Travis Corcoran wrote, in response to a question:

This is deserving of a longer post, but the ultra-brief version:

I started out soft atheist, but always accepted the absolute existence of good and evil (it is evil to kill Jews in gas chambers, even if both the law and the prevailing culture say that it is OK).

The acceptance of an absolute moral code eventually lead me to theism.

Given that one absolute that I accept, I felt I had to accept theism.

I guess hope there’s a lot hidden under that word eventually.

I rashly commented:

Hm. Should I bother writing up my godless views on objective evil?

and, to my amazement, someone took me up on it:

If you’re feeling like it, I’d be happy to read them!

Well. Here are some things that I believe.

  • Game theory and economics are probably the best ways to approach morality. (I’ve touched on that idea before.)
  • Natural law can be defined as an optimum in the universe of possible law-systems. As the scientific method is presumed to converge (eventually) on truth, good institutions should approach natural law. We don’t yet know, in much detail, what institutions are ‘good’; but we’re learning. (I’ve touched obliquely on that idea before, too.)
  • Human brains have flaws, one of which is famously shown by the Milgram Experiment. Presumably any other kind of brain has its own flaws. We can try to work around them.
  • None of this sheds any light on the God Question.


3 thoughts on “2+2=God?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.