Saturday, November 2, 2013

WHENCE MORAL STANDARDS?

A major argument that my Christian friends make is that Christianity is responsible for the moral and ethical standards we have in place.  They often admit that it is sometimes difficult to reconcile much of the Bible, particularly the Old Testament vision of a jealous and at times vindictive God, with the Good News of the New Testament.  Instead, they focus on Christ’s teaching, his vision of love, forgiveness, respect, and acceptance, and argue that our system of ethics and morality is in large part the consequence of that vision.  I disagree.

More generally, my friends’ argument goes, Christianity (or at least the Judeo-Christian tradition) is responsible for the societal moral code that we enjoy today.  And, even though we in America our zealous in our protection of religious freedoms, the basis for our societal standards really stems from the Christian roots of our founding fathers, or at least the traditions out of which they sprang.  Because Christian moral and ethical standards constitute the foundation for our cultural norms, even if we do not tie our personal standards directly to a religious belief, those religious foundations nevertheless underlie our cultural norms.  They would argue that I am a case in point.

I am an atheist, not a Christian.  Just like everyone else, I have faults--lots of them.  But I do believe that I am basically a good person, despite my lack of religious beliefs.  I am law-abiding.  I care about and am respectful of others.  The welfare of my family means everything to me, and I would do all I could to make sure they are well provided for and that they have every opportunity for happiness and success.  I enjoy doing small kindnesses.  Since I have retired, I have been spending time doing volunteer work and find it very rewarding.  

My friends reply that, though I am no longer a Christian, I was raised in a Christian environment and my moral code stems from those Christian roots.  And frankly it would be hard for me to argue that my personal moral views were not influenced by my upbringing in a Christian environment.  It would be too difficult to separate out the various influences on my character, if you will.  

But I think one need only look to nonChristian societies to see that this argument actually has the relationship reversed.   Societies that have had long-term success are the ones that have adopted standards that promote a strong moral code of conduct emphasizing cooperation, fairness, respect, and a sense of caring for others.  The moral standards of such enduring societies were not created by religion.  Rather, they have simply been fashioned by socio-evolutionary forces from the fabric of the human condition.  The function of religion has been to rationalize those standards and to make it easier to teach--and in some cases enforce--them.  

Most people are not Christians, but they still have moral standards.  In some cases the standards include a religious rationalization; in some cases not.  Different societies have different standards, but those societies that have longevity have generally adopted very similar codes, at least as they relate to interpersonal relationships and the conduct and regulation of the society generally.  Consider, for example, Buddhist and Hindu cultures which have developed largely independently of any influence from Western culture.  

There certainly have been societies that have had grossly defective moral codes, but these have generally been totalitarian dictatorships, such as Nazi Germany or North Korea, or run by cult leaders like David Koresh or Jim Jones.  And they have generally been very short-lived as a result.

A portion of the Secular Humanist Declaration (See https://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php/11) helps, I believe, to support this point of view and is worth quoting:

Morality that is not God-based need not be antisocial, subjective, or promiscuous, nor need it lead to the breakdown of moral standards. Although we believe in tolerating diverse lifestyles and social manners, we do not think they are immune to criticism. Nor do we believe that any one church should impose its views of moral virtue and sin, sexual conduct, marriage, divorce, birth control, or abortion, or legislate them for the rest of society. As secular humanists we believe in the central importance of the value of human happiness here and now. We are opposed to absolutist morality, yet we maintain that objective standards emerge, and ethical values and principles may be discovered, in the course of ethical deliberation. Secular humanist ethics maintains that it is possible for human beings to lead meaningful and wholesome lives for themselves and in service to their fellow human beings without the need of religious commandments . . . . 

© 2013 John M. Phillips






7 comments:

  1. John, You are one of the most moral and law abiding man I know. Unfortuanlly, I do feel that you can not get save except through Jesus Christ. This is so important to me to find the Way, the Truth, and The Life through Jesus Christ and Him only. I sure do respect your thinking and I know you respect mine too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure you disagree with my primary point which is that moral standards are established independently of religion. We need such standards to live in groups, societies. And such standards come into existence in all cultures--religious or otherwise--simply in order to have the society run smoothly. Religion serves, not to establish moral standards, but to rationalize and enforce them.

      Delete
  2. I often tell people that I am better that biblical morals...and so are they. Morals predate the bible and can be found in non-human animals. If you actually did follow the bibles morals, you would be in prison. Thanks for your thoughts. xoxo-Vada

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your comments, Vada. The moral precepts found in the Bible are so diverse and conflicting that Christians have to pick and choose to conform to contemporary societal standards. It always amazes me that they have no difficulty doing this.

      Delete
  3. Morals are based on love...love as in how John describes it above for His family and so he provides and supports them and cares for them...Anything that is hurtful, unkind to another is amoral. The 10 commandments are like a recipe for good behavior...but they are only that. They aren't the finished outcome...the bread. Jesus was the Bread of Life...He said I am here to show you how to love, how it's done...I live Love...I live according to the will of my Father...because that is my will, we are One...and if you live like that and it becomes your will to live in love towards other, then my kingdom has come...There is no force from God. He only tells us that sin, living outside of love, causes heartache and pain and finally death. But to live we must follow love...that is what the principles of life are built on. You will be happier, fulfilled. Money and things don't buy happiness...being loving is the most precious possession...and you know that in your heart to be true, so that is how you live, John. I love that about you...you are better than so many so called Christians I know...more like Jesus than many!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So my primary argument in this essay was that moral codes derive, not from specific religious teachings and training, such as Jesus's or Paul's teachings, but from the very fundamentals of our human condition and the societal influences that have been built up by our need to live in groups. Maybe you are using the word "love" to signify the same thing.

      The problem is that saying morals are based on love is somewhat circular. In a sense they mean the same thing. And love by itself is such a slippery and complex concept. At least the Greek language recognizes that there are multiple types of "love."

      Lisa, I feel bad saying this, but, even after having read several times what you wrote, I had a great deal of difficulty following the thread of the remainder of your comments. Perhaps the comments have meaning within a Christian context--they are familiar phrases that provide comfort even if they do not provide substance.

      Returning to the point of my essay, I am saying that the moral life is not dependent on belief in God or in the tenets of a particular (or any) faith. Rather they stem from the very nature of our human condition. Religious teachings do not establish the moral order, they only echo one that already exists. And perhaps you are agreeing with that when you say that I, an atheist, can live a moral life.

      Delete
  4. Yes, I do agree with this...religion reinforces the principles of life and how it was created to function...love is inherent...that is what satan has a problem with...he is trying to destroy that nature. Character is developed over a lifetime and you have chosen to follow the principles of love. You are an honorable man! You are Christlike if you will!

    ReplyDelete