Great video on Objective Morality by QualiSoup

Yet another quality video from YouTube sensation QualiSoup, and this time, he focuses on some of William Lane Craig’s arguments that only a God can allow for objective morality. I haven’t had time to read Sam Harris’ new book, so I can’t pretend to know what his arguments are, but I’ve always been suspicious of the idea that objective morality exists. That’s not to suggest that we should all throw our hands in the air and call it a day. It just means that we have to refine our moral muscle to ensure that we achieve, as Jeremy Bentham would have said, the “greatest happiness principle”.

Besides, the idea that only a supernatural entity can decide what is objectively moral and what is not would mean that any decision taken by that entity which we disagreed with (like God commanding the killing of all Midianites, including babies) would automatically be immoral. Does that sound like an attractive solution when trying to determine what moral choices we should make?

Comments (3)

  • avatar


    A great distillation of arguments WLC tries very hard to make complex, but are plainly simple and childish. Oddly enough, although this video is surely condensing a lot of philosophy and ethical mechanics into 17 minutes of time, I’m not sure I got all of it. In any case, one only need start with WLC’s claim that his god and his rules are necessarily objective, which is an open and unabashed attempt to redefine into his own terms what objective and subjective mean. His god is a subjective party, whether he exists or not.

    The even funnier thing is, this video (unless I missed the argument in another form in the above) doesn’t address the Euthyphro Dillemma, which itself does a good job of tearing down the whole divine morality concept.

  • avatar

    Joseph Scott

    I’m done with “The Moral Landscape”. I’d be happy to mail it to you if you want to read it.

  • avatar

    Jacob Fortin

    That would be great

Leave a Comment

Scroll to top