Finding an Ethical Basis

In a post before this I tried to explain why atheists are so distrusted by society. I put this down to most people seeing ethics as being universal and objective and thus needing to find basis in some sort of supernatural power, i.e. God. I also critiqued any attempt at creating a secular ethic (without supernatural basis) because it would seem to necessary be particular and subjective. However there is more to this story, and myself being an atheist, I think I need to defend the idea of a secular ethic being less powerful or binding as a religious one.

 

Now if there is a God who creates a universal ethic, how does She come to this decision? Does she choose it randomly? Just deciding with no basis to label certain things wrong and other things good? Such does not seem to be the case, for if God just decided randomly to make certain things bad and other things good, then what reasons would we have for following this ethic? This seems like it is a very weak ethic and not really an ethic at all. If something is good or bad there should be reasons why it is such.

Now if God did use reasons to decide what her ethic was. What are these reasons? If our God is a creator God and everything the result of her creation then it seems these reasons are also her creation. This means we are back where we were before with God deciding ethics randomly. For if the reasons for choosing what ethics are, are in fact, decided by God then it seems God needs to produce reasons for deciding these reasons. After all we do want God to decide things randomly, for if she does then her status as being all good is undermined by her deciding what good is. So we go into a kind of infinite regress here with God always needing reasons for having reasons, because otherwise she is just deciding randomly because she created these reasons.

In order for God to not decide stuff randomly there needs to be something outside of and beyond God, that she did not create, that she can use as a reason for making stuff the way it is. If God is the complete creator of everything, then we are left with a God who decides stuff randomly with no basis because there is no basis beyond her. Thus there needs to be something external and beyond God that is not her creation in order for us to not have a randomizing and chaotic God.

Ok, off topic there. Here is the point: Unless there is some external basis for ethics, God is just deciding it randomly which makes it no better than a subjective secular ethic (one could perhaps say that God is more intelligent so her choice is a better choice, but how can a choice be better if it’s random? Also if God is an ‘all creator’ it is she who decides what intelligence is and she does so randomly…unless we want a God who is a contradiction, we must concede to something being beyond God).  What could this external basis for ethics be? I have no idea. But since ethics seem to need to be based in this, is it not fair than that the atheist can skip the God telling him the ethic and go right to these reasons?

If the ethic comes from beyond God, what is he really but a messenger? You don’t need God to have an ethic, for God must find her ethic from somewhere beyond her, so we can find it without her as well. Some might argue that God is the light that leads us to discovering this ethic and without her we can never find it. But why would an all good God make the ethic impossible to find unless through her? Why would she restrict our abilities to do right and wrong?

So finding a basis for ethics is not just a problem for atheists. It is also a problem for theists and deists because the ethic seems to need to find its basis beyond God. Now this creates all sorts of problems. Any attempt, I think, to discuss the basis for ethics always turns into a Pandora box. The question; “why do what it says is good” will always be there.

Do we answer it saying that you should do it because it’s what God wants and he will reward you? Because then it seems like just acting from self-interest.

 

Do we say that acting ethical will make you happy? Again it appears to be self-interested and selfish and also, some people do not find acting ethical makes them happy.

 

Do we place its basis in evolution? Well then, why do what evolution says?

 

Any attempt to give an ethical “ought” can always be responded with “why”.

 

Any philosophical ethical system falls apart when it comes to this question. From Kant’s confusing categorical imperative that only seems to find objective basis in few situations to Mill’s utilitarianism which is reverted to a deontology in certain situations and has no real argument for why it should be followed. (I will go through and explain my problems with ethical systems producing by philosophers in a later post. This here is very simplistic, don’t focus too much on it)

 

Such is my discontent with ethics. Any attempt for finding an objective and universal basis quickly falls apart. Perhaps it is best to pursue a descriptive ethic rather than a normative one.

 

Saying all this, I am not an ethical nihilist. I think ethics does exist. I try to do right things. I just don’t think anyone has a satisfactory basis for why they do right things and what right things are for that matter anyway. Appeals to God for ethics just don’t work.

 

So. Here I am. An atheist who still tries to be ethical without knowing how or why.