A classic debate in philosophy!
The argument you present is a variation of the “argument from morality” for the existence of God. Here’s a breakdown of your claim:
Premise: Human beings are incapable of achieving moral perfection through naturalistic means.
Reasoning:
- Limitations of human nature: You argue that human beings have inherent limitations that prevent them from achieving moral perfection on their own.
- Need for a divine moral framework: Without a divine moral framework, humans are unable to reach moral perfection.
- Implication: The existence of a creator who intentionally brought human beings into existence with a moral framework is necessary.
This argument has been debated by philosophers and theologians for centuries. Here are some potential counterarguments:
- Eudaimonic ethics: Some argue that humans can achieve moral excellence through naturalistic means, such as living in accordance with reason and cultivating virtues like wisdom, courage, and justice (e.g., Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics).
- Evolutionary explanations: Others propose that human morality has evolved over time through a process of natural selection, where cooperative behaviors and moral norms emerged to enhance group survival and well-being.
- Cultural and social influences: Moral frameworks can be shaped by cultural, social, and historical contexts, rather than relying on a divine origin.
In response to these counterarguments, proponents of the “argument from morality” might argue that:
- Eudaimonic ethics is incomplete: While human beings can strive for moral excellence through reason and virtue, they still fall short of achieving true moral perfection without a divine framework.
- Evolutionary explanations are insufficient: The emergence of moral norms through evolution doesn’t provide a sufficient basis for objective moral values or duties.
- Cultural and social influences are relative: Moral frameworks shaped by cultural and social contexts are subjective and lack the universal, objective authority that a divine creator could provide.
Ultimately, the debate surrounding the “argument from morality” is complex and contentious, with no straightforward resolution. However, it remains an important area of inquiry in philosophy, theology, and ethics, as it grapples with fundamental questions about human nature, morality, and the existence of God.