-
The problem is not the "is-ought" gap. It's that whatever an man comes up with is just opinion. Sure anyone can determine what he considers good and evil; that's trivial. The real question is "Why should anyone care about what you think?" Socialists have considered it good to murder opponents. Are they right? The think they
-
In the first place, you're judging God by your own personal standards of right and wrong. But if God actually created mankind, does he not have the authority to do with them as he wishes and determine who is good and evil? Even if you assume that the Bible is fiction, then you should judge the character of God from the perspective of the author
-
Too many points being made to comment on all of them separately, but here are a few observations. Rand, and others try to define God away. Hayek wrote about socialists that it's very easy to define terms in such a way that your argument automatically wins. When a person spends most of their space narrowly defining terms, I suspect that's what
-
Mises clearly didn't take theology very seriously or he would have put more thought into his argument. Mises's problem is anthropomorphism: he assumes God is just another man. Just because man acts out of uneasiness doesn't mean God does, too. Some of man's characteristics are similar to God's because, as the Bible says, he created