Skip to main content
Are atheists moral?

It is often claimed that atheists have no morality, that morality only makes sense through God, that a universal morality exists through God, or that God gave us morality.

All of this is nonsense. (Hey, it's my blog, I can be as blunt as I like!) Let us deal with the last point, that morality comes from God. This statement is meaningless, since God is "everything we don't understand", which says that we don't understand morality. This is factually false, evolutionary psychology does give us a reason for morality. Even if God for some reason wanted us to behave in certain ways (why exactly he would want that escapes me), then how would that be communicated to us? Through prayer? Through stones carted down from Mt Synae? Through the Bible?

The problem with appealing to God is that there are differing religions, each telling their flock different things. There is no reason to suppose that one religion has a connection to God, whilst other religions are simply misguided. I would argue that they are all misguided. What they have in common, apart from a perceived moral superiority over other groups, are to basically love one another and stop being so selfish.

Atheists of course have a sense of right and wrong. It is not just a utilitarian desire to not end up in jail, it is because I don't like to see other people suffer. Besides, I would gain far more by cooperating with people than by conniving against them. Generally, human relationships count far more than material possessions, even for atheists. What right do religions have to claim these values as their own?

These values do not come from God. Well, they come from God in the sense that everything comes from God, which is basically a meaningless statement. Behaviours are actually evolved. Since every human characteristic is subject to natural selection, then the same is also true of our behavioural characteristics. Community, love of our family, and a degree of selflessness are all good for our survival. Our characteristics weren't given to us by God at all!

I would even argue that religious people are less moral than atheists, since they spend their time worrying about unimportant things like in which direction to pray, which food to eat, building buildings for worship, subjugating women and despising other people to the point of violence, all of which are not of any benefit to anybody.

Comments

Calum Grant said…
This is a test comment.
11:50 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking the Article 50 Impasse

Andrew Tyrie overestimates the UK's control over when the UK government can invoke Article 50. As with much of the Brexit debate, hope and aspiration trump cold hard reality. The next few months will see a lot of work by the UK government setting up new departments and policy positions relating to the triggering of Article 50 and Britain's exit from the EU. This is a sensible and necessary delay. However this article by The Independent makes the case that the UK should delay invoking Article 50 until we establish an informal agreement with the EU on our exit terms. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-theresa-may-andrew-tyrie-must-manage-unrealistic-expectations-warns-tory-mp-a7220681.html This is very desirable from the UK's perspective, but flatly contradicts statements by the EU (including direct statements by Jean-Claude Juncker, Donald Tusk and Cecilia Malmström, as well as official EU policy) that no talks can happen prior to invoking Article 50...
3 comments
Read more

Can information theory prove the existence of God?

I recently came across this website by Perry Marshall, which makes a really interesting proof of the existence of God. The argument is basically that DNA constitutes information (a code), yet all information that we know of is the product of a mind. Randomness cannot create information. Therefore, God exists. Lovely argument. Now let's pick some holes. 1) My first observation is that this argument is almost exactly the same as entropy. The argument is that DNA is a low entropy state. Yet randomness always increases entropy. Therefore DNA cannot be the product of random processes, therefore it must be the work of God (or Maxwell's Demon). However this argument is invalid because localised decreases in entropy are perfectly possible, and expected, even though the entropy of the system as a whole increases. Considering that the site claims to make use of information theory, it presumably is aware of information entropy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_entropy It fo...
3 comments
Read more

What next for the UK?

Although events are unfolding at a rapid pace, a lot of these things are largely irrelevant. It looks like the Conservative Party will hold itself together and conduct an orderly leadership election. The sheer panic of Friday 24rd of June is now over, and the markets have rebounded. There will be no annulment of the result, no re-runs, and no early general election. The rhetoric of the Leave politicians has changed. There has been a huge amount of back-pedalling by the Leave campaigners, who now recognise late in the day the need to cooperate closely with Europe. They now recognise that they must (1) stay in the single market, and (2) retain bank "passporting" rights, which mean that our banks can operate in Europe from London. By default, both of these would be forfeited if we left the EU. The markets have responded positively, because if Britain does maintain access to the single market and passporting, then it's almost business as usual. But I fear their optimism ...
Post a Comment
Read more