The Argument from Moral Knowledge and Agency is typically presented as a cumulative case for theism, focusing on the fact that humans are not only biological organisms but also moral agents who possess objective moral knowledge.
The Core Premises
The argument can be broken down into four main observations:
1. The Existence of Objective Moral Facts
The argument begins by asserting that some moral truths are objective—meaning they are true regardless of whether a person or culture believes them. For example, the fact that "it is wrong to inflict needless suffering on an innocent child for fun" is treated as an objective truth of the universe, not just a social preference or biological instinct.
2. The Unlikelihood of Moral Awareness
From a purely naturalistic or atheistic perspective, the emergence of creatures capable of moral deliberation is surprising. Evolution selects for survival and reproduction, not for the ability to perceive abstract moral truths. The fact that a species (humans) emerged with a "moral compass" is not a biological inevitability.
3. The Gap Between Belief and Truth (Moral Knowledge)
Even if evolution produced creatures with moral impulses (like herd cooperation), there is no reason to expect those impulses to align with objective moral facts. On atheism, our moral beliefs are the product of blind physical forces; on theism, however, we would expect a rational and good God to ensure that moral agents have faculties capable of perceiving the truth about right and wrong.
4. The Requirement of Moral Motivation
Moral agency involves more than just knowing what is right; it involves being motivated to do it. The argument posits that an indifferent universe has no reason to produce agents who feel the "ought" of morality. God, however, would have a clear reason to create agents who can recognize value, act on moral reasons, and enter into a moral order.
The Theistic Conclusion
The argument concludes that the existence of moral agents with moral knowledge is highly expected if God exists (because God would value a world of morally aware and responsible beings) but highly unexpected if theism is false.
On Atheism: Our moral "knowledge" is likely just a survival mechanism that may or may not track with actual truth.
On Theism: Our moral knowledge is a reliable perception of the moral character of God (or the moral order He established).
Summary of the Syllogism
Human beings are moral agents who possess objective moral knowledge.
The existence of moral agents and moral knowledge is more probable under theism than under atheism.
Therefore, the existence of moral agency and knowledge provides evidence for the existence of God.
Note on "Tangential" vs. "Agential" Freedom:
In the list this argument comes from, Argument #6 is the Argument from Agential Freedom. It argues that the power of an agent to exercise control over their acts is evidence of a non-deterministic, intentional source (God). Argument #7 (Moral Knowledge) builds on this by explaining why we have that freedom: so that we can act upon the moral truths we perceive.
