The blog of Dr Glenn Andrew Peoples on Theology, Philosophy, and Social Issues

Episode 048: The moral argument for God


In this episode I continue to re-trace my steps through my mini speaking tour earlier this year. This talk was the second in a series of introductory talks on apologetics. In it, I introduce and explain the moral argument for the existence of God.





The “jumping the gun” fallacy


Must we choose just one discipline?


  1. Edward Lilydale

    Do you have a transcript of this podcast? I want to rip it to pieces but need to see the text just to clarify a couple of things.

  2. Hi Edward, I’m afraid you’ll have to resource the effort yourself. 🙂

  3. We get object moral facts from science. Not from god. Read my book The Moral Landscape to find out more.

  4. Sam, I’ve read it. Chuckled about it. Podcasted on the argument too. It fails.

  5. Ben Condon

    What are the practical disadvantages of being a moral non-realist?

  6. Ben, I take the view, not held by everyone, that we should believe things if they are true, and disbeliever them if they are not, and so we should be in the business of finding out what’s true.

    There may be cases where there exist practical benefits in believing falsehoods and there may be cases where there are practical disadvantages in believing the truth. But I tend not to concern myself all that much with such things.

    Are you asking because you suspect that – from the standpoint of moral realism – there are practical disadvantages in being a moral non-realist? Or is your question driven by the suspicion that there are no such disadvantages?

  7. Jordan Lamothe

    hmm…this one and the nonmoral goodness of God podcast only play about 12 minutes for me

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén