A Question on morality
Suppose that it was proven (not just believed, but actually demonstrated beyond all doubt, reasonable or otherwise) that there never were, and never had been, any gods whatsoever. From this, we can see that the various scriptures, as interpreted by believers of such, would not be true.
Theists often claim that their scripture is the motivator for and source of their moral code. Following that their scripture would not be true, I suggest that it cannot be used as a reliable source of morality, objective or otherwise.
As atheists and other non-believers do not look to scripture for definitive moral guidance, it would follow that their morality wouldn’t drastically change with this new information coming to light.
Conversely, I would opine that a number of believers, now not subject the Great Surveillence Camera In The Sky and the punishment/reward system previously believed to be in place, would then not necessarily have any socially acceptable sense of morality, and it’s conceivable that their behaviour would therefore descend into the depravity of the sort that they very often accuse non-believers of having.
Bearing this in mind, is it safer for humanity to tolerate some level of religious ideology that gives the impression of morality (whether real or imagined) considering that the lack of any such morality for those that do not have a well-developed sense of self-control could lead to an increased level of social destruction?
Your thoughts on this are most welcome.
February 6th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Brilliant post. I have thought about this in the past (if one believes that we’re moral only because we’re afraid of punishment, then if that fear went away, one would be immoral), but I have never seen it as clearly explained as you just did.
February 6th, 2007 at 5:56 pm
Thanks Pedro!
February 6th, 2007 at 9:41 pm
I don’t think the religious would suddenly become immoral. We’re wired to care for others, so I’m sure nothing would really change except that the religious would discover that they never needed religion to be moral. I recently wrote a post on my blog addressing this very topic. If you want, you can check it out here:
http://lordjbar.blogspot.com/2007/01/religion-does-not-make-someone-better.html
Basically, there’s very good evolutionary reasons for us to naturally care for each other.
February 6th, 2007 at 9:50 pm
J-Bar: yes, but they are the ones that keep telling everyone that, without religion / fear of God, there is no morality, that atheists are completely immoral, and so on. The logical conclusion is that they, themselves, don’t see any other reason to be kind to others, other than the threat of eternal damnation.
If someone says “without belief in God, we would all be killing one another”, you can infer from that that HE would do so if he didn’t believe in God, since he sees no other reason not to go on a rampage.
Of course, not all theists say such a thing. Many of them would be kind without religion — or, maybe, are kind despite religion. But a lot of them really believe (and say, and say again) that all morality comes from God, that atheists have nothing to prevent them from being monsters, and so on.
February 6th, 2007 at 9:53 pm
J-Bar: I can see, and agree with, your point of religion manifesting itself as codified empathy, and all that entails.
However, I wasn’t alluding to any kind of majority, but a (n unspecified) number who, for all intents and purposes, could otherwise be classified as sociopathic but are kept in check, so to speak, by the fears of retribution or punishment provided by their belief system.
My question, then, was should we tolerate, perhaps even promote, a level of religiosity to provide some kind of balancing system for those who are unable to, for whatever reason, “behave” themselves?
February 6th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
I’m just not convinced it’s the religious beliefs that keep people in check. You see plenty of Christians behind bars. I think the bigger deterrent is actual law enforcement. Personally, I think a person will be good because people are intrinsicallt good. However, I’ll admit I have no way of knowing for sure. It would be an interesting experiment if it could possibly be conducted.
February 9th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
I agree, in principle to your staements, and also feel than the weaning process that society is struggling through will eventually rid us of the need for eye-in-the-sky based morality should be helped along whenever possible
February 10th, 2007 at 2:52 pm
I am also not convinced it is actually the belief / religious doctrine which keeps people on the straight and narrow.
There may be some people (and my feeling is this is a tiny, tiny minority) who would go off the rails if they did not believe God was watching them, but I suspect this is too small a group to make it worthwhile.
Also, the majority of Christian doctrine preaches forgiveness. There is an old joke which carries the punchline it is “easier to ask for forgiveness than permission” so the existence of the cosmic watcher (I feel) does not prevent people doing bad things.
For me, removing the existence of an afterlife (with all its rewards), which can be entered by the most evil people (as long as they ask for forgiveness) forces the focus to be on the here and now. This (may) help people realise that doing bad things is bad, not just the invisible pink unicorn says so, but on a more basic level, there is no way to get forgiveness.