The Moral Argument from our 5 senses

Here is an addition to the Moral Argument in reference to skepticism about our five senses (touch, smell, taste, sight, hearing) and skepticism about our moral sense (Justice, Greed and etc.). This is in objection to the stance of Atheistic Moral Platonism.

Moral Sense:

1.     If a moral sense can exist necessarily without persons, then God does not exist

2.     Moral senses cannot exist necessarily without persons.

3.     Therefore, God exists.

Five Senses:

1.     If our five senses can exist necessarily without persons, then God does not exist.

2.     Our five senses cannot exist necessarily without persons.

3.     Therefore, God exists.

The ultimate question is, are these two arguments and there conclusions more plausible than their denials?

If you think about Justice as a moral sense, can Justice itself be Just? Of course not! Justice is merely a distinction of persons. It requires a person to be Just to deliver Justice. But Justice cannot by itself be just, for if it could then other senses such as love, greed and so forth would be independent entities embodying some sort of physical-metaphysical body which is an absurdity. Therefore moral senses require persons in which to exist.

Think next about our 5 senses. Can touch do anything without a hand or a body? Can taste do anything without a mouth or a liquid or food? It is true that senses cannot exist necessarily out of their own nature because without persons the five senses simply do not exist.

We could say, "well obviously this is true because I didn’t hang out with taste today" or "I didn’t go on a run with greed earlier", but the question remains is the existence of moral sense and the five senses more plausible based on Atheistic Naturalism or on Theism? Can the natural evolution of species account for the moral sense of justice? Did these things merely evolve simultaneously to meet together in the form of Homo sapiens? According to William Lane Craig, he sees William Sorley answer this question thusly, 

“it is far more plausible to regard both the natural realm and the moral realm under the hegemony of a divine Creator and Lawgiver than to think that these two entirely independent orders of reality just happened to mesh.”[1]

---

[1] William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2008), 179.