Class 10 Session B Notes

Transcription

1 Class 10 Session B Notes Atheistic Metaphysic: There is no ultimate reason for our existence. Greg Graffin and Steve Olson, Anarchy Evolution: Faith, Science and Bad Religion in a World Without God, Harper Perennial, 2010, p. 4 No a priori purpose exists... There is no planning Spirit, since evolution itself is the planner and creates its own laws. Franz. M. Wuketits, Biologie und Kausalitat Berlin, Hamburg, 1981,p morality is a biological adaptation no less than are hands and feet and teeth. Considered as a rationally justifiable set of claims about an objective something, ethics is illusory. I appreciate that when somebody says, 'Love thy neighbor as thyself,' they think they are referring above and beyond themselves. Nevertheless, such reference is truly without foundation. Morality is just an aid to survival and reproduction...and any deeper meaning is illusory. Michael Ruse, Evolutionary Theory and Christian Ethics, in The Darwinian Paradigm (London: Routledge, 1989), pp The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference." Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life, Basic Books, New York, 1995 In the end of the cosmos it s not going to matter. You and I are like ants or rats or like pieces of broccoli, really, in the big picture...there is no value to our species...we are no different than a piece of broccoli in the cosmic sense. Dan Barker in debate with Paul Manata, on Reggie Finely s Infidel Guy Internet Radio Program We may think we re pretty good and important, but there is absolutely nothing in the blind, meaningless events to suggest the slightest purpose, value, or significance in our existence. If we should be so foolish as to annihilate ourselves in an atomic holocaust or through the strangling pollution of the earth, it will make not the least difference in the scheme of things. Roger S. Jones (Associate Prof. Of Physics, University of Minn.), Physics for the Rest of Us, Contemporary Books, Chicago 1992, p. 131 We are machines for propagating DNA, and the propagation of DNA is a self- sustaining process. It is every living object s sole reason for living. Richard Dawkins, (1991). The Ultraviolet Garden, Royal Institute Christmas Lecture, No. 4., Barbour, Ian G. (2000). When Science Meets Religion (pg. 155). Harper Collins. Man is the product of causes which had no provision of the end they were achieving; that is origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought and feeling,

2 can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system, and that the whole temple of man s achievement must inevitably be buried the debris of a universe in ruins all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand. Bertrand Russell, A Free Man s Worship, 1933 as quoted in Mario Beauregard and Denyse O Leary, The Spiritual Brain, Harper Perennial, 2008, p. 24 Atheism: Objective Moral Values Sam Harris Moral Landscape defines good in a moral sense as flourishing human life Problem: we can imagine a possible world in which evil people are flourishing. Clearly Harris is not using good in a moral sense and his moral landscape isn t moral at all! Atheism: Objective Moral Duties Science has no methods for deciding what is ethical. It is a matter for individuals and for society. Richard Dawkins, A Devil s Chaplain, Boston: Houghton & Mifflin, 2003, p. 34 Where is morality grounded? In individuals? Then how can one individual legitimately judge the actions of another? Society? Then how can one society judge the actions of another society? Which society am I to listen to? Why? What about the social reformers? Were they immoral? What is society decided it was moral to kill all atheists would society still be an appropriate ground for moral duties? How do we feel about the morality exemplified in other cultures? Is moral progress possible? If so there must be an objective standard to which we ought to strive towards? Where did this standard come from? Did morals evolve? Ø Not obvious Ø Children need training (why?) Ø (No training to breathe!) Ø Next generation more evolved? Ø Why instruct them? Enlightened Self Interest: an appropriate ground? Do whatever makes you happy in this life, but don t hurt others because they may get you back and that will make you unhappy. Is this really an appropriate moral philosophy? Consider: What if someone didn t care about getting hurt or could escape the social consequences of their actions (i.e. raping someone). On this system the actions of these people would have to be considered moral!

3 Societal Impact? This view says that certain acts are not wrong in themselves but we have come to view them as wrong because they disrupt social bonds. What about situations where a person is victimized apart from society (say in a dungeon somewhere)? Is such victimization really morally neutral until society becomes aware of it? Altruism In evolutionary terms it is a puzzle because any organism that helps others at its own expense stands at an evolutionary disadvantage. So if many people really are true altruists, as it seems, why haven t greedier, self- seeking competitors wiped them out? Science writer Mark Buchanan, Charity Begins at Homo Sapiens, New Scientist, March 12, 2005, as quoted by Beauregard, The Spiritual Brain, p. 9 The prevalence of altruistic acts providing benefits to a recipient at a cost to the donor can seem hard to reconcile with the idea of the selfish gene, the notion that evolution at its base acts solely to promote genes that are most adept at engineering their own proliferation. Benefits and costs are measured in terms of the ultimate biological currency reproductive success. Genes that reduce this success are unlikely to spread in a population. Karl Sigmund et al., The Economics of Fair Play, Scientific American, Vol. 286, January 2002, p. 87. Some psychologists argue that a person gets a hidden reward for altruism. The benefit is feeling good, or at least avoiding the guilt for not helping. This reasoning attempts to reserve the rewards/costs model and explain away the altruistic paradox, but it sidesteps some large issues, such as where the good or guilty feelings come from in the first place and why some people are more altruistic than others. Perhaps most tellingly, it cannot explain why we feel good just knowing that somebody is being helped, even when we have nothing to do with helping and receive no credit. ABC s of the Human Mind, Reader s Digest Association, 1990, p316; Editor, Alma E. Guinness; Chief Consultant: Herbert H. Krauss, PhD (Professor of Psychology, Hunter College, CUNY), Specialist Consultants: Martin Milner MD,(Instructor in Psychiatry, Cornell University Medical College); Murk- Hein Heinemann MD (Associate Professor of Ophthalmology, Cornell University Medical College); Helen E. Fisher PhD (Dept. of Anthropology, American Museum of Natural History); Donald Mender MD (Founder of Neuropsychiatric Service Payne Whitney Clinic); Patrick R. Bradley- Moore MD, MRCP, DMRD, (Researcher in Nuclear Medicine, Medical Director Bronx Medical Clinic) Atheistic description of altruistic behavior: Our brains misfire when presented with a situation to which we have not evolved an evolutionary response. Robert Trivers, Rutgers University, as quoted by Science writer Mark Buchanan, Charity Begins at Homo Sapiens, New Scientist, March 12, 2005 In other words, we should be selfish because evolution has wired us that way. And if not, our brains are wired wrong. Mario Beauregard, commenting on Trivers assessment of altruism, The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist s Case for the Existence of the Soul, Perennial, 2007, p.10

4 Which worldview comports which our shared sense that those who risk their lives to save others ought to be recognized and rewarded? On atheism we are just machines whose actions are strongly determined by genetics and environment. Why give a metal to a machine that cannot do otherwise? Atheists do believe in objective morals It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence." William Kingdon Clifford, professor of mathematics and mechanics at University College London, 1877 essay "The Ethics of Belief", As quoted in the Manitoba Humanist, November 2010, Volume 6, Issue 11 mb.humanists.ca they just cannot account for this belief! Clearly it is Christian Theism alone which can account for our shared sense of objective morality (Romans 2:14-15) God is Answer: For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself, Hebrews 6:13 GOD: The Greatest Conceivable Being Ø The Ground of all being Ø The Standard of rational thought Ø The Locus of objective morality Ø Values Ø Duties In [Christ] are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. Colossians 2:3 Jesus saith unto him, I am...the truth, John 14:6 The Christian God provides the necessary foundation for philosophy, science, history and morality. Frankfurt s insightful comment: The claim that a basis for doubt is inconceivable is justified whenever a denial of the claim would violate the conditions or presuppositions of rational inquiry. Harry Gordon Frankfurt, professor of philosophy at Princeton University, - Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vol. 2, p. 414

5 It seems as though Christianity must be seen as indubitable just because any denial of its claims would violate the conditions or presuppositions of rational inquiry. We may say with Bahnsen and Van Til that the proof of Christianity is the impossibility of the contrary. If Christianity is not true, then we are unable to know/prove anything!