The Inconsistency of Atheistic Morality

Atheists often claim that morality can be objective without relying on a higher power or divine authority. However, this assertion is fraught with logical inconsistencies and philosophical difficulties.

The Problem of Moral Ontology

Objective morality implies the existence of moral facts or properties that are independent of human opinions, desires, or cultural variations. Yet, atheism struggles to provide a coherent account of what these moral facts or properties could be.

  • Russell’s Challenge: Bertrand Russell famously asked, “If there is no God, then what is the source of moral obligation?” [1] Atheists have yet to provide a satisfactory answer.
  • The Is-Ought Gap: David Hume’s philosophical conundrum highlights the difficulty of deriving moral oughts from descriptive is-statements about the world. Atheism fails to bridge this gap.

The Failure of Naturalistic Morality

Atheists often appeal to naturalistic explanations, such as evolutionary theory or human well-being, to ground morality. However, these approaches are inadequate:

  • Evolutionary Morality: Richard Dawkins suggests that morality evolved to promote group survival [2]. Yet, this reduces morality to a mere byproduct of natural selection, stripping it of objective value.
  • Well-Being: Sam Harris’s notion of well-being as the foundation for moral values [3] is problematic. What constitutes well-being is subjective and varies across individuals and cultures.

The Inadequacy of Humanistic Morality

Atheists may argue that morality can be based on human dignity, autonomy, or rationality. However, these approaches are flawed:

  • Human Dignity: The concept of human dignity is often rooted in religious or metaphysical assumptions. Without a higher power, it’s unclear what grounds this dignity.
  • Autonomy: Moral principles cannot be derived solely from individual autonomy, as this leads to moral relativism and contradicts the notion of objective morality.

The Problem of Moral Authority

Atheistic morality lacks a compelling account of moral authority:

  • Who Decides?: Without a higher power, it’s unclear who or what entity has the authority to determine moral norms.
  • Moral Arbitrariness: Atheism leaves morality vulnerable to arbitrary decisions and cultural relativism.

Rebutting Common Counterarguments

Some atheists argue that:

  • Morality is an emergent property: This claim is unsupported by empirical evidence and fails to explain how moral properties arise from non-moral components.
  • Moral realism can be had without God: However, this position requires an unexplained moral ontology, which atheism struggles to provide.

Conclusion

Atheistic morality is plagued by inconsistencies and philosophical difficulties. The lack of a coherent account of moral ontology, the failure of naturalistic and humanistic approaches, and the problem of moral authority all undermine the notion that objective morality can be maintained without appealing to a higher power.

As C.S. Lewis astutely observed, “If we are not thinking Adevnturers, but little orthodox gentlemen, who want to keep all their feet on the ground, it is useless to try to make out that morality ‘just happens’ to coincide with the will of God” [4].

In conclusion, a logically consistent and coherent explanation of objective morality requires an appeal to a higher power or divine authority.

References:

[1] Russell, B. (1912). The Problems of Philosophy. Home University Library.

[2] Dawkins, R. (2006). The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press.

[3] Harris, S. (2010). The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values. Free Press.

[4] Lewis, C.S. (1943). Mere Christianity. Geoffrey Bles.