I view every beam of light ultimately coming from one source even if that source is recognized or not.
The life of light in the food we eat, though silent, still witnesses to those who know the source.
“Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above,
coming down from the Father of lights,
with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.”
-James 1:17
Ah scripture….lovely, poetic and mistaken.
Morality comes from the confluence of a complex set of interlocking and mutually supporting processes. These processes are both understandable and explicable, and do not require supernatural agency.
Here is one possible story to illustrate how it works:
As the climate of Eastern Africa began to change (as a result of some plate tectonics), forests began to recede. This forced our primate ancestors in that region out of the trees. Because hominid brains were already pretty big, and childhoods were already pretty long, females had a dilemma: How do you forage for food when you have a baby clinging to your breast?
The solution was to use sex. Females used sex to get males to forage FOR them. In other words, they used sex to incentivize the provider role. This change in roles resulted in many modern features of human sexuality. For example we have no mating season – human females ovulate every month not every year, BUT human females do not advertise their ovulation much (some breast and lip swelling and some pheromone changes and that’s it). This keeps males guessing about when the female is going to be proceptive, and thus put males on a random-intermittent re-enforcement schedule in regard to their provider role.
As a result of this partnership became economically important for males to keep track of whose kids he was supporting – cuckolding is an evolutionary disaster for males. Similarly, this incentivized females to keep track of who males were copulating with, because the last thing she needs is for the male to give his economic resources to someone else’s kids.
This meant that we needed MORE brain growth to keep track of these things. We also evolved a “theory of mind” an ability to imagine what other people are thinking (one side effect of this is that we tend to project our theory of mind on EVERYTHING – and THAT’s why you believe in God – but that’s another story). As our brains grew, our childhoods got longer, and our need for calories went up (brains are hungry organs). This meant that there was MORE pressure to enlist even more family resources into child rearing.
As a result early hominids became a tribal species. The tribe is an economic system for raising young. But this economic system has political structure as a part of its make-up, and hominids that don’t successfully negotiate this political structure tended to either get murdered or get spurned by the females of the tribe. This meant that getting good at negotiating relationships started to get selected for.
To this end evolution selected for (at least) two or three groups of emotional response systems that help to build strong tribal societies:
Empathy – including a desire for justice, care-giving and nurturing
Teamwork – including a desire for obedience to authority, group loyalty
Purity – including a desire for purity of body, purity of breading partners and purity of ideology.
These emotional response systems are used by ideological groups (ESPECIALLY religions) to form ideological social structures. Ideologies are necessary because our society has grown too big to support kin-based tribal systems.
THIS is why you view God as the “Father” he’s a morally idealized authority figure that you use to rationalize and justify your participation in a complex network of social relationships that you use to survive and reproduce.
Pretty cool, huh?
And look: No supernatural agency required.
See the following books for more fascinating details where morality comes from AND who we REALLY are as a species:
The Sex Contract – by Helen Fisher
The Righteous Mind – by Jonathan Haidt
The Blank Slate – by Steven Pinker
Have a great day!
Well Paul, I find your criticisms of Mark fascinating since you seem to follow the same type of engagement online. Learning from one another dramatically decreases when you your first line is so hospitable. “Your going to hell” or “your stupid and let me tell you why” are generally poor dialogue openers. But thanks for your perspective.
Well, see now this is where we have a strong difference in perceptions and values.
I never said that you are stupid. I said the scriptures are mistaken.
By my value system, one of the most loving things that one human can do for another is to point out our own self-deception, and to correct each-other’s mistakes. We all make them after all. Making mistakes is not stupid; it’s a necessary part of learning. Self-deception is not stupid, it’s a feature human thought.
Consider: Why is science only 300 years old? Because for MOST of human history, self-deception was the best that humans could do. We deceive ourselves in order to conform to our group norms and because we perceive it to be in our interests to deceive ourselves. We humans are really really BAD at telling when we are mistaken. This is why there are so many religions in the world – everyone think’s their assumptions about reality are true, and very few of us are willing to question those assumptions.
This is why I love science. It’s a tool kit for proving myself WRONG. Paradoxically Its only by proving ourselves wrong that we have any chance of moving our beliefs closer to the truth. This is why it’s so important to create a culture of mutual, respectful, accountability and mistake-correction. So, by my value system this post is an expression of caring, not derision.
I have this idea that reality is not something we can know directly. I think that it’s only by testing our beliefs against reality that we get to find out if our ideas are mistaken, and when they are we get to move them closer to reality. So reality is that which corrects us when we are wrong. Of course I may be mistaken about this.
There are some beliefs that CAN’T be tested. These un-falsifiable beliefs are often held as sacred by their adherents. It’s as if people use these beliefs as cornerstones for their sense of personal identity. People seem to feel safe in this because these beliefs can’t be taken away. Belief in God is a good example of this. We can’t KNOW that God exists, but MANY people build their whole identity around their assumption that he does. Perhaps you are one of these people.
As an atheist, I prefer to build my identity on uncertainty and doubt. I know, this sounds odd (maybe even disturbing) but think about it. What can I be more confident of than my own uncertainty? It is this principle of uncertainty that informs my humanist values – why go on a crusade for something I am uncertain of? It is better to practice peace and community, these practices have proven value.
I’m all for creating “…a culture of mutual, respectful, accountability and mistake-correction”, this is a challenging endeavor when the biblical writings lay out such matters in black and white conclusions.
2 Thessalonians 1:7-10:
“And God will provide rest for you who are being persecuted and also for us when the Lord Jesus appears from heaven. He will come with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, bringing judgment on those who don’t know God and on those who refuse to obey the Good News of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with eternal destruction, forever separated from the Lord and from his glorious power. When he comes on that day, he will receive glory from his holy people—praise from all who believe. And this includes you, for you believed what we told you about him.”
These are the biblical issues that Mark referenced and the matter is serious to those of us who take the bible serious. There is no getting around such passages, we can try to blunt them, ignore them, mythologize them, ridicule them or simply choose not to believe them but they still stand in contrast to the worldview you express. There’s no getting around that, so one has to figure out how to engage these types of conversations with generosity while admitting the whole deal is pretty inflammatory. I wrestle with how to do that in an ongoing way with real people, not just positions people hold. Pastorally I am tied to more than drive-by comments, articles and tweets. I have to walk with people, both friends and enemies, through all the conclusions and repercussions of such texts.
For me the evidence you say isn’t there, has been for me and its been convincing to me, both personally and outwardly. Bu these types of conversations don’t fit into a test-tube as easy as some aspects of science. We can know so much biologically but we still can’t create life. With all the amazing knowledge before us in the scientific and medical community, life is still an unexplainable wonder. When you lay a hand on your dead friend, as I did this week, the power and mystery of life that was just there and now isn’t, is a mystery I choose to place in the hands of the sacred not the secular.
Eric,
I’m sorry to hear about your friend’s death. I hope you are well and surrounded by people who love you right now.
As to the rest of your post, I have a response, but it will take me some time to research an answer. Bear with me for a bit….
Hi Eric, I’m back.
I was going to give you a long list of links to information about how your position doesn’t hold water, and then I thought better of it. My experience is that these sorts of arguments never end well.
What I want to do instead is simply ask you if you can agree to the following:
Would you agree that as human beings you and I both have an imperfect understanding of the universe? That as human beings we are limited and flawed in our ability to know?
Would you agree with me that it is a mistake to believe that we have the whole truth of any proposition, and that because we are limited and flawed in our knowledge, we need to hold our beliefs to be provisional? In other words, would you agree that we need to keep and open mind and consider the possibility that our beliefs are mistaken?
I’ll come back to look for your response.
I would agree.
I would add that one can know someone but not know everything about someone, that doesn’t mean there isn’t any truth known.
The posture of learning, doubt, exploration, mystery, etc should be the postures of the saint as well as the scientist, in my opinion. I can apprehend yet not fully comprehend much in the intellectual life.
Great! It sounds like we found some common ground.
So here is the follow-up question:
Why would you assume then, that YOU have true knowledge of the bible? If you KNOW that you can be wrong, then isn’t it possible that you are wrong about the idea that the bible should be taken seriously?
When you say that you “take the bible seriously” what I take this to mean is that you think that the bible is a reliable source of knowledge, and that therefore that quote from 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 is a credible threat to your personal existence.
IF you believe that you will be “They will be punished with eternal destruction, forever separated from the Lord and from his glorious power…” and that “…this includes you, for you believed what we told you about him.” Then you are really not FREE to believe anything else are you?
2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 basically says “believe what I tell you or you will be punished, if you DO believe what I tell you then you will be rewarded”
So you are being both THREATENED and BOUGHT OFF.
In order for me to believe what you believe I would need to hold an assumptions that I simply cannot agree with: That belief alone determines the outcome of one’s existence – I have NEVER known this to be true in my life. BEHAVIOR determines outcomes, beliefs only guide behavior.
This is EXACTLY why I DON’T believe in the bible – it threatens me with violence if I fail to believe in it and promises me a bribe if I do believe it.
This is the OPPOSITE of rational discourse.
So here is my big question, and I would really like to ask you to give it some thought:
What would it COST YOU to change your mind? What would it COST YOU to STOP believing what you believe?
Would it cost you your soul?
Would it cost you your identity?
Would it cost you your community?
Would it cost you your job?
Would it cost you your relationships?
If the answer to any of these is “YES” (and I’m pretty sure it is) then is it possible that you only believe what you believe because of what it DOES for you? If the answer to any of these is “YES” are you REALLY FREE TO BELIEVE ANYTHING ELSE?
Is it possible that your belief is motivated by your need to belong? By your need to be safe? By your need to be loved? These are all fine things to need, but they have NOTHING TO DO with whether or not your beliefs are true.
Is it possible that your REASON for believing in the bible has NOTHING TO DO with whether or not it’s true?
I look forward to your reply.
I’ve spent 25 years studying, living, testing and practicing these issues from inside and out. My experience, conclusions, observations and the fruit of living and practicing the teachings of Jesus have gifted me with good people, good work and a life I would be satisfied having lived. What comes afterwards is no matter to me, the quality of my life if it extends beyond into a quantity of life, matters little to me.
So you are saying that your beliefs have benefited you in your relationships, and the quality of your life. I’m glad.
But please note that this supports what my point.
Beliefs don’t need to be TRUE in order to be EFFECTIVE. You are sighting the consequences that your beliefs have had on your behavior and your relationships. Clearly this is a very good reason to go on believing what you believe.
But it is NOT a good reason to suppose that your beliefs are true.
Can you see the difference? In exactly the same way and for exactly the same reason a Muslim (for example) can have very different beliefs from you and still live a full and happy life. These criteria are great for rationalizing a lifestyle and a worldview. They are lousy for telling truth from falsehood.
Faith is an UNRELIABLE strategy for telling truth from falsehood. The world is FULL of people of faith who disagree with you on important points about your belief. If faith was reliable, you would all agree wouldn’t you? Add to this the fact that your God both threatens you and offers bribes for belief and we have a very dodgy situation indeed.
Clearly you are free to believe what you believe, and I suppose you will go on doing so whatever I write here. What you are doing seems like it’s working for you. I suggest you go on believing what you always have. There’s no need to trouble yourself with the points that I offer.
It was nice chatting with you though.
Jesus said he was the truth, I have chosen to believe Him, on the witness of his words, model of life, the impact of his life and my spiritual experiences of those realities. For me, the Resurrection of Christ, places him in a unique place as teacher of truth above all others but I also claim the experience of that resurrected Lord as a personal witness as well. I know what I was like before He was in my life and I know what I was like after, the designations of new and old, dead and alive, born again, light and darkness etc…have all been descriptions I attest too for myself. I know that the testimony of someone’s encounter with God doesn’t fall into a iron clad proof for others, but for me, its been reality.
It sounds like that’s working for you really well then. I’m glad.