Atheists Are Not Capable of Leading Moral Lives Than Theists

Introduction

In his article, Julian Baggini proposes an intriguing position claiming that atheists can be good, if not better than the moral behavior of theists. This claim denies traditional assumptions that religiosity is a necessary requisite for ethical behavior. Baggini’s argument ignores the moral structure offered by religious doctrines and the power of communal ethical structures (Baggini, 2021). While Julian Baggini argues that atheists can have morality as good or better than theists’, a closer analysis shows flaws in his argument for it ignores the power of religious values in developing moral character and promoting a purpose that transcends individualistic ethics.

Essential Background Material

According to one of the most well-known atheist philosophers – Julian Baggini, moral values can be self-sufficient and do not necessarily require religious belief systems. He promotes the belief that secular people, unrestrained by religious creeds have a tendency to create an ethical structure based on reason and responsibility. Baggini is in favour of human-based morality which should present individuals with their freedom to make rational decisions and prevent them from being influenced. As Baggini places reason and personal responsibility as central to the notion of ethics, it does raise some questions about whether such an ethical framework is so complete (Baggini, 2021). The relativity and personal nature of the use of reason and moral decision-making may ignore the complexity in which morality can be deliberated. In this humanistic view championed by Baggini individual autonomy is paramount but religious belief systems promote communal morality that humanism can neglect.

In addition, the argument of secular morality is based on the assumption that rationality and personal responsibility are innately understood standards by which to live ethically. Nevertheless, various cultural and philosophical approaches may dispute this claim. Baggini’s approach seems to emphasize some kind of Western-based morality and this might mean that other moral philosophies in the world may be sidelined (Baggini, 2021). While defending a secular morality based on humanism, Baggini may unwittingly write off the historical and cultural roots of religious ethics. Most societies have relied on religious teachings to establish what is right or wrong and similar in turn helped to mold the norms and virtues that define a society. While Baggini’s argument on individual autonomy seems to uncover the merit in collective religious ethics for it to provide otherwise such moral economic strength and resilience that would enable a shared moral identity.

In essence, although Baggini’s argument emphasizes the possibility of developing ethical frameworks by secular individuals, it requires a rather critical analysis of the constraints associated with an approach based only on reason and personal responsibility (Baggini, 2021). By engaging in the question of collective morality and the multifaceted nature of different moral philosophies, a wider understanding of the interaction between atheism, religious belief systems, and moral behavior may be acquired.

Argument

Though the focus on reason and personal responsibility as an assured basis of secular morality strongly developed by Baggini is commendable, a deeper analysis indicates that the structural impact that religious knowledge has had on historical moral development remains an oversight (Baggini, 2021). Besides being an all-encompassing moral structure, religious belief systems also give clear-cut and longstanding tenets of morality that ensure purpose more than mere individual pleasure. Baggini values individual autonomy in humanist morality as well and emphasizes rationality as a determinant of moral behavior which means that decisions based on reason become the grounds for ethical living. On the other hand, what is implied in this individualistic focus is that while religious practices are communal, their mode of operation emphasizes the shared moral identity. Since religious communities are built on collectivity, an individual is always guaranteed a support system that, in the case of difficult situations, may help maintain high morals.

Religious teachings usually serve to be a guide that is above individual wishes, and they teach selflessness, compassion, and altruism. Religious communities’ communal rituals and shared ethical codes are ongoing daily reminders that individuals have certain moral obligations towards each other and the wider society. This mutual support not only strengthens compliance with ethical norms but also helps to establish a social structure based on common values (Baggini, 2021). Since societies worldwide have always drawn their moral ethics from religious doctrines, disregarding the historical and cultural relevance of religious ethics does not offer a simple approach to the subtle dynamics between atheism, belief systems, and moral behavior. For a deeper perspective toward understanding morality, it is essential to acknowledge and appreciate the lasting influence of religious standards in defining social norms and values.

Additionally, the claim that atheists can have better morals seems to overlook the fact that religious ethics have played a pivotal role in shaping societal norms and values. Religious doctrines have formed the basis of moral codes for most societies across the world embedding them in their way of life. Baggini’s statement, however, appears to unintentionally underplay the role of religion in developing such a communal moral consciousness that goes beyond individualistic ethics (Baggini, 2021). Similarly, religions have been a critical source of morality for societies through the ages and the historical foundation of morality cannot be dissociated with religious roots. However, the moral teachings in religious scriptures have also set a new direction for righteousness and virtues as their foundation has become the basis of societal norms.

Therefore, in contrast with Baggini’s dedication to reason and personal responsibility as a means of secular morality, the full understanding of it requires recognition of religious teachings in moral development. The communal nature of religious practices, the clear guidelines that are offered by beliefs in religion, and the use of religious ethics to determine a moral code for society all build up a complex fabric of human morals (Baggini, 2021). The assumption that atheists could lead a morally better life than their religious counterparts is a gross oversimplification of this complex dialectic, trivializing the fact that religion and religiosity have been having lasting effects in configuring the collective consciousness of societies.

Conclusion

Baggini’s attempt to justify atheists’ moral potential fails to recognize the overwhelming importance of values coming from religions to the formation of a good character. In its effort to criticize pure reason and the individual accountability that goes with it, it fails to consider the essential effect of religious doctrines that present an all-encompassing moral code and a purpose independent of self-focused ethics. In terms of moral argument, there is a need to incorporate the effect that religious belief systems should play in the debate, which has historical, cultural, and social background. The fact is that the recognition of these factors makes a more complete perception of morality, not only in the context of an arid conflict between theology and atheism but also recognizes all other factors that influence human ethical behavior.

References

Baggini, J. (2021). Atheist Ethics. Ch.3 of his Atheism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.