Atheism and Morality

[Nathan]

A simple question, really: Are atheists devoid of morality?

It seems logical enough to me that if God does not exist, and we are all simply just a bunch of over-sized bugs on a ball of dirt in a meaningless space, then there would cease to be right and wrong. Any kind of behavior and conduct would be OK, because nothing matters.

Of course, most atheists would not agree with this position -- they argue that they, in fact, [i]do[/i] have morality. However, I suspect that this "Godless morality" of theirs is simply the result of them having grown up in a culture that still more or less teaches a right and wrong that was founded upon religious belief, a leftover influence that they have not completely shaken. They deny all religion, yet they are still "stuck" with varying degrees of religious influence unbeknownst to them. They take from religion, but they fail to acknowledge it. There is a hypocrisy there that atheists don't seem to be aware of.

I would say that a true atheism, one that has managed to completely shake any and all semblance of religious influence, could only result in a total lack of morality. Pure atheism would be pure anarchism.

Am I right or wrong?

Edited December 6, 2005 by Nathan

[RC_]

Most athiests are also humanists, and claim that society determines what morality is.

This is an immoral stance, because with this logic, everything Hitler did was hunkey-dory, since German society did not see anything wrong with the imprisonment and murder of Jews, Catholics, the Handicapped, and political dissidents.

[Didacus]

Tehcnically spekaing they do have morality, but a very weak one.

The main difference between a Catholic (not necessarily christian - but specifically Catholics) and an atheist is the aaspect of self-sacrifice being at the center of their morality.

An atheist can claim self-sacrifice as much as they want, but when it comes down to the wire, they will never pull through in the large circumstances nor in their daily lives as true Catholics do.

Catholics; would sacrifice everything and be happy in doing so
Atheist: would ultimately obey the sense of self preservation rather than sacrifice themselves. (suicide not being considered sacrifice of course)

[Myles Domini]

An atheist can be moral but can never logically defend their morality as being objective. They can be moral because they have a conscience, but because they reject God's existence, they can never accept that the consience exists as anything other than social and psychological conditioning. They can advocate high flown moral theories e.g. Kantianism and Utilitarianism but with no Creator to advocate between His creations they cannot provide any basis for why one being of equal dignity should command another. The only answer they can offer to that question is Nietchze's: the one with the strongest will to power can force others to obey him. In both cases morality is left as a completely subjective entity. The values of the community decide morality and the values of the community are in turn decided by those with the strongest will to power within them. Hence, if those with the strongest will to power decide something is right it becomes right. No act, no matter how reprehensible is offlimits if there is no God to act as arbiter of morality.

[philothea]

I know of some very moral athiests (Richard Stallman, frex) but I think it is totally illogical stance.

It is frightening to interact with athiests who are consistent with their beliefs.

[Paphnutius]

There needs to be a distinction made here.

Athiests may be ethical but not moral.

Ethics is based on human reason, and morality is based on revelation.

Just thought I might throw that in.

[Deeds]

[quote name='RC_' date='Dec 6 2005, 01:08 PM']Most athiests are also humanists, and claim that society determines what morality is.
[right][snapback]813129[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
That's not really what humanism is - it's about treating your fellow man in the way you'd wish to be treated, in the hope that he'll treat you the same way. A non-religious version of "Love thy neighbour as thyself", or alternatively "You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours."

[blovedwolfofgod]

Wouldnt common grace permit morality and not just ethics? While morality is based on revelation and ethics on reason, it is still impossible to do good without grace. So, even though it is illogical to do anything not self-serving from an atheistic standpoint, being selfless would still be impossible. Would this qualify as an ingrained morality? One that is written on our hearts? God says His word is written on the hearts of man, yet their intellect can deny this and their spirit would if it could.

So, I guess thats my question.

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='blovedwolfofgod' date='Dec 6 2005, 03:32 PM'] So, even though it is illogical to do anything not self-serving from an atheistic standpoint, being selfless would still be impossible. Would this qualify as an ingrained morality?
[/quote]
I did not mean that they could not be moral people, but they could not do something strictly called morality. They would have to recongize it as ethiccs. (at least in the strict sense)

[philothea]

Clarification of terms noted.

[1337 k4th0l1x0r]

An atheist can rid himself of his belief in God, but he cannot rid himself of the fact that he was created by God. God has imbued each of us with a soul and a conscience which provides us with a sense of God's law at a basic level.

[Socrates]

This issue has actually been discussed and debated quite a bit with the atheists on this board. [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=36322&hl="]Here's one of the more recent debates on this topic.[/url]

The atheists were in general quite adament that atheism does not need to immorality, even claiming that atheists by their nature tended to be more moral than "theists."
However, they were not, in my opinion, able to satisfactorally give a rational basis for morality without God, without falling back on "theistic" assumptions.

I morality is man-made, men can always change it.
Some argued that morality existed outside of men, but if there is no God, where do this morality come from?

Edited December 7, 2005 by Socrates

[beatty07]

The wording of the original question is tricky...atheists are not devoid of morality. Atheism is devoid of morality.

They are moral insofar as natural reason and the Holy Spirit working in their conscience cause them to choose Love over consistency in philosophy.

C. S. Lewis put it best...no matter how many halfbaked moral theories the atheist throws at you, you can always ask "sez who?" Thou shalt not rape. Says who?

The only consistent agnostic: David Hume.
The only consistent atheist: Friedrich Nietzsche.

Nathan, your post reminds me of a book I've been wanting to read for years by Alisdair MacIntyre, called "After Virtue." The thesis, as I understand it, is that our civilization has kept a veneer of classical and Christian vocabulary, while gutting these terms of their basis. We talk about right, wrong, good, evil, soul...all of which are nonsense if we are relativists or atheists. It's one of those really really important books that everyone quotes but no one has read.