Christmas, as much as it symbolizes, has become in many ways simply another mad dash to the shopping center. And, when we are asked why we do such things a common answer is “because we have to”, “because we always have”, “because that is what we are suppose to do”, “because I’ve got presents to buy” etc... At the same time it seems most of us claim that we think Christmas has simply turned into an excuse to shop. Christians, claiming Christmas their own, complain that the “true” meaning of Christmas has been lost and needs to be brought back into the holiday spirit. Christians claim that Christmas has a “right reason”, a “real meaning” and that reason and meaning must adhere to their religious beliefs. I claim, as an atheist, that they are missing the point. The real meaning of Christmas is to act good for no reason at all.
The religious claim that atheists have no basis for morality, that we are in fact immoral because we do not accept the stories steeped in tradition but with no evidence whatsoever. They often claim that “atheists have no reason for acting morally” without the belief in God: they claim that atheist have somehow lost the “true” meaning of life, claiming that life has a “right reason”, a “real meaning” and that reason and meaning must adhere to their religious beliefs. These claims are not limited to any single religion: it is the basis of religious thought to offer a moral foundation and it is often the case that those same religious (and moral) minds remind us all that if we don’t “act according to God” then we will be consigned to burn in hellfire for eternity: if we aren’t good, we won’t get a present. The religious mind-set is that without a consequent being moral is impossible, or being moral doesn’t matter. The one argument against atheists is that because we do not believe in God we are consigned to hellfire, and the other argument is that our actions are morally speaking secondary to a belief in God.
The ethics of atheism are virtuous rather than theistic. Theistic ethics are centered upon the authority of God or the acceptance of tradition. To Christians, the bible is the “word of God”. Anyone who reads the bible, however, soon realizes that the Christian ethic has much left to be desired. God kills, rapes, and lies. The Christian circumvents obvious problems by allowing some form of interpretation to be used in deciphering the “word of God”. Also, when many religious are asked why they accept religious ethics they often answer “because we have to”, “because we always have”, “because that is what we are suppose to do”. Muslims do not allow nor do they accept interpretation or tradition to be the cornerstone of their religion: the Qur’an itself (as long as it is written in Arabic) is a miracle and is fundamentally and absolutely true. Jewish people claim that discussion and debate over the Torah is a form of prayer in order to understand the “word of God”. All these religions, however, hold that God is the foundation of any and all ethics, and can for a fact be traced to cultural traditions no matter what the religious “authorities” may claim. Theistic ethics are necessarily authoritarian. Atheistic ethics are not.
Virtue-ethics is a term that is attributed to Aristotle’s Nichomachean ethics, the Greek philosopher’s tribute to how to live one’s life. To Aristotle, virtue was defined as a “moral education”. In short, one must live within a mean, a middle way all the while recognizing extreme ways of living. By educating one’s self, a happy life could be lived. Aristotle’s ethical ideas had the one consequent of being able to be happy most of one’s life. To be good for a reason is to be good with some consequent in mind, but virtue-ethics claimed that happiness is a good in itself. To simply be good is to understand what it is to “be good”. That is to say one must be good for no reason at all. Now, it is true that the atheist does not have the specter of hellfire hanging over his shoulder, but it is also true that such a threat does not make any act good or bad.
The religious claim that without religion, the atheist is ethically lost is simply untrue: the case is actually vice-versa. The atheist is free to be good for no reason at all. There is no god to appease; no devils to fear. It is true that the atheist is “free” in the religious sense from the authority of tradition, the blind acceptance of dogma and doctrine, but it is not true that simply because the religious claim moral authority, claim that it is only through dogma and doctrine that ethical justification is possible, that these claims are true. The atheist can be good or bad, but does not have the luxury of “praying for forgiveness” or sloughing off the responsibility of immoral acts on the “sinful nature of humanity”. The atheist must be good with no ultimate consequent in mind.
Atheists and the religious can be good, they can act moral, for many different reasons. Just because one is religious does not necessarily mean that every good act is done for the “glory of god”. The Christian can have ulterior motives, as can the atheist. Atheists and the religious can also be bad for many different reasons: ignorance, greed, fear all apply. However, the claim made by the religious concerning ethical acts and atheism have to do with the ultimate consequent: a categorical imperative. The atheist is free from this categorical, and being free means that he is responsible for defining and acting on some other imperative, whatever that may be, that is directly connected to personal accountability. “Personal accountability” to the religious mind must, but the very nature of religion, be linked to the religion, to God. The theist acts morally because to do so alleviates the fear of burning in hell and thus leads to happiness; the atheist simply acts good because to do so makes him happy. The theist is correct in claiming that the atheist has no moral foundation, no reason to act good, but the claim is somewhat different than the theist proposes. The theist can act good because to do so alleviates the fear of burning in hell and thus leads to happiness; the atheist simply act can act good for no reason at all.
Search This Blog
