Professor Robert Spaemann, Philosopher and Advocate of the Traditional Mass, Dies at 91. (HT: Kai Frederik Lorentzen)
See also, Philosophie und Glaube: Vom Tod von Robert Spaemann. Excerpt:
Gott als Grundlage aller Wahrheitsansprüche
Gottesglaube ist weder Bedingung für wahre Urteile noch für Gewissensüberzeugungen. Aber da die Existenz Gottes der ontologische Grund beider und in ihnen impliziert ist, beseitigt die Leugnung Gottes die Grundlage aller Wahrheitsansprüche und aller sittlicher Überzeugungen und damit tendenziell diese Ansprüche selbst.
God as Foundation of all Truth Claims
Belief in God is a condition neither of true judgments nor of convictions of conscience. But because the existence of God is implied by both and is the ontological ground of both, the denial of God does away with the foundation of all truth claims and all moral convictions, and thereby tends to do away with these claims and convictions themselves. (tr. BV)
You don't need to believe in God to make true statements. Atheists make many true statements. And you don't need to believe in God to have correct moral convictions. Atheists have many correct moral convictions. But if there is no God, then there is no truth including moral truth. If there is no God, there are no truths to state. Atheists don't need to know that God exists to make true statements, but if there is no God, then they cannot make true statements.
But is it obvious that: no God, no truth? It is not obvious but it can be persuasively argued. Here is a rough sketch of one such argument. The laws of logic are not only true, they are necessarily true. As we say in the trade, they are true in all possible worlds. Now finite minds are not to be found in every possible world: there are possible worlds in which there are no finite minds, Furthermore, truth cannot exist outside of a mind: truth resides in minds to the extent that said minds are in contact with extramental reality. Since the laws of logic are necessarily true, there must be a necessary mind. And this all men call God.
Now that was quick and dirty. I present the argument with considerably more rigor and intellectual cleanliness here.
Recent Comments