1. then everything is permissible”
“If God does not exist,
then everything is permissible”
James Fodor, 19th September 2014

2. Three Big Questions
Moral ontology: What are moral claims about? What sort of things do they refer to?
Moral epistemology: How can we know what is right and what is wrong?
Moral motivation: Given some account of morality, why should we care? Why should we be moral?

3. Part A: Morality Without God

4. 1. Moral Ontology
Ethical naturalism: moral facts are natural facts – truths about the ‘natural world’
Peter Railton’s Reductive Naturalism
“An individual’s (non-moral) good consists in what they would want themselves to want, or to pursue, were they to contemplate their present situation from a standpoint fully and vividly informed about themselves and their circumstances, and entirely free of cognitive error or lapses of instrumental rationality.”

5. 1. Moral Ontology
Moral good expands this to take into account the interests of others
“X is morally right if and only if X would be approved of by an ideally rational and fully informed agent considering the question ‘How best to maximize the amount of non- moral goodness?’ from a social point of view, in which the interests of all potentially affected individuals were counted equally.”
Reductive: moral reduces to non-moral

6. Objection: No Ought from Is
Cannot derive an ‘ought’ from an ‘is’
David Hume: “For as this ought, or ought not, expresses some new relation or affirmation, 'tis necessary that it should be observed and explained; and at the same time that a reason should be given; for what seems altogether inconceivable, how this new relation can be a deduction from others (i.e. ‘is’ statements), which are entirely different from it.”

7. Response: No Ought from Is
Murder is killing an innocent person
Killing an innocent person causes unnecessary suffering
Therefore, we ought not murder

8. Response: No Ought from Is
Murder is killing an innocent person
Killing an innocent person causes unnecessary suffering
We ought not cause unnecessary suffering
Therefore, we ought not murder
How to justify 3? Provide a defensible and cogent account of morality.

9. Response: No Ought from Is
Any moral premises need to be defended, but that applies to any claim
No essential problem getting ‘ought’ from ‘is’ if moral questions are statements of fact
Applies to other claims: e.g. no biological claim can be derived from chemical premises

10. Response: No Ought from Is
Proteins are organic molecules
Carbohydrates are organic molecules
Nucleic acids are organic molecules
Lipids are organic molecules
Therefore, living creatures are made up of organic molecules

11. Response: No Ought from Is
Proteins are organic molecules
Carbohydrates are organic molecules
Nucleic acids are organic molecules
Lipids are organic molecules
Living creatures are made up of proteins, carbohydrates, nucleic acids, and lipids
Therefore, living creatures are made up of organic molecules

12. 2. Moral Epistemology How do we know this is what morality is?
As with anything – give reasons in favour
Explains the nature of moral judgements
Consistent with moral and social practise
No appeal to weird non-natural or supernatural entities
Investigate moral truths like other claims about the natural world

13. 3. Moral Motivation
How to respond to the amoralist: “why should I be moral?”
Humean theory of motivation: motivation is belief plus desire
Not possible to provide a motivation for anything without invoking agent-relative goal
Example: what to say to someone who doesn’t care about reason or truth?

14. Response 1: A Reason for Action
‘We should be moral because if we are, more human desires will be fulfilled and there will be more human flourishing’
Amoralist: “So? Why should I care?”
‘Because if you did, more human desires will be fulfilled and there will be more human flourishing’
Perfectly adequate reason for any morally competent person

15. Part B: Morality From God

16. 1. Moral Ontology
Divine Command Theory: What is right is determined by God’s commandments
Euthyphro Dilemma:
It’s good because God commands it? So good is arbitrary
God commands it because it’s good? So good is external to God
Modified DCT: good because God commands it, but the commands stem from God’s eternal virtuous nature, so are not arbitrary

17. Problem: Defining Goodness
What does it mean to say “God is good”?
By DCT, “good” means “commanded by God because of his perfect nature”
But then saying “God is good” is just saying “God is consistent with his own nature”
This is an empty tautology – it doesn’t say anything about what ‘goodness’ actually is
Totally uninformative account of the good

18. 2. Moral Epistemology
We can know that God is good because that is the nature of God
To ask ‘is God good?’ is to misunderstand the concept of ‘God’
We can know what things are good by consulting his word (e.g. Bible)

19. Problem: Recognising Goodness
How can we know if Jesus is good and worthy of worship?
He declares it? Anyone can do that
He is powerful? Might makes right
We observe his goodness? Would need some prior idea of good to compare
Theistic ethics has no tool determine if any being is righteous or worthy of worship

20. 3. Moral Motivation How does “God commands it” motivate the amoralist?
They can still say “So? Why should I care?”
Even God provides no desire-independent reasons for action

21. Is Everything Permissible?