The existence of a drive for equality among humans and in the animal kingdom lends no evidence for the Bible's claim of an alleged objective morality.
(The argument from superfluity)
- P1: Intelligent beings can perceive inequalities.
- P2: Emotional beings can become angry when they perceive inequalities against themselves or those they care about.
- C1: Intelligence and emotions are all that is necessary for beings to abhor perceived inequalities. (P1 & P2)
- C2: Objective morality is not necessary for beings to abhor perceived inequalities. (C1)
(The argument from animal abhorrence of inequalities)
- P1: Many animals abhor perceived inequalities1.
- P2: The animals that abhor perceived inequalities are not moral agents.
- C1: Being a moral agent is not necessary to abhor inequalities. (P1 & P2)
- C2: Abhorring inequalities is not evidence of moral agents. (C1)
- P3: If abhorring inequalities is not evidence of moral agents, neither can it be evidence of an objective morality.
- C3: The abhorrence of inequalities is not evidence of an objective morality. (C2 & P3)
(The argument from divinely ordained inequality)
- P1: If the abhorrence of inequalities is evidence of an objective morality, that objective morality will not condone inequalities.
- P2: The biblical god condones inequalities2.
- C1: Either a) the abhorrence of inequality is not evidence of an objective morality, or b) the biblical god is not objectively moral. (P1 & P2)
For any one these 3 reasons, The abhorrence of inequality does not support biblical morality.
1. Chimps | Dogs
2. Romans 9:21-22 | Malachi 1:2-3
(Note that it does not matter if Jehovah would proclaim these situations to be “fair”. It violates human notions of fairness, the very notions of fairness that are often invoked as evidence of an objective morality that maps to the morality authored by Jehovah.)