 "Photo: Caitlin Coughlin, Collegian Staff")
 "Photo: Caitlin Coughlin, Collegian Staff")
Members of the University of Massachusetts community packed the Student Union ballroom Thursday night as Drs. Louise Antony and William Craig debated the question, "Is God Necessary for Morality?"
Moderator Steven Goodwin introduced the event by clarifying that the debate was not about the existence of God, only whether the existence of God is necessary for morality.
"Science is only one way of thinking, and it's only one way of knowing," he said.
Antony and Craig each received 18 minutes to present their arguments, followed by two rebuttal attempts and a closing argument. The debaters also took questions from the audience.
Dr. Craig, a research professor of philosophy at the Talbot School of Theology, argued that without God, there is no absolute right and wrong because there is no "moral lawgiver."
Craig said that God is the moral lawgiver, because He is the "absolute standard" of morality. He argued that what God does and orders is inherently moral.
"If God does not exist, why think that we have any moral obligations?" Craig asked, arguing that without God, there are no eternal consequences for our actions, and therefore there are no reasons to resist temptations. Craig said that without God, all that is left of humanity is "an ape-like creature on a speck of dust."
Dr. Louise Antony is a professor of philosophy at UMass. She argued that there are moral standards that are separate from God and "independent of human will." She said Craig follows divine command theory, which says that if God loves something, it becomes morally good.
"If God were to command you to eat your children, it would be right to eat your children," she described the divine command theory. She pointed out that God has ordered genocide and murder.
Craig argued that many atheists agree with his position, quoting atheist philosophers and scholars in his arguments.
He closed by saying "moral values, moral duties become like shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic" because the end is the same.
Antony described her own stance as "divine independence theory." She said that in order for humanity to follow God, He must be good, and goodness must exist separate from God. Antony said that the objective-moral facts guide what is good and what is not. She argued that one of these moral facts is that it is wrong to cause suffering to a living creature.
Antony also described her own religious history, saying that she was a devout Catholic until she attended college, where she said she realized "atheists have the opportunity for perfect piety," because an atheist does good because it is good and not because they face any consequence from God.
"All we have is this world, this life and each other," Dr. Antony said in her closing remarks.
The debate's intensity increased during the question and answer session, when Craig and Antony had exchanges with guests and with each other.
At one point, in response to Craig's claims that without God there is no purpose. Antony said that friends and family were her purpose, and quipped, "I wonder if Dr. Craig has any friends."
People were still in line to ask questions when moderator Goodwin ended the event 30 minutes past the scheduled end of the event. Many guests had left by that point, but at least a quarter of the room was still seated.
"Is God Necessary for Morality?" was a part of the Veritas Forum, which, according to the Veritas Web site, "seeks to explore the possibility of truth, beauty and goodness in every aspect of our academic and personal lives."
Elizabeth Hawley can be reached at ehawley@student.umass.edu.
Be the first to comment on this article!