Principles in Practice: The Blog of the Objective Standard
Monday, November 05, 2007
Mere Atheism
During the question period of the otherwise unremarkable debate between Christopher Hitchens and Dinesh D’Souza on the question of “Is Christianity the Problem?” the following two questions were posed to Hitchens: 1) “What [does atheism] have to offer us as an ethics?” and 2) “What standard [of value] can you appeal to?” Although any objective approach to debating a theist on this subject would involve answering these two questions in the main course of the debate, Hitchens had not addressed either of them there and was unable to answer either when asked. Instead, he went off on tangents about such things as the absurdity of a God who would permit cannibalism and suffering, man’s oversized adrenal glands (which supposedly explain why people do bad things), and the alleged value of “human solidarity” (a euphemism for altruism and collectivism).
This is yet another example of the feckless nature of mere atheism. While religion holds that morality comes from God via faith and revelation—and while religion posits all sorts of divine laws that are supposed to provide people with moral guidance (e.g., the Ten Commandments and the Beatitudes)—atheism provides no moral guidance at all. Atheism says nothing about what is good or bad, right or wrong; nothing about how people should live; nothing about what we should and shouldn’t do. All atheism says is: “There is no god.” It is true that there is no god, but that truth alone is of no value to anyone.
If religion is wrong, then what is right? It is not enough to say “Go by reason, not faith.” What does it mean to go by reason? To what moral principles does reason lead? How are those principles validated? And what do they mean in practice?
Until atheists come to understand and embrace a positive, rational moral philosophy, they will continue to default to the ethics of religion (i.e., altruism and collectivism); consequently, they will continue to accomplish nothing of significance in the battle against religion. And in order to understand and embrace a positive, rational moral philosophy, they will have to find the courage not only to be atheists but also to be egoists—because egoism is the only morality supported by observation and logic.
Labels: Ayn Rand and Objectivism, Philosophy, Religion
PermaLink | Email this link to a friend | Write TOS about this post
Subscribe to the journal for people of reason.
Topics
- Announcements
- Ayn Rand and Objectivism
- Business and Economics
- Education
- Environmentalism
- Events
- Foreign Policy and War
- Healthcare
- History
- Individual Rights and Law
- Philosophy
- Psychology
- Religion
- Science and Technology
- The Arts
Blog Archive
- Recent Posts
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- June 2008
Link to TOS
Place a TOS banner on your website or blog.
Blogroll
- Andrew Bostom
- Andrew Medworth
- Ari Armstrong
- Dollars & Crosses
- Forgotten Delights
- Galileo Blogs
- Geek Press
- Gus Van Horn
- NoodleFood
- Pedagogically Correct
- ReasonPharm
- Spark a Synapse
- Thrutch
- WoPSR
Sites of Interest
- AFCM
- Arts & Letters Daily
- Atlas Shrugged
- Ayn Rand Institute
- Ayn Rand Lexicon
- Capitalism Magazine
- Clemson Institute for the Study of Capitalism
- Climate Debate Daily
- Colorado Freedom Report
- FIRM
- Jihad Watch
- JunkScience.com
- MEMRI
- The Undercurrent
Humor
Blog Feed
Click the button below to subscribe to our blog's feed.
Get the Feed
Blogmarks
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Furl
NewsVine
RawSugar
Reddit
Simpy
StumbleUpon
TailRank
Technorati
YahooMyWeb
