Wednesday, October 25, 2023

Atheism and Morality, part 1, Where Does Morality Come From?

Christians sometimes ask atheists, “If you don’t believe in God, how can you be a moral person?”  

The question is really two questions.  First, how do you know what is moral without being told by a religious authority?  Second, how do you control your impulses without the threat of divine punishment?  I will consider the first question in this post, and the second question in the next.

The entire question is vague, because “a moral person” is poorly defined and is up for considerable debate.  If the chosen definition of a moral person involves religious observance, then no, an atheist is not going to fit that definition of morality.  But any thoughtful person can independently determine what is moral and what is not.  I have found that atheists, accustomed to thinking for themselves, are typically more considerate of right and wrong than religious people.  
 
Angel Aziraphale & Demon Crowley, from Good Omens, by N. Gaiman and T. Pratchett

I settled in to do a small bit of research for this post, and quickly realized that I could fall into a very deep rabbit-hole without adding any clarity about the subject.  So I will take a shallow look at the meaning of morality and then address the question of how atheists can be moral people.  

There’s a growing body of academic work on the topic of morality.  The research is focused on the development of morality with maturity, and cross cultural patterns of accepted morality.  There are a few core values across cultures that are widely regarded as moral, though the list of values is by no means settled.  This post will look at the development of moral thinking, moral foundation theory, the Ten Commandments, my own thoughts about morality, and finally, the relationship of morality to atheism.

Development of Moral Thinking
Lawrence Kohlberg (1958) built on the work of Jean Piaget (1932) in looking at the development of moral thinking in children.  Kohlberg defined a hierarchy of six levels of moral development, beginning with the thinking of young children, and continuing to the thinking in (some) adults.  In summary, the six levels represent a growth in care and respect for others.  These include the values of physical well-being, property rights, and liberty.  With increasing maturity, there is an overall decrease in the acceptance of authoritarian guidance on morality, and an increase in independent thought and action relative to morality.  
Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development

Moral Foundations Theory

Moral Foundations Theory is a 21st century attempt to categorize moral precepts across cultures.  It was proposed to counter the “developmental rationalist” approach by Kohlberg.  The Moral Foundations authors identify six core values across cultures: Care, Fairness, Loyalty, Authority, Sanctity and Liberty; the converse of these values represent immorality.  Earlier work had identified the areas of autonomy, community and divinity as representing cross-cultural clusters of moral concern.  

The Moral Foundation authors remain open to additions or deletions of these core values.  Not surprisingly, there are disputes regarding moral variation across cultures and additional proposed core values.  Other proposed values include efficiency, ownership (property rights), honesty and equity (separate from fairness(?)).  The discourse with respect to Moral Foundations has taken on a decidedly political turn, with conservative and liberal views being argued and amended over what qualifies as fairness in economic distribution.  Certain views of morality appear to be reverse-engineered from self-interest, which is a long way from the authors’ original concept of universal morality.  

The Ten Commandments

Conservative Christians often cite the Ten Commandments as the foundation of morality.  Like the Greek myth that Prometheus gave fire to humanity, there is a Christian myth that God gave morality to humanity.  Conservatives frequently campaign to post the commandments in courts and schools, ignoring the glaring illegality of doing so.  The First Amendment prohibits establishment of a state-sponsored religion, and posting the Ten Commandments in official government facilities would clearly violate that ban.
Ten Commandments, von Carolsfeld, 1850
With that aside, let’s consider what values are expressed by the Ten Commandments.  I will  note that the subdivision and numbering of the commandments is vague and not universally agree upon.  I will use the traditional Christian numbers for this discussion.  

The first four commandments concern the relationship between God and humans.  Certain behaviors are required or prohibited as a form of respect toward God.   The remaining six concern relationships between people.  Here is the list, and the values represented by the commandments.

        You shall have no other gods before me.         Relationship to God.
        You shall not worship any graven image.        Relationship to God.
        Do not take the name of God in vain.              Relationship to God.
        Remember the Sabbath.                                   Relationship to God.
        Honor your father and mother.                         Respect and fairness.
        You shall not kill.                                             Care, avoidance of harm, respect, civil order.
        You shall not commit adultery.                        Sexual behavior, purity, respect, clear inheritance.
        You shall not steal.                                           Property rights, respect, civil order.
        You shall not bear false witness.                      Truth, fairness, civil order.
        You shall not covet your neighbor’s things.     Property rights, civil order.


So we see that the Ten Commandments include generally acknowledged elements of morality, involving respect and care for others.  But the Commandments begin, in a prioritized order, with moral sentiments that are explicitly rejected by atheists as nonsensical.  The remaining commandments, while dealing with aspects of fairness and respect, also show that maintaining civil order is also a priority of the commandments.

Moses Breaking the Tablets of the Law, Gustave Dore, 1866

My Take on Morality
Since there is no clear definition of morality, it’s fair that I weigh in with what morality means to me.  I generally agree with the ideas in the Development of Moral Thinking theory.  I agree with some ideas in the Foundations of Moral Thinking theory, but with the caveat that the moral consensus has changed radically over time, and will probably continue to change.  Some part of the moral consensus will soon be judged to be incorrect.  Historically, there has been a consensus about a patriarchal morality across many cultures, but modern western cultures would find many of those ideas unjust.  Consensus and tradition are insufficient; we have to think about these things from the perspective of human values.

The clearest moral principles reflect respect and care for other people.  Many religions contain these principles.  It has been said that the Golden Rule is intrinsic to all religions.  Like the Golden Rule, moral principles can be independently derived by anyone of sufficient intelligence and maturity.  Above all, universal moral principles should reflect care and respect for other people.  “Other people” includes those of different races, ethnicity, beliefs, origin, sexual identity or orientation, age, near and far, and people in the future.  Aspects of that respect should include safety, health and well-being, property rights and liberty, including freedom of sexual orientation and identity. Morality should also include self-care, and care for animals and nature for their own sake.

A few years ago, I initiated a project to identify the core values for the Alaska Democratic party, and to write those values into the state platform.  I interviewed about 40 Democrats, and asked about their  values.   It was clear that there was a strong consensus about key values, but often expressed in different words.  I identified related values and grouped those into six core values.  After some valuable editing, my six core values were named as Empathy, Truth, Equity, Service, Progress, and Responsibility.    A seventh value, Ethics, was added in the editing process.   I also see Ethics as the intersection of Truth and Responsibility.  

Included in each value are other facets which relate to the named core value.  For example, Empathy includes compassion, kindness and generosity.  Truth includes integrity, honesty and accountability.  Equity is a broad value, including fairness, justice, democracy, intentional inclusiveness, equal opportunity, human dignity, diversity, and respect.  Responsibility means taking action for good and ensuring that we create a better world for others and nature, now and in the future.  In the words of Thomas Jefferson, these values are self-evident, without needing the imprimatur of religious authority.  Like the Golden Rule, these values can be derived independently by anyone.  To expand this list to a list of universal morality, I would add respect for nature and animals, self-care, and liberty.  

My list of moral core values is expanded somewhat from the values of the Alaska Democratic Party.  Moral core values include Empathy, Truth, Justice (renamed from Equity), Service, Progress, Responsibility, Respect for Nature and Animals, Self-Care, and Liberty.  To me, those values are founded in care for others, and form the core of morality.  

Other Aspects of Morality

As seen in literature, theater, art, and music, humans are intensely interested in all aspects of love and mating.  For many people across many cultures, morality is directly connected to notions of sexual behavior and gender norms.  If you Google images of "morality", you find iconography of right and wrong; but if you Google for "immorality", you will find an overwhelming majority of references to sexuality.  Note that many of those moral norms reflect patriarchal repression of women and rejection of human gender diversity.  Over the past two centuries, the notion of what is moral for women has changed significantly in western cultures, and notions of what is moral in gender identity has changed radically in the past two decades.  Those changes are reverberating around the globe, as seen in global television dramas.  Still, there is a wide divergence in the perceived morality of women’s dress codes between Taliban Afghanistan and St. Tropez.  There’s a wide gap between the perceived morality of gay marriage between Waco, Texas and San Francisco, or trans-gender rights between Franklin, Tennessee and Key West, Florida.

There is a wide range of perceived morality of dress among different cultures.

Sexual behavior should be judged in the same way as other aspects of morality, in terms of the respect or harm to others caused by different behaviors.  Sexual actions involving minors, or others incapable of knowledgeable consent are clearly immoral, because of the harm caused and the exploitation of a power imbalance.  Sexual relations or pressure in situations with a power imbalance are also clearly immoral.  Relationships which cause harm to those in committed relationships are also immoral.  Sexual relations which result in children create moral obligations.  Children deserve a loving home, ideally with two parents, and sex without fulfilling that responsibility when a child is born would be immoral.  Sexual relationships are complicated, but as for other moral questions, the morality of a situation can be judged according to standards of care and respect.

What about other issues deemed immoral, such as LGBTQ+ rights?  No one is harmed by LGBTQ+ rights.  On the other hand, religious proscriptions on sexuality cause considerable harm to the non-heterosexual community.  

Community standards on dress can be appropriate to a social setting, or can be repressive.  A reasoned judgment can be made about whether it is moral to prohibit wearing a hoodie in the US Senate, or allow not wearing a hijab on the street.  The balance between community standards and personal freedom is on-going in society, and should be addressed from the perspective of who or what is harmed, and at what cost of personal liberty.  

Throughout history, men have largely been responsible for determining codes of morality for women.  This is well-illustrated by the photo of G.W. Bush, surrounded by his old, male advisors, signing into law the United States’ prohibition on so-called partial birth abortions.  Without going into the morality of a procedure which might be required to save a woman’s life in an impossible delivery, I would simply note that no women were included in the celebratory signing ceremony.  It seems to me that deciding moral standards on women’s reproductive rights and issues should necessarily involve women.

G.W. Bush, signing a restriction on abortion procedures, 2003.

Are credit-card interest rates of 18% moral?  I would say no.  We used to have laws against excessive interest rates.
Is is okay to lie on a credit application?  No.  
Is it okay to lie to comfort a dying patient?  Yes.

Morality is simply a question of fundamental human values, applied to questions of behavior and societal norms.  In all of these questions of morality, religion has no role.
-------
References
Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development
https://www.simplypsychology.org/kohlberg.html


Moral Foundations Theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_foundations_theory

https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/the-nature-of-morality

https://www.yourmorals.org/

The image of Aziraphale and Crowley from "Good Omens", by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett is used without permission and not for profit.  It will be removed upon request. 
Go read the book and see the mini-series.  The story is wonderful.

No comments:

Post a Comment