For the non-believer, the statement “murder is immoral” does not reflect some underlying existent reality or truth about our universe. It is simply a statement about the way people in our society feel about things today.
The realization that the term “moral values” is interchangeable and synonymous with personal preference, societal conditioning and the latest public opinion poll, is not very uplifting. As atheist philosopher Michael Ruse put it: “Morality is just a matter of emotions, like liking ice cream and sex and hating toothaches and marking student papers…Now that you know that morality is an illusion put in place by your genes to make you a social cooperator, what’s to stop you behaving like an ancient Roman [raping and pillaging]? Well, nothing in an objective sense.”
Despite this, I am certain that both Epstein and Campolo are very pleasant people and I’m not worried about them committing violent crimes. This is because they are not real atheists. They have not formulated their value systems by following an atheistic world view to its logical end, which is amorality. They are Judeo-Christian Atheists. Their values are drawn from the eternal, unshakeable, God-centered values of the society in which they have been raised. More.
Elsewhere, that has been called “living on capital.”
Epstein and Campolo’s Judeo-Christian atheism works okay as long as every else believes we are bound by the moral law. But if they succeed in enlightening the rest of us, we won’t believe that. Then what?
A related problem is that naturalist atheists think that the human mind is shaped for fitness, not for truth, which means that even where moral truths are sensed, they are only illusions, convenient or otherwise.
What’s really odd is hearing these people carry on while in the grip of a moral illusion of their own, maybe the latest a-crock-a-lypse.
The comments at Algemeiner are interesting.
See also: Moshe Averick: What’s keeping the Origin-of-Life Messiah?
Follow UD News at Twitter!