The atheist cannot tell you why man has dignity, yet does cruel things. He looks around and sees man is the highest order of animal and that is all there is. Man is valuable because he is smarter than the other animals. And morality becomes a matter of pragmatism, what works best for the greatest number in society.
. . .
Atheists simply have no basis, on the face of what can be observed in the universe, that man has dignity, that morality can have any foundation other than pragmatism, and that the form and nature of the universe can be known with any degree of certainty.
Christians are terrified of pragmatism. I do not know why, though I have seen the terror on many occasions. Apparently, there is something Really Scary about the thought that we behave well because good behavior actually benefits us, instead of because certain behaviors have been decreed Good by something Other, that our sense or morality is just a byproduct of our being social. Maybe the ethical problem is similar to the biological problem, in which Christians look at the human organism (i.e., themselves in the mirror), feel a certain sense of awe at its complexity, and then declare that such a thing could not have simply emerged as a byproduct of some other process. Maybe the Christian ego can't handle being a byproduct. I don't know.
(Never mind, I suppose, that a great many people are clearly and explicitly unplanned byproducts of their parents' amorous indiscretion, and somehow they manage to get over it and live perfectly happy lives without needing to feel that they are here for a Reason™. Why? Because they understand that they are not robots with someone else's intentions programmed into them, and that the meaning of their lives comes from their own intentions, and not from their parents'. Why we can't have the same kind of disregard for other-intentionality as a giver of meaning to our lives on the level of the species, or for the universe in general, I don't know. It's as if Christians think it's some kind of horrible, fearful thing that they should have to exist without someone else first telling them why.)
The funny thing about these comments from "such small hands" is that she first says atheists cannot tell you why people do cruel things, but then she says atheists cannot tell you why people have morality or dignity. Apparently, atheists have no idea why anyone does anything at all, good or bad, while Christians understand all aspects of human behavior. Except the Christian explanation basically boils down to, "God said this is Good, and that is Bad," which is no explanation at all. For example:
Christian: God says lying is bad.
Atheist: Why?
Christian: Because God said so.
Atheist: But why would God say so? There must be a reason.
Christian: Because God is God.
Meanwhile, the atheist tries to come up with a real explanation. But the moment he does, the Christian ridicules it because it doesn't acknowledge this unreasoning, impenetrable God who decrees morality for no apparent reason.
Atheist: I have discovered why lying is bad!
Christian: Oh?
Atheist: Yes! Lying is bad because it creates a circumstance of distrust that destabilizes the community. While a lie from one person may benefit that person, if lying were taken as a general principle of acceptable behavior, then the helpful fabric of the community would be destroyed and no one would benefit.
Christian: That's ridiculous. It's just pragmatism. What about God?
Atheist: What about God?
Christian: You haven't explained anything at all if you ignore God! That's just pragmatism!
Atheist: What, you mean people don't act in their own interest?
Christian: That's just pragmatism!
Atheist: [throws up hands in exasperation]
Christian: [to the audience] See? Atheists are just angry jerks who deny God!
So the atheist goes back to think some more, this time on a new question: Why do Christians persistently reject explanations for morality that involve mundane causes and effects? Why do they reject any explanation of morality as something that regards all human behaviors as functional? Many Christians will say that we have free will, that we can choose to be good or bad, but why would we choose one or the other? There must be come kind of situational costs or benefits that come into our minds at the point of decision. Otherwise, we're just behaving completely randomly. But the moment we try to figure out what those situational costs or benefits are, they loudly decry the whole basis of our operation. Why? Back to thinking...
4 comments:
You are, of course, misrepresenting the Christian position in your pair of conversations.
A Christian would actually reply something along the lines of "God says lying is bad because he loves us, he knows that lying destabilises the community, and doesn't wish to see that happen."
In most cases, the only difference between the athiest position and Christian one is the different between "advice from a parent" and "advice from experience".
If I'd ever actually had a Christian say what you insist a Christian would say, I would have put that in.
However, if you concede that morality is indeed functional, and not just the result of divine caprice, then why do you need a God telling you to be moral at all? The functionality of morality supports moral behavior.
themorph,
You have to understand that Christianity (and many other moral frameworks) don't exist in a vacuum. For example, one of the presuppositions of Christianity is that humans are not, in fact, perfect -- we are subjective and have lmited ability to understand that world we're in, because we're part of it. God, having created the world and all that's in it (whether by evolution or fiat), understands at a much deeper level what is important and what is beneficial.
As such, His "commands" must be seen in that light. I'm never bothered by someone arriving at the same conclusions via pragmatism. I AM concerned when Christians assume that those with the same pragmatic conclusions share their underlying beliefs. But that, I suppose, is a different discussion.
In any case, while you may disagree with the premise (humans are subjective and imperfect, God sees/knows all and is better suited to MAKE pragmatic judgement calls)... I think that it is a bit more nuanced than your initial post implied.
Verb-- I'm not sure what your point is. Sorry. But you might be interested in my follow up post, Killing Straw Men.
Post a Comment