Category Archives: Is-Ought Fallacy

Elaborating on C Theory

Posted on February 10, 2025 by Maryann Spikes

“The end is hypothetical while you are advancing towards or falling away from it. The end is hyperthetical once you have reached it.” (C Theory and the Venn of Import) That was END. Now let’s talk about NOW, relative to … Continue reading →

Posted in Apologetics, Divine Essentialism, Epistemology, Euthyphro Dilemma, Gettier Problem, Harmonic Triads, Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief | Leave a comment

C Theory of Time & the Venn of Import

Posted on June 14, 2024 by Maryann Spikes

First, an introduction of C Theory and the Venn of Import, then an explanation of how C Theory is distinct from and resolves conflicts arising from A and B theories, using the Venn (or Harmonic Triad) of Import. This is … Continue reading →

Posted in Divine Essentialism, Golden Rule, Harmonic Triads, Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief, Predestination | Tagged existential import, time | Leave a comment

“Euthyphro”-type Dilemma of Language Ability and Learning

Posted on May 31, 2024 by Maryann Spikes

Does what is encoded (the pious/good) get our attention, or is it that what we attend to (the loved/valued) gets encoded? Continue reading →

Posted in Epistemology, Euthyphro Dilemma, Gettier Problem, Golden Rule, Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief | Tagged communication theory, information theory, language, Sapir-Whorf | Leave a comment

Ethics & Morality

Posted on May 13, 2015 by Maryann Spikes

Below is a collection of my thinking on the grounding and justification of moral truth. I am warming up for something. Divine Essentialism God wills it (right) because He is good — essentialism. 1/4/08 (Not mine. Precursor.) The Sword and the … Continue reading →

Posted in Apologetics, Divine Essentialism, Euthyphro Dilemma, Gettier Problem, Golden Rule, Groothuis' 'Christian Apologetics', Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief, Keller's Reason for God, Moral Argument, Natural Law and Divine Command, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, William Lane Craig | 3 Comments

Leibnizian Moral Argument?

Posted on June 29, 2014 by Maryann Spikes

I think my moral argument for God’s existence is similar to Leibniz’ cosmological argument (except it has to do with the explanation of the Good, a.k.a. the Golden Rule). If you’d rather not say “the Golden Rule,” then say what everyone … Continue reading →

Posted in Apologetics Toolbox, Divine Essentialism, Euthyphro Dilemma, Golden Rule, Is-Ought Fallacy, Natural Law and Divine Command | Leave a comment

Defining the good: The Golden Rule

Posted on August 15, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

http://www.pflaum.com IN DESPERATE NEED OF EDITING/UPDATING, DON’T JUDGE! A major argument for God’s existence is that, if there is no God, there is no “true” good, because truth is that which corresponds to reality, to real being. A common counter-argument … Continue reading →

Posted in Euthyphro Dilemma, Golden Rule, Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief | Leave a comment

The Moral Argument

Posted on January 30, 2013 by Maryann Spikes

Update 1/30: Expanded on some things The Moral Argument I don’t like the traditional version of this argument that argues from the moral law to a moral law-giver: Traditional Argument from Morality Premise 1: There is an objective moral law. Premise … Continue reading →

Posted in Apologetics, Apologetics Toolbox, Divine Essentialism, Euthyphro Dilemma, Golden Rule, Is-Ought Fallacy, Natural Law and Divine Command | 4 Comments

Poll: What grounds objective moral truth?

Posted on December 31, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

Choose one option from this poll: God wills the good in accordance with his loving nature. The good is a construct of God, man or nature. Nothing, there are only constructs which do not obligate. In other words: What grounds … Continue reading →

Posted in Apologetics Toolbox, Divine Essentialism, Euthyphro Dilemma, Is-Ought Fallacy, Natural Law and Divine Command | Leave a comment

The Humean-Platonic tripartite (Ought-Is-Belief) theory of (moral) knowledge

Posted on May 10, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

The Humean-Platonic tripartite (Ought-Is-Belief) theory of (moral) knowledge It is possible to blend Hume’s is-ought distinction (1) in Ethics with Plato’s justified-true-belief theory of knowledge. Simply put, whatever sort of beliefs one is talking about, including moral beliefs, they must be … Continue reading →

Posted in Euthyphro Dilemma, Gettier Problem, Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief, William Lane Craig | Leave a comment

Groothuis’ "Christian Apologetics" ch.6: Truth Defined and Defended

Posted on May 6, 2012 by Maryann Spikes

The apologetics study group LOVES this quote from Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics: “We may be entitled to our own opinions, but we are not entitled to our own facts.” p. 124 It’s actually a variant of a quote commonly attributed to Daniel Patrick … Continue reading →