Why be Moral?

The case for objective moral truths.

Outline • Objective values vs Relativism • Arguments against the need for God • • • • •

The “Greatest happiness” I can be good without God I can be moral without God Evolution explains everything: “Herd Morality” It is in our best self-interest

• Arguments for the necessity of God • Materialism and Determinism • The Problem of Moral Accountability

“Objective” values • To say that moral values and duties are objective is to say they are valid and binding independent of human opinion. ― Nazism is evil whether the Nazis thought it was good or not ― And it would still have been evil even if the Nazis had won World War II and succeeded in brainwashing or exterminating everyone who disagreed with them, so everybody who was left thought the Holocaust was good.

Relativism • Relativism denies that humanity has an essential nature.

• All actions are simply personally judged to have a pleasant or unpleasant effect.

• How to respond • Ask how he would feel if the positions were reversed.

• Relativists are generally speaking inconsistent. Their actions are judged according to relative morality, but actions which harm them are considered to be evil.

Arguments against the need for God Good without God

“The Greatest Happiness” •

Some atheists maintain that the best moral system is that which brings the greatest happiness, the least amount of suffering, and the greatest freedom for as many people as possible. ― Slavery: The greatest happiness for the greatest number of people means that a minority of people should suffer in bondage. ― But if the atheist says that it is wrong to enslave a minority to benefit the majority, then why is it wrong? Because he said so? If he says it’s wrong because the minority is suffering, so what? Why is suffering wrong?

• From an atheistic worldview, why is it morally wrong to oppress a minority to benefit the majority?

I can be good without God • Are our values mere social conventions

― Driving on the left versus the right side of the road

• Are our values mere expressions of personal preference ― Liking certain foods and not others

• Are our values valid independently of our apprehension of them, and if so, what is their foundation?

I can be good without God • If morality is just a human convention, then why should we act morally, especially when it conflicts with self-interest?

• We might act in precisely the same ways that we do in fact act, but in the absence of God, such actions would no longer count as good (or evil), since if God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist. ― Thus, we cannot truly be good without God.

I don’t have to believe in God to be moral • This is not the question ― There is no reason to think that atheists and theists alike may not live what we normally characterize as good and decent lives.

• If moral and ethical principles then are neither derived from God nor anchored in some transcendent ground, are they purely arbitrary?

“Herd Morality” •

On a naturalistic view, moral values are just the behavioral byproducts of biological evolution and social conditioning.

• A troupe of baboons exhibit co-operative and even selfsacrificial behavior because natural selection has determined it to be advantageous in the struggle for survival

•

As a result of sociobiological pressures there has evolved among homo sapiens a sort of "herd morality" that functions well in the perpetuation of our species.

“Herd Morality” •

"If … men were reared under precisely the same conditions as hive-bees, there can hardly be a doubt that our unmarried females would, like the worker-bees, think it a sacred duty to kill their brothers, and mothers would strive to kill their fertile daughters, and no one would think of interfering.“ - Charles Darwin (The Descent of Man)

•

"There is at bottom no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pointless indifference. … We are machines for propagating DNA. … It is every living object's sole reason for being.“ - Richard Dawkins

Acting “Unfashionably” •

If the moral principles that govern our behavior are rooted in habit and custom, feeling and fashion then the non-conformist who chooses to flout the herd morality is doing nothing more serious than acting unfashionably.

•

If there is no God, then any ground for regarding an evolved morality by homo sapiens as objectively true seems to have been removed. ― Some action, say, incest, may not be biologically or socially advantageous and so in the course of human evolution has become taboo; but there is on the atheistic view nothing really wrong about committing incest.

•

The fact is that we do apprehend objective values, and we all know it. ― Actions like rape, torture, child abuse, and brutality are not just socially unacceptable behavior—they are moral abominations.

Self-interest • Somebody might say that it is in our best selfinterest to adopt a moral life-style. ― We all know situations in which self-interest runs smack in the face of morality. ― Hand grenade

• Why should you sacrifice your self-interest and especially your life for the sake of someone else?

― There can be no good reason for adopting such a selfnegating course of action on the naturalistic world view.

Arguments for the necessity of God If there is no God then everything is permitted.

- Fyodor Dostoevsky

Materialism & Determinism •

The objective worthlessness of human beings on a naturalistic world view is underscored by two implications of that world view: ―

•

Naturalists are typically materialists who regard man as a purely animal organism. ― ―

•

materialism & determinism

If man has no immaterial aspect to his being (soul, mind, etc.), then he is not qualitatively different from other animal species.

On a materialistic anthropology there is no reason to think that human beings are objectively more valuable than rats.

If there is no mind distinct from the brain, then everything we think and do is determined by the input of our five senses and our genetic make-up. ― ―

It becomes impossible to condemn war, oppression, or crime as evil.

Nor can one praise brotherhood, equality, or love as good.

Materialism & Determinism •

A person is not morally responsible for an action he is unable to avoid.

•

Atheist must believe that all of our actions are causally determined and that there is no free will. ― If there is no free will, no one is morally responsible for

anything. ― If God does not exist, we are trapped in a morally valueless world in which nothing is prohibited.

•

What the theist offers is not a new set of moral values — by and large we share a wide range of positions of applied ethics — rather what we can offer is a sound foundation for the moral values and duties that we both hold dear.

The problem of moral accountability •

If there is no God, no moral accountability, then we have to believe that our moral choices are ultimately insignificant.

•

It is nearly impossible to do the right thing when that means sacrificing one’s own self-interest with the belief that ultimately it does not matter what you choose to do

•

The belief that one will be held accountable for one’s actions actually strengthens the moral life.

•

Theism is thus a morally advantageous belief

The problem of moral accountability • Even if there were objective moral values and duties under naturalism, they are irrelevant because there is no moral accountability.

• If life ends at the grave, it makes no difference whether one lives as a Stalin or as a saint.

Questions to ask Atheists • What makes certain actions right or wrong for us?

• What or who imposes moral duties upon us?

• Why is it that we ought to do certain things and ought not to do other things?

• Where does this ‘ought’ come from?

www.catholicfidelity.com