Does a universal morality exist?

Question

Where does this idea of absolute "right" or "wrong" come from and what makes it valid?

If you answer from God then consider Socrates question; Is something right simply because God says so (making it only God's opinion and subject to change on a whim) or does God base what is right or wrong on a universal law that is greater than God (suggesting God is not the supreme existence, that something greater than he exists.)

Or is moral right and wrong purely based on social ideologies and cultural beliefs, and if this is the case then no universal law that should apply to all beings would exist.

I hear a lot of answers like God's knowledge is infinite and therefore he just "knows" what is right or wrong. But if this is the case, then wouldn't that suggest that there is a law (morality) that exists separate from God's will, and this is where he is drawing his decisions from? And if this is the case then wouldn't this also suggest that this law is greater than God himself? and if this is the case then God is not the greatest thing, or highest authority in the universe...this law of morality would be, and then we must ask who created this law for this being must be even greater than God and this law of morality?

By the way I am not trying to prove or disprove the existence of God. That is not what this question is aiming at. I am merely trying to determine what the foundation for right and wrong is, nothing more.

Answer 1

The old chesnut:
1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.
2. Evil exists.
3. Therefore, objective values exist. (Some things are really evil.)
4. Therefore, God exists.

How about...

1. GOD IS ALL-GOOD.
2. GOD IS ALL-POWERFUL.
3. EVIL EXISTS.
4. GOD HAS A MORALLY SUFFICIENT REASON FOR THE EVIL WHICH EXISTS.

It is precisely part of the Christian's walk of faith and growth in sanctification to draw proposition 4 as the conclusion of propositions 1-3. Think of Abraham when God ordered him to sacrifice his only son. Think of Job when he lost everything which gave his life happiness and pleasure. In each case God had a perfectly good reason for the human misery involved. It was a mark or achievement of faith for them not to waver in their conviction of God's goodness, despite not being able to see or understand why He was doing to them what He did. Or consider the greatest act of evil, the crucifixion of Christ. Was the killing of Christ evil? Indeed. Did God have a morally sufficient reason for it? Just as indeed. With Abraham we declare, "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?" (Genesis 18:25).

The only logical problem which arises in connection with discussions of evil is the unbeliever's philosophical inability to account for the objectivity of his moral judgments. Yes, when bad things happen to persons, little babies, etc., we want to know the reasons, but the simple fact is that God does not always (indeed, rarely) provide an explanation to human beings for the evil which they experience or observe. "The secret things belong to the Lord our God" (Deuteronomy 29:29). We might not be able to understand God's wise and mysterious ways, even if He told us (cf. Isaiah 55:9). Nevertheless, the fact remains that He has not told us why misery and suffering and injustice are part of His plan for history and for our individual lives.

So then, the Bible calls upon the believer to trust that God has a morally sufficient reason for the evil which can be found in this world, but it does not tell us what that sufficient reason is. The believer often struggles with this situation, walking by faith rather than by sight. The unbeliever, however, finds the situation intolerable for his pride, feelings, or rationality. The non-believer refuses to trust God. The non-believer will not believe that God has a morally sufficient reason for the evil which exists, unless the non-believer is given that reason for his own examination and assessment. To put it bluntly, the non-believer will not trust God unless God subordinates Himself to the intellectual authority and moral evaluation of the non-believer -- unless God consents to trade places with the sinner.

The problem of evil comes down to the question of whether a person should have faith in God and His word or rather place faith in his own human thinking and values. It finally becomes a question of ultimate authority within a person's life. And in that sense, the way in which non-believers struggle with the problem of evil is but a continuing testimony to the way in which evil entered human history in the first place. The Bible indicates that sin and all of its accompanying miseries entered this world through the first transgression of Adam and Eve. And the question with which Adam and Eve were confronted way back then was precisely the question which non-believers face today: should we have faith in God's word simply on His say-so, or should we evaluate God and His word on the basis of our own ultimate intellectual and moral authority? As Adam and Eve so acted, when non-believers refuse to accept the goodness of God on the basis of His own self-revelation, they simply perpetuate the source of all of our human woes. Rather than solving the problem of evil, non-believers are part of the problem.

Therefore, it should not be thought that "the problem of evil" is anything like an intellectual basis for a lack of faith in God. It is rather simply the personal expression of such a lack of faith. What we find is that non-believers who challenge the Christian faith end up reasoning in circles. Because they lack faith in God, non-believers begin by arguing that evil is incompatible with the goodness and power of God. When non-believers are presented with a logically adequate and Biblically supported solution to the problem of evil (viz., God has a morally sufficient but undisclosed reason for the evil that exists), they refuse to accept it, again because of their lack of faith in God. Non-believers would rather be left unable to give an account of any moral judgment whatsoever (about things being good or evil) than to submit to the ultimate and unchallengeable moral authority of God. That is too high a price to pay, both philosophically and personally.

Answer 2

I'm taking a Biblical Ethics class right now, and one of our textbooks is called "Common Morality" by Bernhard Gert. It makes an interesting argument that there is a common morality. This is based on the fact that there is no society where people engage in torture of small children just for the fun of it, and things like that. There are practices which we may consider torturous, but the people who are practicing this have reasons which they think justifies it. It doesn't mean they are right in their reasons, but it tells us that they do understand that torturing people without adequate justification is wrong.

I would say that God disapproves of immorality, because it is wrong.

All people want to avoid pain, and therefore, no one wants to live in a society where other people are allowed to cause pain. Even if the person does not himself live by the moral rules, he wants OTHER people to do so - because it is in his own best interest.
Based on this basic human nature, there are a set of common moral rules that everyone on the planet can agree to.

Answer 3

Does a universal morality exist?... If it does, it's a pretty poor one these days.
(making it only God's opinion and subject to change on a whim) ...God doesn't change His mind. He has been and will continue to be consistent throughout the remainder of life.
right and wrong purely based on social ideologies and cultural beliefs... Do you think it is okay that people have different view points on whether murder, rape, and the abuse of tiny children is right or wrong based solely on their cultural upbringing?

Answer 4

Maybe.

It may come from logic (sometimes refered to as common sense).

If Right/Wrong come soley from authority, then there really is not morality, as Socrates so wisely stated. There is only obedience or disobedience.

Much of our "morals" are really just the mores and folkways of our culture. It is strange however, that there are taboos that are universal to every culture.

I think the basic premise of "helping others is good" and "hurting others is bad" may be common to all humans. From whence is this derived? It could simply to have proven itself so practical an idea that it endures and proves itself over and over all the time.

But then again, I could be full of it.

Answer 5

All revolves around pain. Hurting another person's well-being is universally perceived as a bad thing in my opinion. As far as religion/folklore is concerned, most try to explain the unexplainable. With more and more being revealed and proved, seems religion is clinging onto the age-old question "what happens when we die?" which is really sad. I hope one day people universally base their lives on benefiting humankind instead of dwelling in fear of some bogeyman that could send you to a "hell".

Answer 6

Because our minds work in a binary fashion. We crave, even at a physiological level to see things in terms of, on or off, black or white, right and wrong. Dichotomies. Or maybe we don't, which supports my point. As far as absolutes are concerned, as applied to any idea, I would give a resounding "**** no."

Absolutes have been scientifically proven to be relative to the circumstances.

Answer 7

Yes it does. This standard of morality is found in the very nature of God, who is most holy and righteous. Socrates' question is easily answered. Because God by definition is holy and just, therefore whatever God requires of us is also holy and just. God is not a man and so He is not fickle-minded or double-minded like us. And by the way, God does not have an opinion on any issue, what He says is the truth.

Answer 8

It seems to me the most universal moral law is property rights. People by nature like their stuff and don't like when people take their stuff. There have been communal societies but they seem to be rare

Answer 9

God had instill in our heart his laws. When we were created, we were created good with the knowledge of Good and Evil. by this statement alone, it tells us that everyone knows what is morally good. therefore, it is universal...


Wasabi

Answer 10

Well anything that is moral is due to personal belief which IS religion.