Lawrence Krauss on The moral argument

Lawrence Krauss rejects the moral argument for God's existence, arguing that morality has perfectly natural explanations that do not require a supernatural grounding. Moral intuitions, he contends, are products of biological evolution — social species develop cooperative instincts because cooperation enhances survival. Cultural evolution then refines these instincts into moral codes, which are further improved by rational reflection and empirical observation of what actually promotes human welfare.

Krauss is particularly critical of the claim that without God, morality is merely subjective or arbitrary. He argues that the well-being of conscious creatures provides an objective standard for moral evaluation, even without a divine lawgiver. Just as we can make objective claims about health without invoking God — smoking causes cancer regardless of what anyone believes — we can make objective claims about morality. Actions that cause needless suffering are wrong, and this is true whether or not God exists.

In debates with William Lane Craig and others, Krauss has pressed the point that the moral argument's first premise — that without God, objective moral values do not exist — is simply asserted, not demonstrated. Craig treats it as obvious, but Krauss sees no reason to accept it. The burden of proof, he argues, is on the person claiming that morality requires a supernatural foundation, and that burden has not been met.