There have been many theists advancing the argument that if
materialism is true, in that everything is ultimately just atoms and molecules,
then killing, maiming and torturing people, is just the mere rearranging of
matter. So if a bomb went off killing 20 people it’s just the rearrangement of
atoms, if you smashed someone’s head open with a club, it is just alteration of the
atoms in their head. In other words, why should anyone care about the rearrangement of matter
if there is no soul embedded within it, and no ultimate consequences? Pastor
Doug Wilson in many debates is particularly fond of this argument, and he makes
it with such tenacity that one gets the feeling that he really thinks he is
making a logical argument. I guess many theists who he preaches to buy into
this fatuous argument, but it does not even strike me with any hesitation as to
its untenability.
First, I am a materialist in that I believe the physical
world is all that exists. I see no evidence to the contrary. All things in the
universe, including life, are ultimately made up of atoms. The materialist
rejects the existence of the soul that the theist believes is necessary to have
morality. Do people like Doug Wilson really not see a difference between
something that is alive and something that is inanimate? It is because we are
alive, it is because we are conscious, sentient beings, capable of feeling
pain, and emotion that makes the difference between us and inanimate matter. Does
Doug Wilson really not have the ability to tell life from non-life? Could he
tell the difference between a Zebra and a rock, or a Manatee from a boulder?
Apparently to him, it’s all just matter, no difference there at all. I hate to
be blunt, but I really wonder if he is that stupid.
If I were to smash a rock with a hammer, there is a huge
difference between doing that and smashing open the head of a person or animal.
We know the rock is not alive, we know it doesn’t think, reproduce, have any
kind of dreams or hopes for the future, or have any kind of sensitivity to pain
or emotion. If rocks were capable of such properties, then we surely would want
to reconsider our treatment of them. But notice that none of these aforementioned
properties sentient beings posses requires the existence of a soul. One doesn’t
need a soul to be emotionally conscious or sensitive to pain. All one needs is
a brain capable of a certain cognitive level and a nervous system, and
evolution by natural selection can produce that without need for appeal to the
supernatural.
Regarding the theistic argument that in a materialistic
world view, if there are no ultimate consequences for our actions, then there
is no reason to be moral, I counter argue that under monotheism such as Christianity
and Islam, there is no ultimate justice either. The usual theistic argument is
that if someone can get away with evil, and they are never caught and
reprimanded for their actions, they can die and essentially get away with their deeds
unrevenged. Hitler is often cited as a prime example, in that he orchestrated
so much unnecessary suffering and had such little disregard for it, and never
faced the consequences for his actions. His suicide stole away society’s
retribution unto him.
Now it is true that under materialism, Hitler got away with his acts. There is no ultimate cosmic justice, and no ultimate cosmic judge. But I still have reasons to think materialism has a slight edge in terms of justice. Under Christianity and Islam, all one needs to do to be wiped of their sins is simply to convert and accept the correct prophets. Recognizing Jesus as the son of god and your savior, or that there is no god but allah and Mohammad is his prophet, immediately absolves you of your moral responsibility for all your sins, at least until that point. So, the serial killer who spends decades enjoying the torment and death of his victims need only to come to god before he is executed on death row, and all his sins are forgiven. But if some of victims happened to have been Hindu, Buddhist, pagan or atheist, not only are they brutally tormented and murdered under the will of a sadist in this world, when they die, they will then be tormented in unimaginably worse ways, at the will of god. Eternal conscious torment, what a loving idea. And so under monotheisms like Christianity and Islam, the murdering sociopath gets eternal paradise and his victims can get eternal torment. I have to scratch my head and in wonder and how anyone can truly believe this is an accurate description not only of justice, but perfect justice under a perfect god. Justice is synonymous with fairness and equality, and under the monotheistic world view, I see no such qualities in their perverted concept of it.
Now it is true that under materialism, Hitler got away with his acts. There is no ultimate cosmic justice, and no ultimate cosmic judge. But I still have reasons to think materialism has a slight edge in terms of justice. Under Christianity and Islam, all one needs to do to be wiped of their sins is simply to convert and accept the correct prophets. Recognizing Jesus as the son of god and your savior, or that there is no god but allah and Mohammad is his prophet, immediately absolves you of your moral responsibility for all your sins, at least until that point. So, the serial killer who spends decades enjoying the torment and death of his victims need only to come to god before he is executed on death row, and all his sins are forgiven. But if some of victims happened to have been Hindu, Buddhist, pagan or atheist, not only are they brutally tormented and murdered under the will of a sadist in this world, when they die, they will then be tormented in unimaginably worse ways, at the will of god. Eternal conscious torment, what a loving idea. And so under monotheisms like Christianity and Islam, the murdering sociopath gets eternal paradise and his victims can get eternal torment. I have to scratch my head and in wonder and how anyone can truly believe this is an accurate description not only of justice, but perfect justice under a perfect god. Justice is synonymous with fairness and equality, and under the monotheistic world view, I see no such qualities in their perverted concept of it.
So the argument that we are all just soda cans fizzing in
certain ways, and that it makes no difference which way we fizz because
ultimately we are all just fizzing matter, is nothing more than theological
rubbish. Once you have life capable of pain and emotion, and consciousness, you
do have a difference between the atoms that make up such beings, and atoms that
make up non living objects. Sure the atoms themselves are the same, but it is
what they make up that makes the difference. Failure to see this I believe is
the failure to use logic in the way necessary for our survival.
No comments:
Post a Comment