Comments Posted By Bill Ramey
Displaying 1 To 1 Of 1 Comments
AN ANSWER TO D'SOUZA'S "WHERE IS ATHEISM?" QUESTION
Although D'Souza's argument is open to critique, the reaction to it here and on Hot Air is rather overwrought. D'Souza isn't making an ad hominem attack against atheists; he's arguing that Dawkins-style atheism cannot account easily, if at all, for the existence of evil. Indeed, some atheists have argued the same point, e.g., Wittgenstein. In brief, D'Souza's argument is:
If nothing exists except matter in motion, then evil doesn't exist.
Evil does exist.
Therefore, it is not the case that everything is just matter in motion.D'Souza is banking on the fact that most of us accept the second premise, i.e., most of us are moral realists in one sense or another. The first premise is prima facie plausible: if nothing exists except matter in motion, it's difficult to see how some material events could be called "evil" and others "good," other than in some emotive sense. That's not to say that it is impossible to reconcile moral realism and Dawkins-style atheism, but it's a hard road to hoe. The upshot is that Dawkins-style atheism is more compatible with moral nihilism; hence if you reject moral nihilism, you're likely to reject Dawkins-style atheism. Again, there's room for critique here, but there's no grounds for the abuse that people are heaping on D'Souza.
Comment Posted By Bill Ramey On 19.04.2007 @ 12:45
