Top Banner
Defending Defending Moral Moral Absolutes Absolutes In a Relativistic World In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005 Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005
42

Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Mar 26, 2015

Download

Documents

Jaden Forbes
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

DefendingDefendingMoral Moral

AbsolutesAbsolutesIn a Relativistic In a Relativistic

WorldWorld

Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005

Page 2: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

I. Definition of a I. Definition of a Moral AbsoluteMoral Absolute

A. Meaning of a Moral DutyA. Meaning of a Moral Duty

1.1. Imperative Imperative vs.vs. declarative declarative 2. 2. Ought Ought vs. vs. IsIs

3.3. PrescriptionPrescription vs. vs. descriptiondescription

Page 3: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Facts vs. Facts vs. ValuesValues

What we What we do do What we What we oughtought to doto do

Descriptive PrescriptiveDescriptive PrescriptiveSociology MoralitySociology Morality

Page 4: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

I. Definition of a I. Definition of a Moral AbsoluteMoral Absolute

I. Definition of a I. Definition of a Moral AbsoluteMoral Absolute

A. Meaning of a Moral DutyA. Meaning of a Moral Duty

B. Meaning of an B. Meaning of an AbsoluteAbsolute Duty Duty 1. Binding on 1. Binding on everyoneeveryone----objectiveobjective

2. Binding 2. Binding everywhereeverywhere----universaluniversal

3. Binding 3. Binding at all timesat all times----perpetualperpetual

A. Meaning of a Moral DutyA. Meaning of a Moral Duty

B. Meaning of an B. Meaning of an AbsoluteAbsolute Duty Duty 1. Binding on 1. Binding on everyoneeveryone----objectiveobjective

2. Binding 2. Binding everywhereeverywhere----universaluniversal

3. Binding 3. Binding at all timesat all times----perpetualperpetual

Page 5: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

I. Definition of a I. Definition of a Moral AbsoluteMoral Absolute

A. Meaning of a Moral DutyA. Meaning of a Moral Duty

B. Meaning of an Absolute DutyB. Meaning of an Absolute Duty

C. Meaning of a C. Meaning of a RelativeRelative Duty: Duty: 1. Binding 1. Binding on some peopleon some people

2. Binding 2. Binding in some placesin some places

3. Binding 3. Binding at some timesat some times

Page 6: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

An Absolute Moral An Absolute Moral DutyDuty

is one that is binding is one that is binding

on on allall personspersons

at at all timesall times

in in all places!all places!

An Absolute Moral An Absolute Moral DutyDuty

is one that is binding is one that is binding

on on allall personspersons

at at all timesall times

in in all places!all places!

Page 7: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

A Relative Moral A Relative Moral DutyDuty

is one that is binding is one that is binding

on on somesome persons,persons,

at at some times, some times, oror

in in some places!some places!

A Relative Moral A Relative Moral DutyDuty

is one that is binding is one that is binding

on on somesome persons,persons,

at at some times, some times, oror

in in some places!some places!

Page 8: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

I. Definition of I. Definition of Absolute Absolute Morals DutyMorals Duty

II. Defense of Absolute II. Defense of Absolute Moral DutyMoral Duty

Page 9: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

[As an atheist] my argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line.

Straight Line = Absolute Standard

1. We can’t know what is in-just

unless we know what is Just.

C.S. LewisMere Christianity, 45.

Page 10: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

2. Absolutes are 2. Absolutes are undeniable.undeniable.

I am I am absolutely absolutely

sure there are sure there are no absolutes!no absolutes!

You You should should

never say never say ‘never’!‘never’!

Page 11: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

The Father of Situational The Father of Situational EthicsEthics

He declared that He declared that we should:we should:

1. Always avoid 1. Always avoid using“always.”using“always.”

2. Never use “never.”2. Never use “never.”

3. Absolutely avoid 3. Absolutely avoid absolutes.absolutes.

((Situation EthicsSituation Ethics, 43), 43)Joseph Fletcher

Page 12: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

But Fletcher Couldn’t Avoid But Fletcher Couldn’t Avoid Using Universal Terms Using Universal Terms

HimselfHimself

But Fletcher Couldn’t Avoid But Fletcher Couldn’t Avoid Using Universal Terms Using Universal Terms

HimselfHimselfHe said: He said: 1. “1. “OnlyOnly one thing is intrinsically one thing is intrinsically

Good” (p. 51).Good” (p. 51).

2. “The ruling norm… is love; 2. “The ruling norm… is love; nothing nothing elseelse” (p. 69).” (p. 69).

3. “3. “OnlyOnly the end justifies the means” the end justifies the means” (p. 113). (p. 113).

4. “4. “NoNo act apart from its foreseeable act apart from its foreseeable consequences has any ethical consequences has any ethical meaning whatsoever” (p. 126).meaning whatsoever” (p. 126).

He said: He said: 1. “1. “OnlyOnly one thing is intrinsically one thing is intrinsically

Good” (p. 51).Good” (p. 51).

2. “The ruling norm… is love; 2. “The ruling norm… is love; nothing nothing elseelse” (p. 69).” (p. 69).

3. “3. “OnlyOnly the end justifies the means” the end justifies the means” (p. 113). (p. 113).

4. “4. “NoNo act apart from its foreseeable act apart from its foreseeable consequences has any ethical consequences has any ethical meaning whatsoever” (p. 126).meaning whatsoever” (p. 126).

Page 13: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

3. Moral comparisons demand3. Moral comparisons demand an objective standard. an objective standard.

=Mother Teresa is better than HitlerMother Teresa is better than Hitler

Page 14: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

4. True progress (or regress) 4. True progress (or regress) demands an absolute demands an absolute

standard.standard.We can’t know the world is We can’t know the world is

gettinggetting betterbetter (or worse) (or worse) unless we know what is unless we know what is BestBest

But we do know a world with But we do know a world with less hate, bigotry, and less hate, bigotry, and

intolerance is a intolerance is a betterbetter one! one!

Page 15: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

5. Everything can’t be relative?5. Everything can’t be relative?

It can’t be It can’t be relative to the relative to the relative, etc!relative, etc!

It must be It must be relative to relative to

what is NOT what is NOT relative!relative!

Page 16: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Even Relativists Have Even Relativists Have AbsolutesAbsolutes

I.I. HeraclitusHeraclitus said: “No man steps into the said: “No man steps into the same river twice.”same river twice.”

II.II. But he had an But he had an unchanging Logos unchanging Logos beneath beneath the change by which he measured the the change by which he measured the change.change.

III.III. EinsteinEinstein said: Even time and space are said: Even time and space are relative.relative.

IV.IV. But the speed of But the speed of lightlight was held to be was held to be absolute in the physical world, and Absolute absolute in the physical world, and Absolute Spirit Spirit (God)(God) was behind the relative world. was behind the relative world.

I.I. HeraclitusHeraclitus said: “No man steps into the said: “No man steps into the same river twice.”same river twice.”

II.II. But he had an But he had an unchanging Logos unchanging Logos beneath beneath the change by which he measured the the change by which he measured the change.change.

III.III. EinsteinEinstein said: Even time and space are said: Even time and space are relative.relative.

IV.IV. But the speed of But the speed of lightlight was held to be was held to be absolute in the physical world, and Absolute absolute in the physical world, and Absolute Spirit Spirit (God)(God) was behind the relative world. was behind the relative world.

Page 17: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

The moment you say that one set of moral ideas can be better than another, you are, in fact, measuring them both by a standard, saying that one of them conforms to that standard more nearly than the other. But the standard that measures two things is something different from either. C.S. Lewis

Mere Christianity, 25.

6. Moral disputes demand an objective

standard outside the dispute.

6. Moral disputes demand an objective

standard outside the dispute.

Page 18: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

7. We don’t invent the moral law 7. We don’t invent the moral law any more than we invent any more than we invent

mathematical or mathematical or physical laws.physical laws.

7. We don’t invent the moral law 7. We don’t invent the moral law any more than we invent any more than we invent

mathematical or mathematical or physical laws.physical laws.

No one invented the No one invented the laws of math--laws of math--

and Newton did not and Newton did not invent gravity.invent gravity.

Like moral laws, Like moral laws, they were they were discovered!discovered!

Page 19: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

8. Universal moral guilt shows 8. Universal moral guilt shows there is a universal there is a universal

moral law.moral law.

8. Universal moral guilt shows 8. Universal moral guilt shows there is a universal there is a universal

moral law.moral law.

Page 20: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Making Excuses for our FaultsMaking Excuses for our Faults It seems then we are forced

to believe in a real Right and Wrong. First, human beings all over the earth have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way. Second, they do not in fact behave in that way. The truth is, we believe in decency so much that we cannot bear to face the fact that we are breaking it, and consequently we try to shift the responsibility.

C.S. LewisMere Christianity, 21

Page 21: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

9. We sometimes choose duty over instinct.

9. We sometimes choose duty over instinct.

Page 22: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

10. We all find some things evil (e,g., genocide, racism & bigotry)

Page 23: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

11. There are many things we 11. There are many things we don’t want others to do to don’t want others to do to

us us (e.g., lie, cheat, abuse, & (e.g., lie, cheat, abuse, &

kill).kill).

“Do unto others what you “Do unto others what you would have others do to would have others do to

you”you”--The Golden Rule (Mt. --The Golden Rule (Mt.

7:12)7:12)

11. There are many things we 11. There are many things we don’t want others to do to don’t want others to do to

us us (e.g., lie, cheat, abuse, & (e.g., lie, cheat, abuse, &

kill).kill).

“Do unto others what you “Do unto others what you would have others do to would have others do to

you”you”--The Golden Rule (Mt. --The Golden Rule (Mt.

7:12)7:12)

Page 24: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

12. The same basic moral 12. The same basic moral codes are found in all major codes are found in all major culturescultures

12. The same basic moral 12. The same basic moral codes are found in all major codes are found in all major culturescultures Lewis shows that

prohibitions against disrespect of parents, lying, stealing, and killing are found in all major cultures of the world (see Appendix)

Lewis shows that prohibitions against disrespect of parents, lying, stealing, and killing are found in all major cultures of the world (see Appendix)

Page 25: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

I. Definition of Absolute I. Definition of Absolute Morals DutyMorals Duty

II. Defense of Absolutes II. Defense of Absolutes Moral DutyMoral Duty

III. Distinguishing III. Distinguishing Absolute and Absolute and RelativeRelative

Page 26: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Distinguishing:Distinguishing: Absolute vs. Absolute vs. RelativeRelative

Values vs. InstancesValues vs. Instances

Values vs. Values vs. UnderstandingUnderstanding

The End vs. The MeansThe End vs. The Means

Command vs. CultureCommand vs. Culture

Values vs. Which Values vs. Which Value Value

Page 27: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Values vs. InstancesValues vs. Instances

Absolute MoralAbsolute Moral

Values doValues do

NOT change…NOT change…But But beliefsbeliefs

about whether about whether a given actiona given action

violates a moralviolates a moralvalue DO change.value DO change.

Page 28: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Values vs. InstancesValues vs. Instances

Witch hunters used to believe

witches murdered

people with their curses.

Now, we know they do not.

The moral value vs. murder did

not change. People’s

understanding of what violated the moral value

did change.

Page 29: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

A person’s understanding of a moral value A person’s understanding of a moral value can change over time. The Moral value can change over time. The Moral value itself, however, does NOT change.itself, however, does NOT change.

Values vs. Understanding Values vs. Understanding ThemThem

““The truth of a The truth of a statement resides in statement resides in its relation to reality, its relation to reality, not in its relation to not in its relation to

the individual’s the individual’s judgment about itjudgment about it.”.”

Mortimer J. AdlerMortimer J. Adler

Page 30: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Values vs. Understanding Values vs. Understanding ThemThem

A couple understands A couple understands love better after love better after

many years.many years.

However, Love didn’t change.

Their understanding of it changed.

1985

2005

Page 31: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

The End vs. The MeansThe End vs. The Means

Basic Moral Basic Moral EndEnd (the moral value (the moral value itself) does not itself) does not

changechange But the But the MeansMeans

(how to attain the(how to attain the

moral value) moral value)

may changemay change

Page 32: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

The End vs. The MeansThe End vs. The Means

Both pacifists and Both pacifists and militarists militarists desire the desire the same same end end (peace).(peace).

They simply They simply disagree as to disagree as to

meansmeans to to

attain that end.attain that end.

Page 33: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Just because a moral command Just because a moral command is expressed differently in is expressed differently in

different culturesdifferent cultures

DOES NOT MEANDOES NOT MEAN

The moral command The moral command itself is different itself is different

Command vs. CultureCommand vs. Culture

Page 34: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Command vs. CultureCommand vs. Culture

Greeting by a kiss is considered polite in some cultures. In others it would

repel.

WHAT should be done (greeting) is

the same.

HOW it should be done is different.

Page 35: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Whether Values Change Whether Values Change vs.Which Value Applies vs.Which Value Applies

There are times There are times when the issue when the issue is notis not WHETHER WHETHER a moral value a moral value

exists and exists and should be should be applied,applied,

butbut WHICH WHICH

moral value moral value should be should be applied in applied in the given the given situation.situation.

Page 36: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Whether Values Change Whether Values Change vs. Which Value Appliesvs. Which Value Applies

A woman A woman contemplating contemplating abortion may abortion may believe that believe that human life human life

has value.has value.

So, what’s it

gonna be, Mom?

But she may have But she may have been told that an been told that an

unborn child is unborn child is not human.not human.

Page 37: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

I. Definition of Absolute I. Definition of Absolute Morals DutyMorals Duty

II. Defense of Absolutes II. Defense of Absolutes Moral DutyMoral Duty

III. Distinguishing III. Distinguishing Absolute and Relative Absolute and Relative

IV. Determining AbsolutesIV. Determining Absolutes

Page 38: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

IV. Determining IV. Determining AbsolutesAbsolutes

A. From the Top Down:A. From the Top Down:

The Moral Nature of God The Moral Nature of God 1.1. God is the basis for God is the basis for all all moral absolutes. moral absolutes.

2. The moral law reflects 2. The moral law reflects the Moral Law Giver. the Moral Law Giver.

Page 39: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Knowing AbsolutesKnowing AbsolutesGod is God is love--love--Love is always rightLove is always right

God is God is just--just--Justice is always rightJustice is always right

God is God is truth--truth--Truth is always rightTruth is always right

God is God is holy--holy--Holiness is always Holiness is always right right

Page 40: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

IV. Determining IV. Determining AbsolutesAbsolutes

A. From the Top DownA. From the Top Down

B. From the Bottom UpB. From the Bottom Up 1. The effect is like the Cause1. The effect is like the Cause

2. The creature is like its Creator 2. The creature is like its Creator 3. The moral law is like the 3. The moral law is like the

Moral Law Giver Moral Law Giver

4. It is written on our hearts4. It is written on our hearts

Page 41: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Written on our Written on our HeartsHearts

How to read the Moral Law: By--How to read the Moral Law: By-- Our Our Inclinations,Inclinations, not by our cognitions; not by our cognitions;

Our Our expectationsexpectations, not by our actions;, not by our actions;

WhatWhat we want done to us we want done to us, not by what , not by what we want to do to others.we want to do to others.

In short, read the meaning from In short, read the meaning from out ofout of our our nature; don’t read our meaningnature; don’t read our meaning into into it. it.

How to read the Moral Law: By--How to read the Moral Law: By-- Our Our Inclinations,Inclinations, not by our cognitions; not by our cognitions;

Our Our expectationsexpectations, not by our actions;, not by our actions;

WhatWhat we want done to us we want done to us, not by what , not by what we want to do to others.we want to do to others.

In short, read the meaning from In short, read the meaning from out ofout of our our nature; don’t read our meaningnature; don’t read our meaning into into it. it.

Page 42: Defending Moral Absolutes In a Relativistic World Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2005.

Read More About ItRead More About It….…. Six Great IdeasSix Great Ideas Mortimer Adler Mortimer Adler Feet Planted FirmlyFeet Planted Firmly Frank BeckwithFrank Beckwith

in Mid-Airin Mid-Air The Closing of the The Closing of the Alan BloomAlan Bloom

American Mind American Mind Christian EthicsChristian Ethics Norman GeislerNorman Geisler The Abolition of ManThe Abolition of Man C. S. LewisC. S. Lewis Mere ChristianityMere Christianity C. S. LewisC. S. Lewis The Revenge of ConscienceThe Revenge of Conscience Jay Budziszewski Jay Budziszewski Written on the HeartWritten on the Heart Jay BudziszewskiJay Budziszewski