The accusation that Atheists “have no morals” probably stems from the observation that we refuse to adopt, or even pantomime, Christian worship rituals or other Christian tribal culture and customs. We also resist even aggressive, harassing efforts to convert us. Anyone who rejects the rightness of Christianity must be truly evil, right?
In fact, Atheists do abide by the same basic morality as most other people. Surprising? Hardly. Basic morality arose from Darwinian processes. Humans survive best when we live in groups, and group living is impossible without trust. Tribes whose members indulged in violence or dishonesty toward each other would most likely have dispersed, losing the survival advantage of group living. Tribes whose members refrained from violence and dishonesty toward each other would have had a much better chance to prosper. That dynamic is common to all co-operative, social species. Even chimpanzees and wolves generally refrain from killing tribe/pack mates.
Also, it should stand to reason that, since Atheists do not accept man’s claims about there being an afterlife, we should be reluctant to waste any of our limited existence sitting in prison. We benefit when we abide by basic morality.
The astute reader may have noticed that these rules of basic morality make no mention of the cultural issues raised at the beginning of this essay -- worship rituals and other cultural customs. Even though the Ten Commandments mixes together basic and cultural moral rules, the two are quite different. While Darwinian basic morality is the same the world over, cultural moral rules vary randomly from tribe to tribe: which god(s) to worship, how to worship, what sexual and reproductive practices one must or must not engage in, what items of clothing or jewelry one must or must not wear, what foods one must or must not eat, and so on.
Many people tend to think of their tribal moral code, such as the Ten Commandments, as monolithic, and so conclude that anyone who rejects one rule must be suspected of being capable of rejecting all of the rules. This is where fear of “outsiders” arises.
An “outsider,” coming from a different culture, disobeys the proper cultural rules, and so must be regarded with suspicion. Such people may also be judged as being outside the protection of any rules, and may be considered fair game for treatment that violates basic morality. This reflects a primitive, paranoid tribal concept of humanity. Everyone is an “outsider” to someone else’s culture.
***
Another source of animosity toward Atheists may lie in the philosophy of Atheism itself -- the idea that nothing exists beyond the tangible, material world (materialism). Theists expend a great deal of time and energy in religious worship, believing that it will qualify them for entrance into an eternal existence in some kind of Heaven or Paradise after they die. Atheistic materialism specifically discounts that possibility. Theists’ exposure to materialism may provoke doubts, possibly leading to fear and anger.
The whole idea of conscious existence after death is based on hope and wishful thinking, and stories handed down from antiquity by people who also hoped and wished. Doubt forces the theist to look at that shaky foundation, possibly causing troubling questions about what really happens to consciousness after the death of the body and brain.
Some people will choose to deal with such troubling questions by trying to intimidate and silence the person who is accused of causing them. Doubt can then be denied again, consigned to a deep, dark hole where it will no longer cause troubling questions.
Intimidation of others is not an ethical way to deal with one’s existential angst. Those troubling questions must be resolved internally, even if only by closing the mind and denying any possibility that materialism may be valid. Using violence in an attempt to suppress someone else’s philosophy speaks ill of one’s own philosophy.
***
Finally, Americans claim that they value the freedom to make their own decisions, but mostly that seems to mean choices about where to live, who to vote for, what car to buy, what shows to watch. When it comes to choosing a philosophy of life, and death, we’re apparently expected to follow the crowd, join one of the mainstream churches, sit in a pew with everyone else and listen (and leave something in the collection plate).
Many Atheists started out that way, but spent a good deal of time reading the Holy Bible cover-to-cover, reading about other religions, reading the ideas of philosophers, and introspecting on all of it before abandoning belief.
Because Atheists have dared to make our own decisions about our philosophy of life, and death, believers sometimes criticize us as arrogant, intellectual elitists. That reflects American anti-intellectualism, left over from the 19th Century rush westward.
On their way west, people kept out-running civilization, and lost not just a use for, but also regard for, higher intellectual development. The preachers who accompanied that rush were mostly the Protestant variety who believed that one man’s interpretation of Scripture was as good as another’s -- all anyone needed was basic literacy. The self-perpetuating culture they established is more suspicious of intellectual development than almost any other on Earth.
Those who react to intellect with fear and jealousy need to start exercising their own minds, rather than trying to silence ours.
