Can We Be Good Without God? A Conversation About Truth, Morality, Culture & a Few Other Things That Matter

by Paul Chamberlain

Physician-assisted suicide. Racism. Genetic engineering. Abortion. Poverty. Capital punishment. Our culture is beset by a host of vexing ethical questions. Are there any foundational moral principles to guide us? If so, where do they come from? Christians say that we can--and should--be guided by principles derived from a right understanding of God. But skeptics and those with differing religious convictions argue that ethics and morality need not have anything to do with the God of the Old and New Testaments. Are they correct? Can right and wrong exist without God? Can we, in fact, be good or bad without God? In Paul Chamberlain's intriguing, inventive book, these questions are explored by a cast of Ted (a Christian) joins Graham (an atheist), Francine (a moral relativist), William (an evolutionist) and Ian (a secular humanist). Together they have been summoned to the home of a mystery host. And together, to the benefit of their host and the reader, they undertake a fascinating examination of truth, conduct, culture--and a few other things that matter.

Genres: Christian, Philosophy, Theology, Christianity

202 pages, Paperback

First published January 17, 1996

Reviews

[Jeff Bjorgan · Rating 3 out of 5]

A whimsical approach to presenting the different arguments of a foundation for objective morality. Taking a page from Peter Kreeft, Chamberlain presents the arguments through characters representing different viewpoints (theism, atheism, humanism, evolutionism, and moral relativism) who have been gathered by a mysterious observer for weekly meetings and conversations. Character development is not a strong point, and the wisest person in the room is the theist, which made me wonder what the argument would look like if the shoe was on the other foot. But the argument is persuasive, and thought-provoking, and in a culture that appears to have largely moved on from the question of objective morality by dismissing it, it makes this reader wonder if we collectively have considered well the implications of our decision.

[Jamie · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was definitely a thought-provoking book. It does raise more questions, but it’s a good start to thinking philosophically. My next question would be, why are we asking the question- is it good or bad? Maybe we should be asking – is it loving or not? Is it helpful or not?

[Mia Keller · Rating 3 out of 5]

One of my favourite reads ever. Makes you consider the complexities surrounding morality and whether our sense of morality is objective or subjective.

[Adam Chandler · Rating 3 out of 5]

Chamberlain frames the Moral Argument for the existence of God in a dinner dialogue and university lecture with several characters. He provides notes to the conversations to track some of the points made to academic sources (for and against the argument) for students. While I agree with his argumentation that there is objective moral truth and it is found in the nature of God as the creator of the universe as a logical deduction from the existence of morality as a real abstract substance, the writing of the conversation is paltry. He should not write fiction.

The opening finds there being one Christian who eventually out-argues four other interlocutors and presumes their respective positions (atheist, moral relativist, evolutionist, secular humanist) need different people voicing them. That's not realistic. Most atheists hold to all four positions. Aside from this, the narration in between speaking points were dreadful and sometimes unbelievable (as a former university student, no full classroom will be in rapt attention of the speaker no matter how good Chamberlain thinks he is at oratory), and the fact that the supposed experts holding the dialogue could not figure out who was inviting them to discuss ethics (the butler did it!, which I deduced a few pages into the dialogue) does not bode well for thinking the dialogue held by them is as veracious as it could be.

[Ponder Woodcock]

An interesting introduction to philosophical ideas and systems. I was elated to read Chamberlain using simple reason to defend faith.
I'm glad someone wrote it.

[Zenith · Rating 5 out of 5]

Indulging, thought-provoking :)

[Mimi V · Rating 4 out of 5]

yes, we can. and we are.