We’re rewarding the question askers & reputations are being recalculated! Read more.
2

It may be clearer to restrict the concern to Plantinga’s “naturalism” which implies a belief that there is nothing “God-like”, that is, there are no agents and everything is the result of event causation. See Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN) in Where the Conflict Really Lies. The problem of evil may challenge not just a certain ...


2

I find this a poor argument against Materialism. If Materialism is true then ethics is a matter of taste and social convenience and we can each have our own views on how we should act and behave. The Achilles Heel of Materialism is not that it causes social problems or explains nothing since it may yet be true. The real problem is that it doesn't survive ...


1

Amoralism David might be an amoralist : someone who understands moral terms, perhaps even recognizes moral obligations, but fails to be motivated by them and feels no regret, remorse or shame about this lack of motivation. To David, morality is just an irrelevance that never guides or even influences his motivation. This would fit his relationship with Mary....


1

That's a really weak argument. There's nothing really absurd with having no objective value of ‘justice’. Even moral anti-realism in total isn't an obviously absurd position. Not even remotely. We may not like it, but it certainly is supported by some convincing arguments and even has intuitive appeal (for example, see Don Loeb's mock-analogy between moral ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible