The second premise is questionable because it appears either to equivocate with respect to premise 1, or it is simply unsupported as a claim about objective moral knowledge. While premise 1 seems to hold that, without God, no objective knowledge is possible, premise 2 might be taken simply to mean that we have knowledge of our own moral beliefs, which might be purely subjective. — ModernPAS
This is mere claim. As such a fatally weak leak in the chain of argument - unless you can prove it. Give that a try.If God does not exist, then we cannot have moral knowledge — ModernPAS
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.