A: I would like to address your offensive “moral law” argument that says that without God as an objective moral standard atheists who do not have the influence of theism would be immoral beings.
DC: I never said atheists can’t be moral. I never said atheists don’t know morality. In fact atheists know morality just like everybody else. We know morality because it is written on our hearts. What I am saying is that atheists can’t justify morality. That is the point. What I am saying is that you cannot justify “why not murder innocent people to get what you want?” That’s the point. It is a point about ontology not a point about epistemology. It is not a point about “how you know the moral law.” It’s a point about “why does the moral law exist.”
A: The moral argument is not actually an argument for the existence of a God. It’s the argument for the fact that we should have an idea for the existence of a God. Because otherwise there would be moral basis from which we could stand. I disagree with that because I feel that humans are inherently altruistic and moral.
DC: What do you mean by “altruistic and moral?”
A: We are giving and we care about each other.
DC: Why is that good?
A: Why is that good? Because it helps our species survive.
DC: Why is it good to survive?
A: Because then we can propagate, move on as a species, and continue to exist.
DC: So, why is that a good thing? Who said?
A: Because… that is what is.
DC: Well that’s an “is”… That is not an “ought”. Stalin would say… “Fine, I’m gonna survive by killing you and taking your stuff.” Why is he wrong?
A: Because Stalin would have the initial urge not to. He would feel that the inherent urge of humans is to be caring for one another. There are situations where humans will not be caring about one another and those are exceptional. But, because humans are inherently altruistic his first urge to take care of the person or try and help them. But if he has some motivation against that then he would no longer have that urge. He would then decide that he wants to kill because he has a reason to.
(NOTICE: The attempt to avoid the question “Why is he wrong?” The A doesn’t address why Stalin would be wrong in surviving by killing and stealing.)
DC: You are again begging the question as to what altruism is. Why is taking care of others a good thing if there is no God? That’s your opinion. Is there an external referent an authoritative unchanging referent that you are getting that opinion from which makes it objective . Or is it just something you “feel” ?