You are starting from the assumption that the universe should be inherently just. What is you basis for that belief?

Besides wishful think, that is.

[seer]

Nevertheless, this supposed justice is very different to what a perfect court would do, because your ultimate fate is prredicated first and foremost on your religious belief. If we heard of an earthly court that determined guilt and punishment on the basis of the accused's beliefs we would consider that to be injust.

First Like I said, salvation is a free gift, opened to all men. That is fair and just. Second, no matter which side of the ledger you are on (saved or lost) there are degrees of rewards and punishments corresponding perfectly to our deeds.

Your claim 3:

(3) Justice will only be done if God exists.

... would seem to be utter nonsense because the system Christianity posits is inherently injust.

Inherently unjust according to whom? You? Whether you consider this just is immaterial, your sense of morality could no more rise above God's than a stream could rise above its source. So again, I live in a just world - you live in a universe where justice is not even potentially possible.

[Psychic Missile]

(1) Moral behavior is rational.

Not necessarily. Moral behavior could be entirely attributable to instinct.

(2) Morality behavior is only rational if justice will be done.

Granting you the preceding line, moral behavior can be rational if justice may be done.

(3) Justice will only be done if God exists.

Granting you the preceding lines, and allowing for the existence of the supernatural, why is God (presumably the Christian God) the only conceivable judge? Why not the karmic cycle? Furthermore, as has been mentioned, the Christian God does not do justice, he is in fact an enemy of justice because he rewards and punishes people primarily based on what they think rather than what they do.

(4) God exists.

Obviously, this argument cannot prove God exists even granting you the preceding lines. That requires scientific evidence.

[seer]

So?

You are starting from the assumption that the universe should be inherently just. What is you basis for that belief?

Besides wishful think, that is.

No, I'm claiming that without justice morality is irrational. If you went to a far country where 50% of the population were allowed to rob, steal and rape with no legal consequences would you consider that system just or rational?

[seer]

Not necessarily. Moral behavior could be entirely attributable to instinct.

Then it is not rational.

Granting you the preceding line, moral behavior can be rational if justice may be done.

No, a moral system can only be rational if it is just.

Granting you the preceding lines, and allowing for the existence of the supernatural, why is God (presumably the Christian God) the only conceivable judge? Why not the karmic cycle? Furthermore, as has been mentioned, the Christian God does not do justice, he is in fact an enemy of justice because he rewards and punishes people primarily based on what they think rather than what they do.

How does Karma know what is just or unjust? As far as I know moral ideals only are known by minds.

Obviously, this argument cannot prove God exists even granting you the preceding lines. That requires scientific evidence.

So we can only know true things through science? Can you prove that scientifically?

[Psychic Missile]

Then it is not rational.

Agreed, which would make the first line incorrect.

No, a moral system can only be rational if it is just.

If there merely may be justice, it might still be rational to behave morally because the likelyhood of acting immorally and escaping justice is too little.

How does Karma know what is just or unjust? As far as I know moral ideals only are known by minds.

Karma is believed to act according to cause and effect, just like the physical world we know. Behavior results in karmic consequence just like jumping into a puddle produces a splash.

So we can only know true things through science?

We can only verify true things to others through science.

EDIT:

Can you prove that scientifically?

If you mean to ask if it is possible for other methods to know things are true or to prove true things to others, then I am open to that idea, but since those methods are not currently known to society and there's no evidence that they exist, It's reasonable to assume they don't until further information comes in.

[seer]

Agreed, which would make the first line incorrect.

What?

If there merely may be justice, it might still be rational to behave morally because the likelyhood of acting immorally and escaping justice is too little.

That depends, if you are follower of a Stalin or Mao the law is on your side.

Karma is believed to act according to cause and effect, just like the physical world we know. Behavior results in karmic consequence just like jumping into a puddle produces a splash.

But "something" has to decide what is a moral or immoral act in the first place for there to consequences. And as far as I know - only minds can do that.

We can only verify true things to others through science.

Can you verify this statement to me scientifically?

[Psychic Missile]

What?

If moral behavior is entirely or even partially attributable to instinct, then the line "1) Moral behavior is rational" is false.

That depends, if you are follower of a Stalin or Mao the law is on your side.

That ignores the international community or coups and uprisings.

But "something" has to decide what is a moral or immoral act in the first place for there to consequences. And as far as I know - only minds can do that.

Certain acts result in certain results. Acts which result in negative consequences we call "bad" and "immoral" and acts which result in positive consequences we call "good" and "moral". There is no more decision or judgment being made than when you throw a ball and it falls to the ground.

Can you verify this statement to me scientifically?

Is this a genuine request or are you trying to show that there is a tautology?