PDA

View Full Version : Why most Animals are not Philosophers: Fatal Flaws in Dr. Craig’s Moral Argument



Richard Amiel McGough
01-18-2013, 11:17 PM
I just published a 4500 word critique of Dr. Craig's Moral Argument on my blog. Feel free to comment here or there.

Why most Animals are not Philosophers: Fatal Flaws in Dr. Craig’s Moral Argument for God (http://www.biblewheel.com/blog/index.php/2013/01/18/why-animals-are-not-moral-agents-fatal-flaws-in-dr-craigs-moral-argument-for-god/)

David M
01-19-2013, 10:40 AM
I just published a 4500 word critique of Dr. Craig's Moral Argument on my blog. Feel free to comment here or there.


Hello Richard

I have only just started to read your blog post and based on the following comment you make and which I agree in part, I don't see much point in watching the video.


Craig’s assertion that humans would be “just animals” under atheism is false. It could be true only if the faculties which distinguish us from other animals – self-awareness and language – were logically impossible under atheism. As long as we have those faculties, we are not “just animals” under any metaphysical view. And as long as we are human animals, we will be moral agents.

The one thing I think distinguishes man from animals has to do with language and it is the ability to reason. Animals might be self-aware (however you define that) and animals have their own language and form of communication which they can vocalize. The one ability that makes the difference is the ability to reason. I am not sure that teaching monkeys would prove anything beyond their ability to learn basic tasks. Repeating tasks and choosing according to pasts results is not proof monkeys can reason things out. If anyone would like to go on TV and reason with a monkey, I shall enjoy watching.

Now if you want to claim the serpent was an animal and was able to reason with Eve, then we shall end up disagreeing again that it was Eve that wrongly reasoned in her own mind and the serpent is a personification for the mental conversation that Eve had with herself in justifying why she should eat of the forbidden fruit. There is no need to argue the point.


All the best

David