The Big Lie: Morality
given its force and validity by God? No - you mean Faith!
Where is the explanation for morality really coming from?
Believers glibly say it is God. They say that is their explanation.
But there is a difference between the explanation or explanations and their
explanation. The real explanation is the right one but their explanation is just
their explanation. Even if it is right it is based on their say-so so it might
as well be wrong. It is only through luck if it is right.
Believers say we have to believe in a good God to explain how moral values are
real objective existing things. Read that carefully. It is really belief in God
they base the morals on. But basing them on belief in God is not the same as
basing them on God himself. It is basing them on human observation and
interpretation. Belief is caused by evidence and what we perceive the evidence
to be indicating. Despite saying morality basically comes from God, the
believers end up saying we are the judges of morality after all. Yet that is the
very attitude they condemn in the atheist and agnostic. At least there is an
excuse for us for we don't believe! What excuse will they have if they have to
face God?
To base morality on God involves a huge and fundamental lie. And a morality
based on telling lies is not a morality.
If we sense that morality is objective does that mean that we need to believe in
God to see it as objective? Why not settle for saying the matter is unexplained?
It is better to do that than to be dogmatic and say you need God to have belief
in an objective morality. To bring God in may seem to help one way but in the
bigger picture it's a failure.
Also if morality needs something to be objectively true we can say that it is
objectively true but we don't know why. The possibility that it is God is not
equal to the possibility that it is something else because it is better to
favour some natural possibility than a magical one if you are going to favour
any. Better to say you don't know than to favour any possibility. There is no
law that says we have to be able to explain everything. Emphasising God as a
possibility is dishonest and manipulative in itself for no one possibility
should matter more than the rest.
What do we say to, "We believers have a point. We are right to say that morality
can only be grounded in belief in God." We can reply that it does not matter
what we think about God's role as long as we do not do harm. They after all say
that God has put moral tendencies in us. They will be there even if we decide
there is no God. So if the argument is right it still does not necessarily make
faith in God a good or necessary thing. But it does matter what we think of
faith's role.
It is terrible if there is a God who makes something good merely by commanding
it. But faith in such a God's existence is far worse. Faith in God is one thing
and God is another. It is too much for believing in. It is as immoral as
believing that God wants babies murdered in order that they may pay for the sins
of others so that they can go to heaven. It is not about if God is bad or not
but the badness of many forms of faith.
Does God as creator create morality? Where do moral values come from? Does the
question even make sense? Creation of moral values by God? Is it a theory we can
accept? It is not a theory for we don't really know what it means to say that
something can come from nothing by God's agency. Though it is clear that the
idea makes no sense, it is possible to imagine that it does. It is your
imagination that gets you fooled. The witch turning to stone makes no sense if
you make the effort to see that you cannot understand it. Then the imagination
is kept at bay. Creation is all faith. It cannot even be called a theory.
A rule such as "Don't steal somebody's lunch" or "Don't fiddle your tax return"
is not a moral value but expresses a moral value. The rules value honesty. The
honesty is the moral value.
It is not really belief in God the believers get their sense of moral values
from. It is from the assumption that he has not made them by chance. Moral
values being based on an assumption means they are assumptions themselves.
It is better to value honesty and kindness and mercy etc because you simply
experience them as somehow totally valuable than to depend on an assumption.
Assuming them is insulting them and opening the door to those who wish to assume
that hating enemies or whatever is totally valuable.
If you tie God and morality together, you end up saying one has a moral
obligation to believe in God and whatever God teaches. In fact, you cannot have
an obligation to believe anything for you either believe it or you don't. You
end up saying that dogma should be enforced by moral law. Disagreements about
dogma are really petty. Disagreements about morality may cause harm and
confusion that results in people mistakenly doing wrong or putting people off
the idea of worrying about moral instruction. Bringing God or dogma in only
results in the credibility of morality being reduced and seems to want to
justify the pettiness of disagreements about dogma. There is so much
disagreement about morality that to say your moral ideas come from God really
translates as, "I know what God wants and therefore who is as wonderful as me?
My moral beliefs are fantastic so I'd expect God to agree with me." It is
blasphemy.
Many believers in the argument, “You cannot believe in morality without
believing in God” think the argument is probably true. And they admit they think
it. That is to say it is at least 51% probable. Nobody cares how probable
you think it is as long as you think it is probable. That is very odd. Surely
you want belief in morality to be as strong as possible! And there is no
such thing as thinking something is a fact being enough. It is not.
A fact doesn't care what you think and is not about what you think. A fact
is a fact no matter what you think. If morality and each item in its
complex code of accepted behaviours is a fact then it needs to be recognisable
as a fact. Calling something a fact because you think it is a fact is to
lie and to endanger truth. It is dangerous to put out things as fact when
you are not sure.
Thinking each rule of morality and morality itself is a fact is dangerous and counter-productive and arrogant. It contradicts the very morality it pretends to protect.
Adding in the thought that God makes the rules and that
makes them fact is only worse. It is a new manifestation of the arrogance.
God is not faith. Faith comes from you. To base morality on faith in God and
then say that you believe morality comes from God is to lie. You are trying to
decree morality for yourself and others as if you are God. You are playing God.
If you are charitable that will not last!