RELIGION AND VALUES

Most contemporary philosophers think that you not

only CAN talk about values independent of religion, but that

you SHOULD.

WHY?

COMPELLING REASONS…

Consider Kohlberg’s levels of moral reasoning: If I do what’s “right” for fear of going to hell or for the privilege of getting into heaven, it’s pretty difficult for a believer to act ethically. Explain.

How can one be certain that reward is not one’s motivation?

COMPELLING REASONS

Has religious belief produced more good or more harm in human history?

While it may not be possible to balance the impact of religion, its impact has certainly not been wholly positive.

Catch: If one is a believer, souls saved count in favor of the good benefits of religious belief.

COMPELLING REASONS

Is the argument -- “Religion is good for people”-- supported by the research?

Effect on marriage: Divorce rates are higher among

Christians and Jews than among agnostics and atheists (Barna Research Group).

Domestic violence is greater among “fundamentalists” (Jim Wallis).

COMPELLING REASONS

Is the argument -- “Religion is good for people” -- supported by the research?

Effect on physical well being: Some studies link regular attendance

at religious services with better immunological response and longer survival with AIDS.

Perhaps religious communities offer clear support and it’s that support rather than religion that we need?

COMPELLING REASONS Life is filled with horrors – an

argument against the existence of a loving, omnipotent God Natural evils: earthquakes, floods,

rampant disease, droughts Unnatural evils: rape, plunder,

slaughter, torture, terror, war If one were to pick a

contemporary human being at random, what is the probability that his or her life would be as good as yours?

WE picture a “normal” life as one of development in childhood, joys in marriage and child-rearing, reflection in retirement and death in our sleep at the published life expectancy.

If we get anything else, we think our rights have been violated.

Most lives do not fit that pretty picture at all.

David Hume:

Is he willing to prevent evil but not able? Then he is impotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both

able and willing? Whence then is evil? Nothing can shake the solidity of this reasoning, so short, so

clear, so decisive…

CAN RELIGION BE COMPATIBLE WITH

DETERMINING WHAT IS ETHICAL?

Taken from Patrick Grim’s Question of Values,

Lecture 6: “Thoughts on Religion and Values.”

Chantilly, VA: The Teaching Company, 2005.