The Foundation of Morality

Throughout history, religion has been a very influential force upon human society, for better or worse. Most people throughout the world have some degree of religious faith, but there is also a significant and growing number of nonreligious people throughout the world. In recent years, several influential secular minded public figures, most notably Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris, have argued that religious faith is unjustified, outdated, and harmful to individuals and to society as a whole. The main argument among these secular minded individuals is that faith is simply the act of believing in something despite the lack of evidence or even in the face of counterevidence, and that this often leads people to commit acts that are harmful to themselves and to others, such as acts of murder, war, and terrorism. There are many backwards and self-destructive cultural practices that have been strongly influenced by religious faith. The list of horrendous acts committed by the more fanatical religious believers in the name of their religion is dreadfully long and seems to grow larger by the day.

With this in mind I would like to ask you, the reader, to search your feelings and to ask yourself: What can be done to make things better? How could the world be better than the way that it is now? What would a better world be like? What are the problems and how can they be addressed? How can we work to prevent injustice and to promote peace and prosperity for ourselves and for others?

If you may have judged that the world would be better in the future if religious faith in general had significantly less influence in determining people’s actions, then I largely agree with you (with all due respect to the faithful, who might want to read this introduction). If you have come to believe that it would be better if people, in general, were to rely more on reliable knowledge gained from observation and reason, then I wholeheartedly agree with you.

If you have indeed concluded that the world would be better with less influence of religious faith on people’s lives, then in order to demonstrate a point, I need to ask how you came to this conclusion. Of course, you may point to the innumerable injustices that religious faith is at least partially responsible for, such as holy wars that result in countless civilian deaths, corrupt politicians who self-servingly act as devout religious believers in order to maintain power, and of course the senseless acts of suicide bombings and airplane hijackings. Though this may seem obvious, I must still ask: How have you judged that these are indeed injustices? The faithful likely see their own acts as benevolent because of their belief system. How can anyone be justified in saying that another’s beliefs are wrong and that their own is right?

A reasonable response to this would be to point out that the faithful are blindly following beliefs that have been told to them and for which they have no reliable evidence. There is of course no reliable evidence that blowing one’s self up in order to kill others will lead one to a better future in heaven. There is no reliable evidence that the “holy scriptures”, including the Bible, the Qur’an, etc. that the faithful often see as infallible have anything more than the occasional historical fact mixed in with a heavy dose supernatural falsehood.

On the other hand, there is reliable evidence that when people have beliefs such as these, this often lead to people being hurt or killed. It is possible for one to compile objective evidence that certain beliefs lead to suffering and death. This may be true, but the question remains: why is it preferable for there to be fewer people killed or hurt and why is it preferable for more people to rely on observation and reason when making decisions rather than blindly following the holy book that they have been told from a young age is the word of God?

Though one can certainly point to objective evidence that certain acts that one can perform in general lead to more happiness than others, happiness can only be preferable subjectively. Though things like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness seem universally preferable, this is not an objective fact. Scientific facts are objective, but value judgments can never become objective because it is not possible to minimize personal biases and misunderstandings to the degree where they can be considered objective, no matter how universal they may seem to be.

Lets take a look at the question again: Why is it preferable for people to rely less on religious faith and more on observation and reason? The problem with attempting to answer this question objectively is that there is no objective answer to this question. This is not to say that there is no answer to this question, period. Only that trying to address it objectively ultimately leads to circular reasoning, which is essentially the same method that faithful use to justify their beliefs. Any attempt to establish a truly objective foundation for morality is doomed to failure. There is simply no way of pointing to objective knowledge and showing how morality can be derived from this to those who have differing views. It is certainly possible to do this for knowledge about the physical universe. One can point to objective facts to allow others to have a better understand the laws of physics. But it does not work this way for morality and value judgments.

Even if one is certain that they know the right moral principles that can help people and is passionate to advocate these principles to others, if the only methods one can think of is to point to point to objective facts, then this advocacy will likely only be effective among those who already have similar moral beliefs. In order to be most effective in explaining moral principles to others of different backgrounds, one will first need a more detailed and comprehensive understanding of reality as a whole and the individual’s place in it. From this, one may be able to better understand their own personal experiences and to use this understanding to formulate and apply moral laws.

If you are still reading to this point, then you likely believe that there are certain moral principles that are true regardless of anyone’s point of view, and that these principles can be known through some form of personal experience with the aid of reason. Though these principles cannot be studied objectively as the laws of physics can, there are still ways of understanding the foundations of morality and explaining these principles to others so that we can achieve a more peaceful and prosperous future. What we need is a more enlightened worldview that can be used to help us understand reality. From this we can find a solid foundation for morality and this can help us to promote a more peaceful and prosperous future.

Finding a solid foundation for morality within a comprehensive worldview is one of the main themes of the forthcoming book Seeking a More Enlightened Worldview, which this website was created to promote. We need your support to get this book to publication. But giving your support is easy – all you need to do is let your voice be heard. You can email the author at brandon@enlightenedworldview.com or you can visit the forum and discuss many important and fascinating issues with the author and with other visitors to this website.