Atheism and Morality

Some comments were made on this blog that caused me great concern, as it seemed that while the author was not deliberately trying to deceive others, that was still the case in the ignorance of the quotation of certain matters as fact rather than just speculation. I believe that this is caused by the Church’s arrogance, and some cases ignorance, about philosophies and praxii other than their own, as well as certain pastors attempts to demonize anything that stood in counterpoint to their own theologies. Of course, when it comes to religion, very few people will go out of their way to read up on opposing viewpoints contrary to their own, and even fewer people take the time necessary to learn the rules of logic and reasoning that underpin their own understanding of whatever Scripture is held in Holy regard. When this is done to the Christian community, a great hew and cry is raised to point out the ignorance of the viewpoint, diatribe, or argument that was utilized against them, which I believe that they rightly do so. No argument should be based in ignorance, or a willful distortion of other’s worldview that you yourself may not hold. Such is the death of wisdom; true wisdom comes in the form of knowing how little you know, and striving to add to your knowledge with the tools that you have available.

In the Christian community, especially within the Charismatic, Pentecostal, and Fundamentalist sects that I’m more than familiar with, there is rampant disdain that is lavished on atheism in general, and atheists in particular. I believe that the majority of this comes from the confusion of separate issues; for instance, the first issue that is usually raised is the fact that most Christians believe that morality only comes from God. The second topic that gets confused is that atheism, by some Christian’s definition, is necessarily equated to Communism, two completely different philosophies; one dealing with issues pertaining to the supernatural, the other dealing with a form of government. The last point of confusion that I would like to deal with is the question of meaning in a person’s life. Most Christians, through ignorance of philosophy and other’s viewpoints, often point out that the outlook of atheism is bleak, desolate, and spiritually bankrupt, as it leads to a mechanistic view of the universe, with an absence of meaning. Of course, my contention is that all of these myths about atheism are exactly that- myths.

What is atheism? In the simplest sense, atheism is the lack of belief in God, gods, and the supernatural. Most atheists have a lack of belief in the supernatural because the supernatural is not proven, cannot be tested for, and in almost all cases, cannot even be properly defined. According to this stance, if you asked ten different people what a “spirit” was, you would get ten different answers, none of which agrees with the others outside of the nebulous, ethereal nature of the “spirit”. Of course, most atheists have only the lack of belief in the supernatural; others, however, hold an active disbelief. This arises from the contradictions in fact and in reasoning of the theist position on almost all arguments relating to the existence of some transcendent being in (out of) the universe. Agnosticism, on the other hand, is what a lot of Christians confuse with atheism, mainly that agnosticism is the belief that a god could exist, but the uncertainty of if it does, or which one is the true God. However, in regards to atheism, the lack of a belief, or the active disbelief, of gods and the supernatural is the sum totality of the philosophy.

What of morality? The common misconception about morality is that if one does not adhere to a belief in the Divine, then one cannot be a moral or ethical person. The fallacy in this can be immediately seen, as there have always been, and always will be, persons who abuse their religion in order to justify the expedience of definite immoral and unethical behavior. For example, the Inquisition, the Crusades, and even the Third Reich based their hideous and repugnant immorality upon the ideas of Christianity. In the current day, we as a society are still dealing with extremists such as the Aryan Nation, Westboro Baptist Church, and Fundamentalist Muslims who all believe in God, but perform immoral act after immoral act. Clearly, it can be seen that adherence to morality is not a correlation to theism. Just as Christians are errant in blaming mainstream atheism for the conception and execution of Communism and other assorted ills, so too is the atheist in blaming mainstream Christianity for the examples that were cited. Obviously, there is something else in the formation of morality and ethics.

What would this other thing be? To take a look at an example, what of the Christian who only follows a moral code because of her fear of condemnation in a lake of eternal fire? Would this person be more moral than an atheist who follows a moral code just because it is the right thing to do? You see, most atheists, because of their belief that this is the only life that we have to live, take life as a precious thing, and seek to make it as comfortable and enjoyable for all concerned as possible. Hence, their concern for following an ethical code of conduct, as this is the only way that ensures that all are accorded the right to live their lives as they see fit without abrogation of others’ rights to do the same. A good starting point would be Zindler’s essay on atheism and ethics. Also, when we look into the ancient world, we see philosophers and natural scientists that did not have access to the Bible, believed in capricious gods that had questionable morals, but were still able to make magnificent (for their time) treatises on Ethics and Morality. Plato and Aristotle both wrote articles on the ethics of human behavior that are still studied in High Schools and Universities today. In fact, it was Plato who first identified that gods, goodness, and The Good were separate entities, according to his Platonic Idealism, and then formulated his philosophy’s source for the operation of human ethics and morality. We can see that atheism does not equate to immorality. Neither does theism. Morality is defined, regulated, and ruled by other ideas and concepts.

Of course, with the advent of Communism, most Christians latched onto the phrase “Godless Atheist” when describing the Soviet Union. Then it was a “known” fact that all Communisms were atheist in origin. However, even a cursory glance at history show that this is not the case. The most successful communist regime in the world today, and by far the oldest, is the Catholic Church. Most Christians are uncomfortable with that fact, because they have been conditioned to only think of Communism in terms of a caricature of atheism. However, the underpinning of atheism is freedom of thought. Any structure that opposes an individual’s right to think for themselves is antithetical to the most important element to many Atheists. Given this, it is easy to see that Christianity lends itself far more easily to Fascism than Atheism does to Communism.

The last point to consider is the meaning of life, and should such a meaning necessarily be contingent upon the belief in a transcendent deity? Of course, most theists will state that of course it is contingent, as only God can give meaning to an individual’s life. When examined, though, we see that this viewpoint is reached because of a subscription to an ideal of a Straw Man in regards to atheism- namely, that atheism has no meaning to offer, and equates all “truths” as being relative to each other, which lowers the meanings of everything to the lowest common denominator of nothing more than a mechanistic universe. This Straw Man is false, and has been shown to be false again and again, yet still the Fundamentalists like to offer this viewpoint as the truth in regards to those who hold opposing viewpoints to their own. Any cursory inspection (again, that fundamental requisite to intelligently discuss such topics, which most Fundamentalists neglect) of philosophy will show that a meaning for life is not hinged upon the belief in God. In fact, by definition of a meaning for life in the Union of the individual with God after life inherently denigrates all life. By stating that the purpose of life to lie within the unknown (the afterlife and death) one neglects the purpose for this life that is lived.

“If a person cannot find meaning and purpose in their lives without imaging the existence of a state of being after they are dead, they fundamentally devalue and denigrate life itself. Such devaluation, in the long run, only serves to further the cause of violence — especially religious violence — because it encourages people not to value life, whether it is their own life or the lives of other human beings. When life has no value except when it is over, then in the end life simply has no value period.”

For an overview of this philosophical view, go here and here.

Hopefully this will allay some of the myths and stereotypes some fundamentalists hold in regard to Atheism.