For those who follow the discussion threads on this blog, you will see that several theist commentators have been criticizing the atheist worldview as devoid of meaning. In fact, some have suggested that atheists are incapable of making meaning in an ultimately meaningless universe. Perhaps one of the best explanations was put forward by Tirian who wrote:
"Atheism, however, as a worldview, has no moral absolutes and no justification for morality. That doesn't mean that atheists have no morals, in fact, most of them do. However, it is in spite of their atheism, not because of it. In the atheist universe, your morality has nothing to do with me and therefore why should I submit to your morality? It's different strokes for different folks....to each his own....etc."
I have rejected Tirian's suggestion that Christianity offers an objective base for morality:
I do not "accept Christian morality". If you are asking whether morality exists outside of human existence, I would say probably not. The only reason why I say "probably" is because studies are ongoing in some of the more intelligent animal species which tend to suggest that they may be much smarter than we currently suppose and exhibit behaviors that we would describe as moral.
My point in this post [http://www.atheistmissionary.com/2009/03/does-atheism-necessitate-moral-nihilism.html] was to observe that atheists behave in a manner which is moral and to explain that without the necessity of a belief in, or any knowledge of, the Bible or God.
There is no question that morality evolves in humans. I don't believe it arises at birth (although the necessary characteristics are present). Child psychologists tell us that children are basically formed from a personality perspective by the age of 5. We can learn moral behavior from our parents. We can also learn amoral behavior. Other behaviors are instinctive (i.e. no one teaches you to grimace at the sight of someone gratuitosly beating an animal).
You keep speaking as if morality exists in the same way as the concept of a triangle exists. I guess this is where atheists and theists depart. Richard Dawkins would say that suggesting morality exists (outside of beings who exhibit moral characteristics) is like asking what is the purpose of a rock? The question simply makes no sense.
I guess what I am trying to point out is that disbelief in an ultimate right and wrong does not mean that atheists cannot lead morally upstanding lives - they can and do.
With this issue still in the back of my mind (but not in the throes of existential despair), I listened to an excellent Point of Inquiry podcast featuring Eric Maisel, the author of The Atheist's Way: Living Well Without Gods. The podcast can be downloaded from iTunes or directly at: http://www.pointofinquiry.org/eric_maisel_-_the_atheists_way/. I haven't read Maisel's book yet but I have ordered it and will review it here at a later date. Basically, Maisel appears to put forward a proposition that I agree with wholeheartedly: Life has as much, or as little, meaning as a person gives it. Atheists do not require the existence of an external moral compass or supernatural deity to give their lives meaning. Theists apparently do. Why is that?
In my opinion, there are atheists who are immoral, criminal and/or dastardly characters, and there are atheists who are not. The same goes for persons who worship Faith regardless of the religion. What I do not understand is those who say that you must practice a religion to have a moral compass. If your child bullies another child on the playground, I would rather say to that child that it is just plain wrong to do that without having to rely on some external force, like God, or some reward down the road, like going to Heaven, to try to deter the behaviour.
ReplyDelete"Atheists do not require the existence of an external moral compass or supernatural deity to give their lives meaning. Theists apparently do. Why is that?"
ReplyDeleteMy guess: Theists, in their abject terror at the thought of their own demise, have built a perceptive set that REQUIRES someone to save them from...well, everything, including themselves. Since they have suborned their own humanity, making them nothing more than God's automatons in their bid for immortality, they obviously cannot be trusted to make moral decisions themselves.
And since THEY can't trust THEMSELVES, how can they possibly trust that someone with a perceptive set lacking a savior, (a situation that scares the willies RIGHT out of them,) will have a moral code that doesn't include all the horrible things they pray that God will protect them from.
I think far too many people continue to forget, or never realize, that religious belief is motivated by a single, simple, powerful emotion: fear.
Why is that? Because theists are basically cowards. Afraid to think things through and stand on their own decisions, they need someone to pass the buck to.
ReplyDeleteWhy is it wrong that your child would bully another child?
ReplyDeleteMikey, because society does not favour aggressive interpersonal relations. If you continue that behavior, you will get locked up (unless you are a successful sociopath, in which case you become a CEO).
ReplyDelete