'The moral argument does not prove that god exists but it does make it probable that god exists' Discuss

Morality for Dom Trethowan was a form of religious experience, and therefore due to this belief points towards being to do with religion and therefore points to god being the one morality is down to. Every time that we make a moral decision we are choosing what is seen to be between good and bad and therefore a variety of possible course of action. Trethowan believed that a sense of obligation guides us to make the choice between right and wrong, and that this obligation is due to a sense of value that under pins each moral decision. He therefore believes that this intrinsic value can be understood to be God.

Immanuel Kant was a deontologist and through this belief he devised his own theory to understand morality. He believed that an existence of God can only be established through faith and that his existence could not be explained through logic. To understand the link between morality and religion he considered his own beliefs. He reasoned that in a perfect world behaving morally should lead to happiness, since happiness should be the natural reward of virtue. Though, as this rarely happens is our world he argued there must be another answer. Through looking at morality it is obvious that there is something that motivates us all to act morally other than the prospect of immediate happiness. He argued that another cause of morality must be that of an objective sense of obligation which compels us to act in a certain way regardless of the consequences. Kant believed that there were certain laws which we are duty bound to abide by and he called these categorical imperatives. I can understand this explanation partially through my own beliefs. I would consider myself to be a moral being and I believe I am moral because I believe if I wasn't I would inflict pain on others and due to having been hurt myself I would not wish that on anyone. Just as Kant wrote

'Act according to a maxim which can be adopted at the same time as a universal law.'

This meaning that you should do nothing that you would not want turned into a law that applies to everyone.

The categorical Imperative is in itself another argument for the existence of god through the path of reality. That our moral experience obligates us to strive for the highest good, and if our obligation is to follow the law, it is our obligation to aim for the highest goal of this law. And through this fact we cannot as a human being achieve this higher good without assistance. As humans we lack the necessary power to bring about the highest good therefore God must exist to assist us in achieving this higher good.

Freud as a psychologist believed that the conscience is a product of the unconscious mind and that this was in two parts, the super-ego and the ego-ideal. The super ego is the conscience and creates feelings of guilt and the ego-ideal creates feelings of pride and satisfaction and that together they actively represent the moral decision making and are pre-rational in that they are independent of rational reflection. This moral sense of the super-ego acts as an 'inner parent' which rewards good behaviour and punishes bad. Matters of conscience are therefore determined by unconscious influences. He described life as a series of challenges that produce tension and if these are not resolved they become repressed until later life in the form of neuroses. Behaviour that is repetitive and compulsive is called an obsessional neurosis. Freud believed that religion is an obsessional neurosis because often so-called religious influences can be described to such obsessive neurotic behaviour. Therefore Freud's theory suggests that conscience is inbuilt within us. However this does not conclude that there is no god as many would argue that if the conscience is inbuilt it was pre-designed by a higher power which we would then call God.

Newman argued for the morality argument, believing that we have an illative sense of moral judgment, which is where we get the feelings of guilt and responsibility. He believed that the conscience of man is evidence of 'the supreme master' as the conscience is the voice of the law giver whom he defines as god.

I believe it is hard to know where exactly morals come from. Living in the situation I do; I know that due perhaps to the culture I live in; I have learned what I know about morality from my parents and teachers who helped shape me into a respective member of my community. Because of this, I do not know that had this not been the case and I had been taught that killing was good I would not know any better and just accept this. For example if everyone told me 2+2 = 7 if that was all I had ever been taught then I don't believe you know within yourself that this is wrong. Just like if you were given a gun at the age of 6 and told to kill the enemy you would do so with your conscience butting in and telling you it is wrong.

Following on from this it is also important to note that what I believe to be moral is what other people believe to be moral and I cannot fairly say that my morals are better than theirs as I would not like the same said about mine. This is a large problem because it is not fair to impose your beliefs upon others.

Therefore I believe that the moral argument does not prove gods existence but through the logical thinking of Aquinas, Freud, Owen, Newman, Kant and Trethowan; leaves space for there to of been a god. As if we believe morals are physiologically a part of our body this still leaves space for a higher more powerful figure of greater good to of defined these, just as Owen says;

'It is impossible to think of a command without a commander.'

Jennifer Clutten

21st November 2004