Do you agree with these sentiments

zerinus

Well-known member
Ah, it was easier to Edit than I thought. Read it again, because this morning I edited it then too, to make the narrative flow better in other places; especially the first paragraph...

The Euthyphro Solution ~ by ReverendRV

Psalm 33:5 NIV; The LORD loves righteousness and justice; the earth is full of his unfailing love.

The Euthyphro Dilemma is a supposed debate between Socrates and Euthyphro, told to us by Plato; and Atheists use it to Debunk Theism. It basically asks, ‘Is Morality Good because God Decrees it to be Good, or does God recognize that Morality is Good in and of itself?’.
That is a tautology, because you need to define what "morality" is before asking that question.
This is like asking ‘Which came first, the Chicken or the Egg’ but instead asks ‘Which came first, Morality or God?’ The question makes us wonder if Morality exists outside of God instead of reflecting God’s Nature; ergo, there is no need for God to exist for Morality to exist. Christians use the existence of Morality to try and prove the existence of God. Atheists remove this argument from the Arena of Ideas by raising the dilemma.
The same here. You need to define what you mean by "morality" first. I assume you mean an objective standard of moral judgement. If that is what you mean, you need to define it more clearly before proceeding.
~ A big problem for the Euthyphro Dilemma is Morality as a factor. Most Atheists believe in Moral Relativism, IE Morality is Relative to the Individual. Here’s the issue; Morality has to be Objective for Euthyphro to even have a Dilemma.
Not necessarily. If morality (i.e. and objective criteria for determining right or wrong) exists independent of God, it could be considered objective; but if it is established by God, it could be considered subjective (i.e. subjective to the will and determination of God). If God has determined it, then presumably he can also change it.
If Morality is external to God, but this Morality is Arbitrary; Morality can’t be Good in and of itself.
That argument is again a tautology, because you have not defined what you mean by "morality". If by "morality" you mean a common standard or criteria by which good and evil, write and wrong is determined, then calling "morality" itself "good" or "bad" doesn't mean anything, because it is a tautology. If "morality" is a standard by which good and evil, right and wrong are determined, how can you apply that standard to itself, and ask the question of whether "morality" itself is good or bad? It is like saying, "good is good!" It is a tautology.
This is self-defeating in two ways. Atheists have to accept the existence of Objective Morality if they want to use the Euthyphro Dilemma; and secondly, Moral Relativism can’t be Good in and of itself…
I see the same problem arising here. You are applying a standard of right and wrong to itself. I will skip the rest of your comments for now. This is enough to get you thinking a bit more!
 
Last edited:

ReverendRV

Well-known member
That is a tautology, because you need to define what "morality" is before asking that question.

The same here. You need to define what you mean by "morality" first. I assume you mean an objective standard of moral judgement. If that is what you mean, you need to define it more clearly before proceeding
.


Not necessarily. If morality (i.e. and objective criteria for determining right or wrong) exists independent of God, it could be considered objective; but if it is established by God, it could be considered subjective (i.e. subjective to the will and determination of God). If God has determined it, then presumably he can also change it.

That argument is again a tautology, because you have not defined what you mean by "morality". If by "morality" you mean a common standard or criteria by which good and evil, write and wrong is determined, then calling "morality" itself "good" or "bad" doesn't mean anything, because it is a tautology. If "morality" is a standard by which good and evil, right and wrong are determined, how can you apply that standard to itself, and ask the question of whether "morality" itself is good or bad? It is like saying, "good is good!" It is a tautology.

I see the same problem arising here. You are applying a standard of right and wrong to itself. I will skip the rest of your comments for now. This is enough to get you thinking a bit more!
There is only so much room on a One-Page Gospel Tract to explain why it is not a Tautology; IE the Gospel Tract relies on the Reader being at least somewhat knowledgeable about the Euthyphro Dilemma. When someone is knowledgeable about the dilemma, they are also knowledgeable about what Morality is. As with others here, you try too hard to be right when you're wrong. As I said, this Board is not the best place to expand on it. The Apologetics Board or the Philosophy Board is better. ~ Until we meet again...
 
Top