Topics Religion

Question If someone had a definitive proof that God did not exist (an argument so powerful it became universally accepted, like when Copernicus proved that the sun did not orbit the Earth), which of these scenarios would be most likely: 1) Most people would run out to have drunken orgies, and in general, live lives of utter debauchery; or,2) we'd enjoy an age of unprecedented enlightenment because mental energy would no longer be wasted on the distortion of a grand delusion; or, 3) A combiation of both A and B. Thanks, Jeff

Accepted:
March 13, 2006

Comments

I am not a sociologist, so I'm not going to make a prediction. But perhaps you can make your own. When you care for the members of your family and your friends, when you are kind to your neighbors, and when you avoid performing random acts of cruelty toward strangers, are you acting out of fear of eternal punishment from God? Or are you doing it out of (dare I say it?) love for your fellow human beings?

This is a bit more of a sociological or psychological than a philosophical question. My personal experience provides virtually no basis for knowing the answer. My guess is that, as with Copernicus, the proof would take some time to catch on. During that period we'd see a lot of people, particularly those heavily invested in religion, attacking the proof, attacking the person who invented it, and attacking those who accept it. There'd be fatwas against purveyors of the satanic proof; somehow it would be found to manifest the mark of the beast or correspond to some dreary prophecy in Revelation. Well scrubbed suburban homeschoolers would recite its flaws in between trips to the mall. A formerly unknown Danish newspaper would be catapulted to the center of the world's attention for publishing it and then be charged with racism for employing Arabic numerals in doing so. Pat Robertson would condemn the proof as another effort by the homosexual, secular left to undermine religion, morality, and capitalism, suggesting that someone assasinate its inventor. O'Reilly would ask, why do philosophers hate Santa Claus and our freedom?

I have my doubts that much of the sort of debauchery or enlightenment you describe would occur, however. True, you'd see fewer waste their resources on religion, but it's also true that people are remarkably adept at finding ways to waste time, money, and "mental energy." You might see a diminishment of both heroic virtue (like pacifism) and extraordinary vice (like suicide bombing). On balance probably a good thing.

I suppose I'd go so far as to diagnose theocracy as one of the most pernicious forces in the world today, its decline would be a good thing. But, again, it's certainly possible that something else might substitute for theocratic vice--statism, nationalism, consumerism, authoritarianism, and corporatism come immediately to mind. With the removal of the vices (and virtues) produced by belief in a deity, we'd have to work hard to prevent the rising of new vices (and the preservation of what virtue can be salvaged).

Overall, though, I guess I think fewer people really believe so deeply that their belief in God has much effect on their behavior--pious protestations to the contrary. You might recall Ambrose Bierce's definition of a Christian: "One who follows the teachings of Christ in so far as they are not inconsistent with a life of sin."