Second debate on God attracts hundreds of students

Dan McKechnie

CALL TO RATIONALITY Pigliucci argues on the Horowitz stage last Thursday.

The Myer Horowitz Theatre was host to a centuries-old debate on January 28, as "Does God Exist II" was presented by the University of Alberta Atheist and Agnostic Society and the U of A chapter of Campus for Christ.

Nearly 600 students packed the theatre, eager to hear the discussion about the nature of morality. The debate asked if morality needed to originate from a god, or some other outside organizing force.

On the “no” side was Massimo Pigliucci, the chair of philosophy at Lehman College, part of the City University of New York. He was contracted through the Student Secular Alliance. Pigluicci has published a number of books discussing creationism, rationalism, and evolution.

Arguing for “yes,” Michael Horner is an anthropologist who tours Canadian campuses to “promote and defend Christianity,” according to his website. He is affiliated with Campus Crusade for Christ, Campus for Christ's governing body. Horner is the author of a number of articles relating to Christian philosophy.

Pigliucci presented an argument against objective morality centering on a Socratic dialogue referred to as “Euthyphro's dilemma”: is something moral because God says so, or does God approve of something because because it is moral?

Pigluicci claimed that the first case implied a “might makes right” scenario, which, according to him, does not bear out through history. The second case, Pigliucci said, implied that morality existed separate from God and thereby was not dependent on him.

During his opening arguments, Horner worked from the premise that objective moral principles exist independent of humanity, and on the basis of this assumption, argued that there must be something larger than humanity from whence morality originates.

“Objective moral principles are true, independent of anyone's opinion,” he said.

Horner argued that because we intuit, with great consistency, that things like rape and murder are wrong, there must be some manner of universal moral principle.

The debate became heated when the speakers were allowed to speak freely, with both Pigliucci and Horner talking over one another and throwing arguments and rebuttals back and forth. This marked a dramatic change from the sedate pace of the debate up to that point. There was much applause for each speaker in turn as they brought new arguments to bear.

UAAA administrator Farid Iskander said he would like to see similar topics discussed more often.

“While the debate about morality started as early as Socrates, nowadays it's not discussed nearly as much as it should [be],” Iskander said, adding that the goal of the debate is to “engage people in thinking about a topic that is important.”

Melanie Joy, a Campus For Christ member involved in organizing the debate, also touched on that sentiment.

“I hope that from the arguments presented, and the discussions following between friends, that students will have their ideas challenged, and refined,” she said, adding that another debate may take place next year.