William Lane Craig debated Sam Harris on the proper ground for objective morality a few months ago at the University of Notre Dame. Craig’s position in the debate is summed up in his two contentions: 1) If God exists then we have a good ground for objective morality, 2) If he doesn’t, we do not. Harris’s contentions were then that God is not a good ground for morality and that a science of human flourishing based in avoiding, minimally, the worst possible misery for everyone is a good place to objectively ground it instead.
Both Craig and Harris acknowledged that the debate was not about the existence of God, nor was it about whether there are objective moral values and duties; as both Craig and Harris accept that there are.
Dr. Craig gave a synopsis of the debate and commented on it in a recent interview with Kevin Harris. Click on the link below and take a few minutes to listen, then share what you thought by commenting on this post.
audio link: Reasonable Faith.org podcast “The Sam Harris Debate (part 1)”
audio link: Reasonable Faith.org podcast “The Sam Harris Debate (part 2)”
Craig responded previously to a question of the week about Harris’s views: “Sam Harris on Objective Moral Values and Duties”
You can preview Craig and Harris’ positions here
Watch/listen to the debate here
See a reaction posted on PQE about the debate: “Initial Reactions to the Craig/Harris Debate”
And read some other PQE posts involving our recent discussion of objective morality, the moral argument for God, and God’s commands concerning the people in the land of Canaan:
“DAILY DEMONSTRATION: The Moral Agrument”
“A Brief on May 15th Meeting” (where we talk about morality and the moral argument)
“The Euthyphro Dilemma and Divine Morality”
Also, here is a link to another Reasonable Faith question response about the moral argument that addresses some of Harris’ out-of-place claims about the moral insufficiency of God’s character:
Persistent Questions 
Posted on June 6, 2011 by Ammon
0