[PW] Athiests and Morality

[Hadden, Robert L ERDC-TEC-VA]

	The defense of religion is older than the 19th century. This was an
important point in 17th and 18th century Europe, especially after the French
Revolution and the excesses of the Terror. Since many of the revolutionaries
proclaimed themselves atheist, many non-Frenchmen placed the horrors of the
revolution on their lack of Christian morality.
	Morality as a shared system of ethics comes from divine authority.
Absent this authority, there is no common voice to say what people can and
can't do. If there is no divine authority of good, there is no divine
authority of evil. Thus, why not raise children as a food source? After all,
if God says to save the children, then if there is no God, who is to say that
devouring your children during time of famine is wrong instead of rational
and clever? Or destroying today's natural resources for temporary personal
gain, which will beggar the next generation? And if you don't believe in
divine law and retribution, you cannot be judged in this matter, especially
by other atheists who don't share a common belief with you.
	Richard Bentley (1662-1742), neatly states the view that many
atheists hold concerning the relationship between religion and morality: "And
if Atheism should be supposed to become universal in this nation... farewell
all ties of friendship and principles of honor; all love for our country and
loyalty to our prince; nay, farewell all government and society itself, all
professions and arts, and conveniences of life, all that is laudable or
valuable in the world." [Bentley, Folly of Atheism, in Works, III, 25] 
	The general view defended by Bentley, and many other apologists for
religion, is that without religious principles and institutions to guide and
motivate us, the moral world will collapse into nihilism, egoism and the
arbitrary rule of power. This view of things was further confirmed, as Hume's
near contemporaries saw it, by the philosophy of Hobbes. See:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume-religion/#9	
	Many atheists share a common morality, but it isn't universal.
However, there is no agreed principle of morality among atheists like there
is among Christians or Jews or Hindus, etc. If all is rational, then only
rational morality is valid. There is breakdown between common good and
individual ethics. 

Lee

R. Lee Hadden
Geospatial Information Library (GIL)
Topographic Engineering Center
ATTN: CEERD-TO-I (Hadden)
7701 Telegraph Road
Alexandria, VA 22315-3864
(703) 428-9206
Robert.L.Hadden at usace.army.mil

See some of my writings, both online and on paper, at my author page at:
http://www.librarything.com/author/haddenrobertlee

-----Original Message-----

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 14:53:26 -0500
From: Paul Zimmerman <pzimmer at wcnet.org>
Subject: [PW] Atheist (im)morality
To: list at project-wombat.org
Message-ID: <47B1F936.5000907 at wcnet.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

The common belief among many of the "faithful" that atheists are 
necessarily immoral people is fairly well known. That this is not 
necessarily so is also well known to anyone who thinks. But all 
stereotypes or folk beliefs have an origin. In this case it was probably 
the rebellion against the sanctimonious hyper-morality of the Victorian 
era. I seem to recall but cannot locate a specific example. A prominent 
19th century person, author, scientist, philosopher (one of the 
Utilitarians, perhaps?), I'm not sure, who said specifically "Morality 
is bunk" -- not meaning that he had the right to lie, steal, or whatever 
he pleased, but simply that Pecksniffian decorum was over the top. It 
might have been that he wanted to be able to get a divorce, which was 
definitely an outrageous thing in the 19th century.

Now, this phrase has had a recent revival. I am _not_ looking for the 
modern repeater(s) of this phrase, but the original, which I am fairly 
certain is in the mid-19th century.


------------------------------