Graduation Year

2024

Document Type

Thesis

Degree

M.A.

Degree Name

Master of Arts (M.A.)

Degree Granting Department

Philosophy

Major Professor

Michael DeJonge, Ph.D.

Co-Major Professor

Colin Heydt, Ph.D.

Committee Member

Garrett Potts, Ph.D.

Keywords

MacIntyre, expressivism, Hart, Schindler, Stout

Abstract

Is something like a transcendent God necessary to have a coherent moral system, or at the very least, necessary for one to have personal ethical guidelines to live by that are not entirely subjective? This paper explores the claims of two Christian thinkers, David Bentley Hart and D. C. Schindler, as well as some alternatives to their thinking in the ethics of Alasdair MacIntyre and Jeffrey Stout. Hart and Schindler portray society as downcast, riddled with moral decay, and the only solution to this decay is to turn toward God, thereby recognizing a hierarchical, cosmological worldview. While MacIntyre believes that morality is universal in nature, held in place by a divine link, his thinking serves as a contrast to Hart and Schindler, since he allows that ethics can be grounded in specific practices, fully equipped with their own standards and norms. By contrast, Stout does not allow metaphysics to enter the discussion concerning morality, as he does not believe metaphysics are necessary for moral deliberation and development. For Stout, moral objectivity stems from the individuals who assert various claims, and insofar as their claims are not overturned by doubt, then these claims are objective. Likewise, objective morality for Stout is relative in nature, but it does not fall into the category of relativism more broadly, as he does maintain the existence of cross-cultural truths that could apply to all people. This paper offers alternative views, one in the form of ethics with metaphysics, and one in the form of ethics without metaphysics, and it does not provide a conclusive termination to the discussion concerning the grounding of morality.

Included in

Philosophy Commons

Share

COinS