Imagine, Morality Without God

Transcription

1 Imagine, Morality Without God There are various religious institutions throughout the world. These establishments basis is upon a common view of moral principles. Each religion differs in opinion of how these principles were founded and these differences of opinion have caused hardship for humanity. Humanity is in dire need of moral content without a connection to various traditional religious beliefs. We should have moral content without religion because religion offers an extrinsic reward which over justifies morality, there are great differences between moral codes of various religions, and the future of humanity depends upon a rational, moral standard. One prime example of the necessity for moral content without religion is the external reward which over justifies morality. Utilizing humanity s greatest fear, death, religion rewards morality with eternal life. As John Locke states he that takes away Reason to make way for Revelation, puts out the Light of both, and does much what the same, as if he would perswade a Man to put out his eyes, the better to receive the remote Light of an invisible Star by a Telescope (26, Locke). For example, the Conquistadors, a Spanish superpower traveled across the sea in search of souls during their religious campaign, and destroyed ancient civilizations. The Conquistadors conquered Native Americans throughout South, Central and North America in the name of Christianity. In addition, plantation owners in the 1800 s argued that Christianity helped the slaves become "civilized." Enduring a life time of suffering, the slaves were promised happiness

2 in the afterlife. Evidentially, those who chose not to follow where likely put to death. These external rewards replace the rational, internal reward of living morally because it is essential to human existence. The importance of morality is humanity s ability to provide positive results that benefit existence. We must disregard the immortality of the human soul and divine providence in order to have a clear, rational understanding of morality. According to Immanuel Kant: First, formulate a maxim that enshrines your reason for acting as you propose. Second, recast that maxim as a universal law of nature governing all rational agents, and so as holding that all must, by natural law, act as you yourself propose to act in these circumstances. Third, consider whether your maxim is even conceivable in a world governed by this law of nature. If it is, then, fourth, ask yourself whether you would, or could, rationally will to act on your maxim in such a world. If you could, then your action is morally permissible.(29, Kant) This formula describes a simplistic method for moral reasoning. Foregoing the extrinsic rewards offered in scripture, we rationalize an intrinsic value of empathy and reciprocity. Humanity must refocus its attention on an intrinsic reward. A reward which involves the betterment of our species. Also, due to my own experience with religion. I was raised Catholic, and frequently attended church throughout my youth. The majority of my friends within and outside of the Catholic religion had a difficult time separating the concept of God, and the need to live by a moral standard. In other words, if there is no god then there is no purpose in living a moral existence. As Dostoevsky's Ivan

3 Karamazov stated "If there is no God, I am free to rape my neighbor! (3, Waal) Such thinking is destructive and irrational. It has a devastating effect on the development of people today. Morality should not be dependent upon religion because there are great differences between moral codes of various religions. Religions create complex resources that often contradict one another. In the Old Testament, it states An eye for an eye, whereas in the New Testament, Jesus is quoted to say Turn the other cheek. The regurgitation of scriptures, and the paradox of these various translations confuse the masses. As Cornel West put it, The problem is that we need much more moral content(6, West). With the exception of a few philosophers, it is difficult to locate resources of up to date, rational, moral standards which are not, in some way, linked to religion. Throughout the past few years, I have discussed morality without religion with various atheists and agnostics who have similar opinions of what it means to live morally. They advocate basic human values and uphold strong moral standards. It is important for society to have information regarding basic moral principles available. An underlying problem in society today is that humanity s moral roots are closely tied with traditional religious beliefs. There are a staggering amount of people who are either non religious, atheist, secular, or agnostic. According to Space and Motion s statistics, there are over 850 million people who are either non religious, atheist, secular, or agnostic(10, Theology: Major World Religions). The majority of these people believe that they live by some sort of moral principles without the unnecessary aims of the church. As Bertrand Russell put it The man who holds concentrated within his own mind, as within a camera obscura, the depths of space, the evolution of the sun and its planets, the

4 geological ages of the earth, and the brief history of humanity, appears to me to be doing what is distinctively human and what adds most to the diversified spectacle of nature (3, Russell). Also, we should have more moral content without religion because the future of humanity depends upon a rational, moral standard. Based on my experience, religion has frightened me from acknowledging traditional religious beliefs because of religion s long history of oppression and discrimination from one another. From the Crusades to Nazi Germany, religion has played as an important role in death and destruction as it has in life and prosperity. I have studied many religions, such as Christianity, Islam and Judaism and find their foundation of moral standards to be extremely similar. With more and more people born, who are non religious, our future depends on non biased moral content. We need this moral content without the religious roots which often confuse and keep a strong separation between groups of humanity. Dietrich Bonhoeffer once said The ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world that it leaves to its children (7, West). Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a strong, Christian leader and his words convey an important message for us today. Our ability to provide our children with moral content which is separate from any traditional religious beliefs would leave a much more empathic, and compassionate world. We need to leave a world free of oppression and segregation. John Lennon wrote and sung: Imagine there's no Heaven It's easy if you try No hell below us

5 Above us only sky Imagine all the people living for today Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too Imagine all the people Living life in peace John Lennon had a perspective on life which expressed humanities power to forego painful, traditional values and understand how to get along with one another. By providing more moral content without religion, we are sending an unbiased, un opinionated message to the future of humanity. A message which states that it is alright to love your neighbor without Leviticus 19:18, it is good to forgive without needing holy communion, and that being good is expected and not only deemed necessary if you want to enter the kingdom of heaven. By living by these scriptures which are thousands of years old, we are preventing ourselves from moving forward and understanding what can lie ahead. The mass segregation of our species, due to different religious beliefs will continue to breed hate and inflict death within our world. Also, a large amount of people come to live without religious traditions, providing basic moral content will allow them to understand the universal laws that religion has inhibited. Each religion has divided people by varying details and interpretation. This action has misconstrued the foundation of morality. The future of humanity needs moral content which does not hinder them from being able to live and work together without such constraints as

6 traditional religious beliefs. Look to the future of humanity the future of our species. My opposition would consist of religious officials who would say that society needs religion in order to uphold moral standards. They believe that humanity is not intelligent enough to live independent of the church and hold moral principles. Also, my opposition would consist of Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, and many other religious people. The opposition might say that if moral standards were originated by God, then rejecting God goes against the foundation of such moral standards. Whereas, in reality, these moral principles are a part of our species, and are deeply rooted here on Earth. God is merely an idea which mirrors our own moral beliefs. There has been neither proof nor disproof of any god, therefore humanity has lived by moral standards in the absence of God for the last two thousand years. Also, the overwhelming amount of people who are unaffiliated with traditional religious beliefs proves the need for moral content without religious ties. Throughout history, these various religious institutions cause discrimination, and death which without their differences of opinion on baptism, particular dates of celebration, and other minuscule affairs, they have very similar opinions of morality. We simply need to separate morality from religion to see things clearly. Conclusively, religion has hindered our ability to focus on a common good outside the boundaries of tradition. Morality is necessary for human existence, but religion is not. Humanity must respect the differences of opinion and beliefs, but religions offer an extreme and almost immoral process. These destructive and self hindering institutions discriminate against various other methods of thinking and

7 ideals. Faith is no place to put our moral standards because it often confuses the two. Humanity must create much more moral content without religious traditions because the future of our species, here on Earth is extremely more important than where we go when we die. Our ability to rationalize our existence is imperative. Although religion offers many kickbacks to being a good person, the Earthly side effects pollute the human mind, body and soul.

8 Work Cited Cline, Austin. "Bertrand Russell: Christianity Encourages Hate & Immorality." About.com 2006: 1. Web. 30 Mar < morality.htm>. "John Locke." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Web. < "Kant's Philosophical Development." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Web. < "Quotes." Think Exist (2006): Web. 30 Mar <thinkexist.com>. "Theology: Major World Religions." Space & Motion (2010): 1. Web. 30 Mar <