What It Means to Be Moral. Phil Zuckerman

illustrating atheist morality in action, such as the recent international study that looked at children and their likelihood of being generous or selfish.⁶⁷ In 2015, a team of researchers headed by Dr. Jean Decety of the University of Chicago went to six different countries—China, Canada, Turkey, Jordan, South Africa, and the United States—and did an experiment with children between the ages of five and twelve; some of the kids had been raised Christian, some had been raised Muslim, and some had been raised without religion. Each child met individually with an adult who had a bunch of different stickers. The boy or girl was then told that he or she could choose any ten stickers to keep. However, after picking their favorites stickers, they were told by the adults that the researchers didn’t have time to give out the rest of the stickers to other kids in a different (fictitious) class, but if he or she wanted, the boy or girl could put some of his or her ten stickers in an envelope to be given away to other kids. Well, the nonreligious kids were the most generous—giving away, on average, a higher number of their stickers than the Muslim or Christian kids, who tended to be more selfish.

      Sure, it was just one study involving kids and stickers. But it effectively points to a much larger and important reality: that the vast majority of atheists the world over are decent and humane. Goodness without God is not only possible but pervasive. And in one of the more optimistic indicators of secularization in our society, more men and women are coming to accept that religion does not have a monopoly on morality: a growing majority of Americans (65 percent) now say that they rely primarily on things like practical experience, common sense, philosophy, or science for guidance regarding right and wrong—not religion.⁶⁸ And in Canada, a whopping 82 percent of adults agree that “it is not necessary to believe in God to be moral and have good values.”⁶⁹

       The Promise of Secular Morality

      The fact that so many North Americans currently rely on nontheistic sources in their moral deliberation is really good news—because religious ethics are brittle, and as British philosopher Derek Parfit makes clear, belief in God can actually prevent the free development of moral reasoning.⁷⁰ After all, any ethical system that ultimately depends upon faith in a nonexistent, magical deity who issues commands that one must obey for fear of punishment is inherently unsound.⁷¹

      But aren’t there admirable moral teachings in the world’s leading religions? You bet—but those admirable moral teachings did not originate with those religions. Rather, those religions merely wrote down and codified what was already emergent in human civilization.

      But aren’t there wise, just, and humane precepts and tenets found within the world’s leading religions? Absolutely—but they are wise, just, and humane for natural, secular reasons, not supernatural, theistic reasons.

      But don’t many religious movements fight the good fight, working on behalf of the betterment of humanity? Yes, but usually it is secular movements that pave the way on these fronts, with religion only joining up later in the game. As leading American skeptic Dr. Michael Shermer has noted, “once moral progress in a particular area is under way, most religions get on board—as in the abolition of slavery . . . women’s rights . . . and gay rights . . . but this often happens after a shamefully protracted lag time.”⁷²

      Still, aren’t there millions of religious people out there doing good in the world as a result of their faith? Yes, and they should be lauded and abetted in their good works. But more and more people are losing said faith, so alternative understandings of ethics and morals must arise and, ultimately, prevail.⁷³

      Despite all the good that one can find within certain corners of religious life—and the countless ethical people out there who do believe in God—theistic morality remains inherently problematic, tending to thwart human progress, both at the individual and societal level. Whatever religion’s moral attributes or ethical benefits may have been thousands or hundreds of years ago, today they now largely serve to hold humanity back. Thus, we need to look elsewhere as we strive to grapple with questions of wrong and right, good and bad, just and unjust. Not to the clouds, not to the priests, rabbis, or imams—and most importantly—not to imagined deities. Rather, we need to look to ourselves.⁷⁴ It is this secular, humanistic approach to morality that we need not to not only embrace but to rely upon and hang our hopes on.

      Fortunately, secular, humanistic, and atheistic approaches to and understandings of morality are sound and solid and, on most if not all fronts, intrinsically superior to what God-based morality has had to offer.⁷⁵ In the words of British philosopher A. C. Grayling, secular people who don’t believe in God are among “the most careful moral thinkers, because in the absence of an externally imposed morality they recognize the duty to examine their views, choices, and actions and how they should behave towards others.”⁷⁶

      While theistic morality forces us to look outside ourselves for ethical guidance, secular morality forces us to look within—consulting our conscience and our reason. Whereas God-based morality is ultimately founded upon obedience, human-based morality is founded upon empathy and compassion. While religious ethics have required ever-contested interpretations of obscure or contradictory formulations of supposedly divine will, humanistic ethics depend squarely upon ongoing debate and forthright argumentation with and among our fellow human beings. Christianity and Islam—the two largest religions in the world—have taught that our time in this world is fleeting and insignificant and that the really important eternal realm awaits us after death. But secularism forces us to live in the here and now, focusing our energies on this world: the only plane of existence we’ll ever inhabit. While the world’s leading religions—Christianity and Islam—construct ethical life as a juvenile game of heavenly reward and hellish punishment, which infantilizes morality to a matter of self-centered prudence and fear, nonreligious ethics emphasize rationality and understanding as more mature ways to address and minimize malevolence. And rather than terrorize children with the fear of eternal torture, nonreligious orientations cultivate reflective understanding of actions and consequences among children, employing love and explication over scare tactics. Whereas theistic ethics have ultimately been predicated on a principle of “might makes right,” secular humanist ethics are predicated on how best to alleviate the suffering of sentient beings. Christocentric ethical systems have hinged upon the notion that we are born sinners who must actively choose to be moral—a willful choice that goes against the grain of our fallen selves—but secularism embraces the growing body of scientific evidence illustrating the degree to which a proclivity toward cooperation and sociability, care and concern, and altruism and love are the observable outgrowth of our evolved natures.

      As more and more of us let go of God, so too must we counter and ultimately reject the notion that our morals come from said God. They don’t.⁷⁷ Morality and ethics grow out of the human experience: our genes, our minds, our emotions, our evolutionary history, our experiences, our communities, our cultures, and our societies.

      I should note here that the very terms “morality” and “ethics”—terms that I’ll employ throughout this book—are virtually synonymous in everyday usage. As American philosopher Ryan Falcioni notes, “moral” and “ethical” basically mean the same thing,⁷⁸ both having to do with how we treat others, whether our actions are helpful or harmful, and the degree to which we reduce or increase suffering. That said, I generally use the term “moral” to refer to personal values and behaviors that increase the well-being of sentient beings, while “ethical” signifies principles and orientations that aim to increase justice and fairness in society. Again, the terms are nearly interchangeable. And both function better when there’s no God in the picture.

      But how does godless morality work? How can people be moral if they don’t believe in God? How does morality even function if there is no Supreme Overlord issuing forth moral edicts and ethical commandments, watching over us all, judging, rewarding, and punishing? Can objective morality exist without God? And what specific moral precepts, ethical imperatives, and cardinal virtues do nonbelievers actually live by?

      In the pages that follow, these questions will be answered as thoroughly and as thoughtfully as possible.