The phrase in the title is from Genesis, not that I need to tell Christians that.
4:8 And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.
4:9 And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper?
4:10 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground.
It isn’t the biblical story of the first murder that I want to talk about but the phrase itself and what it means to me as an atheist. In the story Cain is denying anything to do with the location of his brother and victim but he still raises a valid question even beyond the fact that an omnipotent god shouldn’t need to ask in the first place. “Am I my brother’s keeper?” is a rhetorical device that denies responsibility for Abel’s location and actions.
I think that it raises a valid point. I am not my brother’s keeper, I am not responsible for anyone else but me. Many Christians, at least in my experience, believe that they are their brother’s keeper, that they have a responsibility for one another. There is no doubt that it is good to care for and help others. We are social animals with an evolved sense of compassion and empathy. We reciprocate actions that aid our welfare and form groups that promote our survival. Yet we remain individuals with the groups that we form. We are not responsible for the actions of other members of the group.
Why then should we be concerned with what someone else does? If I have no responsibility for what someone does then why do I feel embarrassed when my nation does something stupid or harmful? Why do I feel pride when one of my children learns a new skill or gains a greater understanding of something? Isn’t there more to it than a reflected status that I share with my group? Am I so selfish as to care only about myself and what benefits me?
To assume a lack of altruism is to miss the point that we are responsible only for our own actions. In understanding that I embrace the full meaning of personal responsibility. I try to understand how my actions can impact and influence others and what that influence’s net result will be, whether positive or negative for my group.
There is a kind of karma involved. When I act in a way that benefits someone else they are inclined (but may choose not to act) to act in a similar positive way, when I act badly the victim of my poor behaviour is inclined to act badly too. By taking responsibility for my actions and acting in such a way as to increase the net benefit to all I am perpetuating this positive attitude. It is true that I may never be the recipient of this net positive gain, indeed I may suffer while others benefit, but the group as a whole gains. That doesn’t make me responsible for the net gain, only my own actions.
As an example let’s suggest that I go shopping and allow someone with a few items to skip in front of me at the checkout. That is my good deed that I am responsible for and can gain the credit for. Let’s then suggest that, motivated by my passing kindness, the other shopper gives way at a junction while driving home. That driver, in turn, gets to work and buys a round of coffees for her fellow workers. As a result each person is slightly more patient with their customers, etc, etc. At no point did I cause any of this to happen. I’m not responsible for the coffee being bought (or spilt) or any of the number of ongoing positive actions that make the day better for others.
Using the same example let’s suggest that I dashed in front of my fellow shopper as they were approaching the checkout. Annoyed, they refuse to allow someone into their lane of traffic. Another driver who was considering a quick stop at Starbucks, decides to go straight to work rather than put up with the inconsiderate motorists for a moment longer. Thirsty the people at the office are short with their customers, everyone is annoyed and the amount of happiness is slightly lower. Again, I didn’t cause this to happen and am not responsible for it.
I may not be my brother’s keeper but my actions do have consequences, often unseen. I can act in a way that will consistently increase the general good or I can act in a way that will diminish it. If I act positively then their is a good chance that other social animals like me will use that instinct for reciprocating to act in a positive manner too. Maybe one such positive action will benefit me, maybe in a way that I won’t even notice.
I don’t have to consciously try to change people to conform to my idea of how they should act, as some Christians and some evangelicals feel compelled to do, all I have to do is treat them as I would wish to be treated. I am not my brother’s keeper, not do I wish to be.
Posted in A Cacophony of Posts, Jason | 7 Comments »There is a quote that I found a few days ago that pretty well describes, from a Christian perspective, my interest in evolution, and all things atheistic.
“Unthinking faith is a curious offering to be made to the creator of the human mind.” ~John Hutchinson
This post in particular is not about me ‘wondering’ if evolution is true or not, although there is an element of that to my thinking. Rather, I’m taking the approach that there are an aweful lot of people that believe in evolution, and I believe in creationism. How, exactly does evolution work? Other than the fact that I am a Christian and believe in the Bible, what *don’t* I believe about evolution? Am I missing something? Are they?”
So I went out to www.howstuffworks.com and typed in “evolution” just to see if they would have anything. What I found is a sort of “evolution primer” - an “Evolution for Dummies” - of the theory. What I got is actually pretty good! Interestingly, even though it is not a religious site, they are willing to take a look at the holes, and .that leads me to believe they will present evolution from an objective, if not pro-evolution perspective.
My hope is that this will turn into a series where I try to look at the theory of evolution as objectively as I can - given that I’m very skepticaL - and relay my questions and reactions to what I find. Also, since I do invite several Christian friends to read what I write each week, this may be a good opportunity for them to ask questions, too. Again, the goal is not to prove or refute, but to understand what evolution is, and why it makes sense to so many people - and doesn’t make sense to so many others.
A couple of years ago, Eliza posted a series on her experience as an atheist, sitting in on a Lutheran membership class (look at articles titled ‘Class #__”), and relayed her perceptions of what it was like as an outsider. That’s kind of what I want to accomplish here - I want to look at what evolution has to offer, as objectively as possible, and see if it makes any sense. Parts will, I’m sure. And parts won’t, I’m equally sure.
If you click on the link I provided, it will take you to the actual article I will be working from. Please feel free to go look at it, too. I’m hoping that as questions arise - and they will - you will be able to help me through them.
Here endeth the intro :) Read the rest of this news item »
Eight weeks ago I wrote about false assumptions and how Christians suffered in the past because of them just as atheists suffer today. Atheism doesn’t have a philosophy or principles to counter these false assumptions any more than it has a philosophy or principles to deserve them. Secular humanism does put forward a set of positive traits and promotes a world view. These are:
Ethics - A search for viable individual, social and political principles of ethical conduct, judging them on their ability to enhance human well-being and individual responsibility.
Ethics is a major branch of philosophy. I simply cannot do it credit in a brief summary and so must assume that everyone has some basic idea of what is ethical and what is not. Secular ethics are one particular branch of the larger philosophy. In short the idea of secular ethics is based on a commonality of human experience. Humans, being social animals with the same basic physical and mental processes, have similar needs and desires.
There is a commonality of ethics throughout human religion but it is clearly not bound to religion. Secular ethics are obviously not drawn from religion but are drawn from the common idea that religions enjoy. In fact the Dalai Lama said, when discussing human values like affection and compassion “We need these human values. I call these secular ethics, secular beliefs. There’s no relationship with any particular religion. Even without religion, even as nonbelievers, we have the capacity to promote these things.”
Yet some theists like to maintain that belief in gods, whether theirs or another, is a requirement for ethics and for good, moral behaviour. They claim that without heaven as a reward or hell as a punishment there can be no control on the negative actions of people. I have only one thing to say beyond the utter refutation of this: If you need to believe in God to stop you raping, murdering and stealing then I am glad that you have that belief. I do not need it because I, like most people, can act morally without regard to religion.
Beyond this basic idea that humans decide for ourselves what is ethical behaviour those who self define as secular humanists also seek to discover what actions can improve life both for themselves, for society and, by extension, the world. This could be a material improvement through sharing resources, new technology or medicine or an idea. I know it is a bit of a stereotype but we embrace the idea of science being used to make things better for ourselves. For example without agricultural techniques and machines we’d only be able to feed 1% of the current world’s population.
We also follow the very simply idea that what is good feels good to do. Helping others feels good, seeing people benefit from your aid gives us a warm glow of happiness. Doing harm to others or causing suffering feels bad so we seek to avoid it. It is a rare individual who does not have these feelings. Moreover we encourage or reinforce good behaviour in our children and peers and discourage bad behaviour if for no other reason than we want to mix with others who we can trust to help us if we ever need it.
Posted in A Cacophony of Posts, Jason | 20 Comments »