The Moral argument:

Kant:

○God's existence can only be established through FAITH as God is beyond the limits of intellect and reason. However, it is reasonable to POSTULATE God's existence through use of reason.

○Happiness is the natural world for virtuous behavior. Behaving morally should therefore lead to happiness. This doesn't appear to actually happen. Therefore, there must be something else that leads people to behave morally. There must be a reward for moral behavior in the next world. The promise of reward for acting morally is too far away for us to feel a strong sense of behaving morally regardless of rewards/consequences. There must be certain objective laws ---> The Categorical Imperatives

○Objective moral laws that reason tells us we must obey. Moral people must act out of duty rather than personal desire to pursue the highest good "SB". Rational people have an overwhelming sense of duty. The categorical imperative is "duty for duties sake". People feel obliged to act out of duty, so we must have freedom to act. "Ought implies can" so the moral action must be possible to do. Happiness is the end which everyone seeks. Religion and obedience to moral maxims brings about this highest good where people are moral and happy. We cannot attain this by ourselves as we don't have the power,God has the power as he is the highest original good. God must exist in order for everyone to achieve that which they are morally required to pursue- greatest happiness. God's existence is morally necessary as it is illogical to be required to seek an impossible end. A rational, moral person must therefore postulate God's existence.

The highest form of good is good will. To have good will is to perform one’s duty for the sake of duty and for no other reason

.

○Reason leads us to follow the categorical imperative (universalisable maxims for duties' sake). It is most important to aim for the Summum Bonum which is when virtue and happiness are united."Ought implies can" so the Summum Bonum must be attainable, but not in this life (there are many acting morally but are not happy). There must be an afterlife and there must be an omnibenevolent and potent God in order to provide it. For morality to have meaning, God must exist. No Summum Bonum and Categorical imperatives, no inclination to do good.

Moral experience tells us we are under obligation to strive for a higher good. It is not possible for humans to achieve the Summum Bonum without asssistance as we aren't the cause in the world. God must exist to help us achieve that which we ought to do. It is illogical to have a Summum Bonum without accepting the existence of God and eternal life.

(Reason= rationally perfect virtue that ought to be rewarded by perfect happiness and goodness (SB). This is achievable as ought implies can. Existence of SB leads to conclusion of God to ensure it happens)

○There is an innate sense of moral duty/awareness in humans- sense of moral power placed their at creation.

○The Categorical Imperative includes a Universal Law which is "do nothing you would not want to have turned into a law that applies to everyone"

Psychological challenge from Freud:

Duty comes from social conditioning and human nature. His challenge introduces the idea of external influences.

Religion = an obsessional neurosis

♥ID= basic desires and instincts for example hunger, lust, greed

♥Ego= our perception of the external world which aware of the reality principle. It is our most outward personality and is part of the id modified by contact with the external world. Mediates between moral demands of super ego, societal pressure and primitive instincts of the ID

♥Superego= response to social pressures, shaped from culture, functions as an internal censor to repress the urges of the id. Like the conscience which created guilty feelings.

Morality is brought about by subconscious activity in the mind reacting with experiences. Senses of duty and moral awareness can be explained by socialization i.e. adaptation of behavioral patterns of the surrounding culture. Our conscience (right and wrong) is a produce of our unconscious mind/ super ego of the human psyche.

Strengths:

• It does not rely on predicting outcomes or happiness and it is rational and certain

• Human life is given intrinsic worth (ends in themselves) promoting equality

• Cardinal Newman: Conscience is the literal voice of God within us (however, what about Yorkshire Ripper and others who were "following their conscience"?)

• Owen: Moral commands cannot write themselves: it is impossible to think of a command without first a commander.

Weaknesses:

• Whilst morality may exist, there is no reason for a God because of this, it could merely be evolutionary response to protect species

• Morality is genetic/environmental/guilt

• Morality cannot derive from a divine origin as the commands would be absolute and we would all come to the same conclusion, for example Euthanasia

• Brian Davies: objective moral law doesn't need to suggest God's existence- it maybe a "Pantheon of Angels"