11.30.2007

Why Are We Moral?


This week’s time cover is a whopper. Its an article written by Jeffrey Kluger called “What Makes Us Moral.” As soon as I checked the mail and saw the cover I said, “Oh boy, here we go.” My expectations were confirmed after reading it. It continually amazes me how often pure speculation passes for science, whatever science means these days. The subtitle says, “Humans are the planet’s most noble creatures—and its most savage. Science is discovering why.” Now unlike many Christians, I am all for science, and if fact only a Christian worldview can support even the doing of science. For example, ask an atheist scientist how she accounts for the uniformity of nature, when in their worldview we live in a chance random universe. According to the atheist (or materialist, naturalist, Darwinist, etc.) this universe started by some material process, and nothing in the world goes beyond the physical world. There is nothing outside of matter. No mind, only brain. “Nature is all there is, was, and ever will be.” But the atheist runs into trouble when they start trying to do science, but especially when they try to speak of morality. This article is a prime example. As Greg Bahnsen writes, “Atheism is philosophically unable to argue ethically, scientifically, or logically against the Christian faith.”

Of course the article is filled with naturalistic presuppositions, with no less than three comments to the effect that the thought that humans are unique among animals is arrogant. In effect, it says that humans are “equipped with moral programming” (just like other animals) but our social environment will shape and acquire the appropriate moral categories. An implication of this view is that we have no right to condemn the Muslims who took down the twin towers. After all, they are a product of their culture, and who are we to say that our culture’s morality is better than theirs? Jeffrey, who are you to say that Hitler was wrong? According to whose standard?

This is the heart of the issue. According to the atheist, there is no objective standard by which to measure good or evil. We are all just matter in motion. When is the last time you made a moral pronouncement on a chemical reaction in the lab? You would never say that it is right or wrong, it just is. A consistent naturalist never has “ought”, but only “is.” On the atheist worldview, to make a moral judgment is to presuppose a Theistic worldview. The question that must be asked is “What are the necessary preconditions for morality?” Not every worldview has the rational grounding to make a moral judgment. You must have an objective standard by which to measure what is good or evil. Christians have no problem with morality. God’s will and character revealed to us in Scripture is our objective standard. We make moral pronouncements because He has made moral pronouncements.

Kluger also ironically speaks of human responsibility. Again, on his own terms, why should humans be responsible? Theoretically, we are no different than an ant, just a little more evolved. The Christian has no problem with human responsibility and dignity.

Another interesting omission from the article is the fact that those who have turned out for the worse (Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot) were philosophical materialists. The problem with humanity is not their environment, but their fallen nature. Christianity has a viable answer to why the world is so messed up: Genesis 3. Humanity has devolved, not evolved. We also have a viable solution: The seed of the woman (Gen 3.15) has come and won the victory and guaranteed the restoration of all things. He will restore the created order.

Finally, contra Kluger, humans are indeed unique among creation. We alone are created in the image of God. To think otherwise is a natural response though without God’s Word. When one looks at the utter vastness of the universe, we are indeed a very small part of it. This is why the Psalmists says, “When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful of him?”

5 comments:

Jay Scott said...

Interesting, I enjoyed reading your take on this.

There's a book that Chad Helwig gave me that I really think you would enjoy reading: Francis Schaefer's Trilogy. Who knows, you may have already read it.

Blake White said...

Thanks Jay. I have actually read and listened a lot about Schaeffer but have not read much by him. Eventually I would like to buy his 'works" because they are only 5 vols. and about $80, but they probably won't happen for a long time. Deuces.

黃立成Jack said...

AV,無碼,a片免費看,自拍貼圖,伊莉,微風論壇,成人聊天室,成人電影,成人文學,成人貼圖區,成人網站,一葉情貼圖片區,色情漫畫,言情小說,情色論壇,臺灣情色網,色情影片,色情,成人影城,080視訊聊天室,a片,A漫,h漫,麗的色遊戲,同志色教館,AV女優,SEX,咆哮小老鼠,85cc免費影片,正妹牆,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,聊天室,情色小說,aio,成人,微風成人,做愛,成人貼圖,18成人,嘟嘟成人網,aio交友愛情館,情色文學,色情小說,色情網站,情色,A片下載,嘟嘟情人色網,成人影片,成人圖片,成人文章,成人小說,成人漫畫,視訊聊天室,性愛,a片,AV女優,聊天室,情色

文章 said...

AV,無碼,a片免費看,自拍貼圖,伊莉,微風論壇,成人聊天室,成人電影,成人文學,成人貼圖區,成人網站,一葉情貼圖片區,色情漫畫,言情小說,情色論壇,臺灣情色網,色情影片,色情,成人影城,080視訊聊天室,a片,A漫,h漫,麗的色遊戲,同志色教館,AV女優,SEX,咆哮小老鼠,85cc免費影片,正妹牆,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,聊天室,情色小說,aio,成人,微風成人,做愛,成人貼圖,18成人,嘟嘟成人網,aio交友愛情館,情色文學,色情小說,色情網站,情色,A片下載,嘟嘟情人色網,成人影片,成人圖片,成人文章,成人小說,成人漫畫,視訊聊天室,性愛,AV女優,美女,成人圖片區,080苗栗人聊天室

小小彬 said...

成人論壇,080聊天室,080苗栗人,免費a片,視訊美女,視訊做愛,免費視訊,伊莉討論區,sogo論壇,台灣論壇,plus論壇,維克斯論壇,情色論壇,性感影片,正妹,走光,色遊戲,情色自拍,kk俱樂部,好玩遊戲,免費遊戲,貼圖區,好玩遊戲區,中部人聊天室,情色視訊聊天室,聊天室ut,成人電影,成人遊戲,成人文學,免費成人影片,成人光碟,情色遊戲,情色a片,情色網,性愛自拍,美女寫真,亂倫,戀愛ING,免費視訊聊天,視訊聊天,成人短片,美女交友,美女遊戲,18禁,三級片,自拍,後宮電影院,85cc,免費影片,線上遊戲,色情遊戲,日本a片,美女,成人圖片區,avdvd,色情遊戲,情色貼圖,女優,偷拍,正妹牆