5 / 06
Image of birds flying. Image of birds flying.

#601 Objective Bigness and the Moral Argument

October 21, 2018

With regards to the moral argument for the existence of God.

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist

2. Objective moral values do exist

3. therefore God exists.

I would like to present the following argument

1. If Shkabishkabob the God of bigness does not exist, objective size does not exist.

2. Objective size does exist.

3. Therefore, Shkabishkabob the God of bigness exists.

With regards to any questions about the premises, Shkabishkabob is big by definition and is the root of all size. If objective size didn't exist, supernova's wouldn't be big and nanoparticles wouldn't be small, which is absurd, therefore obviously objective size does exist. If not for Shkabishkabob, how could you account for the existence of size? Also, Shkabishkabob has revealed to me that He finds any form of worship to other supposed deities abominable and punishable by eternal torture, though I am not one to judge.


Flag of Australia. Australia

Photo of Dr. Craig.

Dr. craig’s response


I don’t think your attempt to parody the moral argument succeeds, Jeremy, because your premiss (2) is plainly false. Size is clearly a relative property, not an absolute property.  I am gianormous relative to a proton, but I am incomprehensibly small relative to the observable universe.  As for your examples, supernovas, too, have no absolute size nor do nanoparticles.

Now relative properties can be objective. Galaxies are objectively bigger than electrons. But in that sense, premiss (1) is false. You don’t need an absolute bigness in order for things to be big relative to something else. 

What your question serves to bring out is that moral properties like goodness are not merely objective but ae non-relational (monadic or one-place) properties. Nothing is just big, period; but things can be and are good, period.

- William Lane Craig