There are different paths philosophers follow when attributing goodness to God. For traditional metaphysicians, the route includes background metaphysical assumptions -- for example, the convertibility of being and goodness -- from which if one infers God is subsistent existence then (via the convertibility principle) God is subsistent goodness. This path, of course, does not say God is a *moral agent* like *we* are moral agents, which is something various Thomists like Brian Davies are keen to emphasize.
Others, like Richard Swinburne, infer God's goodness from God's omnipotence, since they argue omnipotence entails omniscience, and omniscience (in conjunction with something like moral motivation internalism) entails God as always doing the best action (if there is one; or at least never any bad action). Personally, I prefer the more traditional approach, though think there is much worth studying in the approach of thinkers like Swinburne, as well.
Hello
Not related to the post but I was wondering if you could talk about why we say God is good/how we know that he is?
I've been able to follow along with many of what we call divine attributes, but have had a harder time finding stuff about his goodness.
I should also note that this is not about the problem of evil (as I think it fails anyway).
Thank you
John
Hi John,
There are different paths philosophers follow when attributing goodness to God. For traditional metaphysicians, the route includes background metaphysical assumptions -- for example, the convertibility of being and goodness -- from which if one infers God is subsistent existence then (via the convertibility principle) God is subsistent goodness. This path, of course, does not say God is a *moral agent* like *we* are moral agents, which is something various Thomists like Brian Davies are keen to emphasize.
Others, like Richard Swinburne, infer God's goodness from God's omnipotence, since they argue omnipotence entails omniscience, and omniscience (in conjunction with something like moral motivation internalism) entails God as always doing the best action (if there is one; or at least never any bad action). Personally, I prefer the more traditional approach, though think there is much worth studying in the approach of thinkers like Swinburne, as well.
As for resources, I recommend The Metaphysics of Good and Evil by David Oderberg (which supports the more traditional approach), and below is post where I talk more about the link between goodness/morality and God: https://chroniclesofstrength.substack.com/p/what-is-the-link-between-morality