What is the source of that liberty, equality and fraternity that are now the guiding principles of the West, if not the modern world?
Historians note the anomaly that these principles originated and developed only in Western civilization. In this sense, they are not universal. Of late, however, these principles are being exported to the rest of the world. One may say they are Western in origin but universal in their application.
But where do the principles come from? With the death of Heidegger and Sartre, Jurgen Habermas is now regarded as perhaps our leading living philosopher. Habermas is also an atheist. Yet when Habermas found out that the European Union in its charter gave full acknowledgement to ancient Greece and Rome, but none to Christianity, he erupted in learned outrage.
Habermas's argument is that it is philosophically illiterate to locate the roots of the West in Athens but not in Jerusalem. In fact, Habermas argues that Jerusalem--by which he means Judaism and Christianity--is far more responsible than Athens for the modern principles of liberty, equality and fraternity. In "A Time of Transition," Habermas writes:
For the normative self-understanding of modernity, Christianity has functioned as more than just a precursor or catalyst. Universalistic egalitarianism, from which sprang the ideals of freedom and a collective life in solidarity, the autonomous conduct of life and emancipation, the individual morality of conscience, human rights and democracy, is the direct legacy of the Judaic ethic of justice and the Christian ethic of love.
Habermas's point is that there is too much arrogance in contemporary atheism. Even the atheist is standing on mountain erected by Christianity. How ungrateful it is to scorn the mountain that is still holding you up! How ridiculous the posture of the man who cannot acknowledge the very foundation that sustains him from below!
This is what Christians mean when they say that America is a Christian society. This is not a call for theocracy or "rule of the priests" but rather a call for a public acknowledgement of the historic role of Christianity in shaping our institutions, our values and our culture. The opinions of several leading Supreme Court justices on church-and-state issues would benefit greatly from a slight familiarity with the history that Habermas is talking about.
Habermas's argument would have struck a chord with the greatest atheist of modern times, the philosopher Nietzsche. Nietzsche argued that if you want to get rid of the Christian God, at least have the honesty and the guts to repudiate the Christian ideals of human dignity, human equality and human liberty.
Yet our village atheists want to have it both ways. They want to reject God but preserve at least certain core aspects of the Christian legacy. Nietzsche would have had nothing but scorn for these little men of unbelief, Lilliputians hurling their tiny javelins at the Christian God while they continue to live off His inheritance.
Reader Comments ( Page 7 of 29)
91. DD, religion is a holdover of belief from the days before science. It must pass. You say:
"Habermas's point is that there is too much arrogance in contemporary atheism. Even the atheist is standing on mountain erected by Christianity. How ungrateful it is to scorn the mountain that is still holding you up! How ridiculous the posture of the man who cannot acknowledge the very foundation that sustains him from below!"
This argument lacks logic. The hypothesis & later discovered fact that the earth was round was nurtured in a mind raised on the belief that the earth was flat. No one misses the flat earth theory now. The idea of germs & sanitation as causes of illness overcame the idea of sickness caused by the devil. No one misses that, either. All kinds of matter make up the mountain you're standing on; better to look to the stars (the future) than wallow in the past.
Cole at 7:40PM on Aug 7th 2008
92. "Israel has been unable to adopt a constitution full blown, not because it does not share the new society understanding of constitution as fundamental law, but because of a conflict over what constitutes fundamental law within Israeli society. Many religious Jews hold that the only real constitution for a Jewish state is the Torah and the Jewish law that flows from it. They not only see no need for a modern secular constitution, but even see in such a document a threat to the supremacy of the Torah"
http://www.counterpunch.org/cook01252003.html
So, let me get this straight, Somber, the government is a democracy, but it has no definite borders within which all people are equal under the law. Israel has no constitution because the government feels that the Torah is a dandy constitution!(don't say this isn't true, because if it were a few cranks who thought this the govt. would go ahead and write up a constitution, wouldn't it?
If their sacred text is their de facto constitution then it certainly IS a theocracy!
not-pboyfloyd at 7:39PM on Aug 7th 2008
93. It amazes me that so many Christians believe they have a lock on morality, and atheists are immoral.
Do most of them even know what morality is? Doesn't appear so.
Morality is behavior that conforms to ethics.
Ethics are human standards of behavior.
Many Christians may think that humanity was without standards of behavior until the arrival of Abraham, or perhaps Moses, but that doesn't seem reasonable.
What is reasonable for them to believe is that the first four commandments of the decalog were written to allow greater control of the tribes. The last six were meant to document existing human standards of behavior.
Yep, it was the atheists and pagans who developed ethics.
naturalpuppy at 7:42PM on Aug 7th 2008
94. Naturalpuppy, I like that.
Cole at 7:47PM on Aug 7th 2008
95.
Greece and Rome were PHYSICAL REALITIES. Christianity is a RELIGION. They both developed cultures of the highest order; while they had religion, it wasn't the religions that made them great.
You seem to think that christianity is the root of everything. Everything good, that is. When confronted with the bad, you point fingers elsewhere. You so often point to "atheist regimes," yet refuse to discuss how they got where they were. These atheist regimes were born in very theistic places.
Greece and Rome were massive states, and both contributed to the great western society we know today. From art to politics to architecture, they were ahead of their times. Yet, we don't hear about how Apollo or Zeus made them great - they didn't. IT WAS THE PEOPLE.
ex-christian at 8:11PM on Aug 7th 2008
96. The Greeks were not democratic only the rich landowners could vote or get an education. Women were second class citizens and the majority of the population were slaves. Same for the Romans. Christianity is far from democratic or egalitarian. Throughout the bible women are treated as less then human. In Europe and in America women could not get an education, were not permitted to own land, nor were they allowed to vote. That, DD is NOT egalitarian. It was the christian church that tortured and slaughtered millions of women during the 300 years of the Witchcraze. Christians were the ones who stole land and took the lives of millions of indigenous peoples around the world. Christians condoned slavery using the bible to cement their views. If christians were in complete control today our society would look exactly like the Taliban controlled Afghanistan.
I am always amazed at the way so-called christians try to change history or ignore their own horrific treatment of other peoples while pointing out the flaws in other societies that aren't christian.
Christians like DD do not look at or research all the facts. You would think that having going to dartmouth, DD would not rest on strawman attacks or superficial arguments.
DD start doing your research or are you afraid of the truth?
Judy at 8:37PM on Aug 7th 2008
97. "Many Christians may think that humanity was without standards of behavior until the arrival of Abraham, or perhaps Moses, but that doesn't seem reasonable."
Who believes this? Even if you were to take a ridiculous, fundamentalist view of, say, the Bible, you could not reach this conclusion. This is a blatant straw man.
"It amazes me that so many Christians believe they have a lock on morality, and atheists are immoral."
Any Christians who believe this don't know much about their Christianity, which famously teaches that the line between 'moral' and 'immoral' isn't drawn between 'us' and 'them,' but is rather drawn straight down the middle of each and every one of us. Add to this the Christian teaching that we're *all* made in god's image, and the fundamental notion that Christianity can't be reduced to a system of ethics, and you can deduce the following conclusions: first, Christians, qua Christians, are not necessarily 'more' moral than atheists; second, that atheists, qua atheists, are not necessarily 'less' moral than Christians; and third, that we shouldn't expect Christians to live up to their standards, but to fail to live up to their standards. Who among us, after all, could live up to Christ's example? Even St. Francis was infinitely far from achieving this. This sort of humble view was put nicely by Chesterton who compared the religion of those self righteous folks who look down from the mountains, where everything looks so small, to the religion of those humble folks who look up from the valley, where everything looks so big. I may not come across as the most humble guy when discussing some abstruse intellectual point (though I'm only abrasive to those who treat me disrespectfully; I admit, it's a weakness of mine), but I have never suggested that I'm more moral than anyone else.
"Yep, it was the atheists and pagans who developed ethics."
Even if we concede, for the sake of argument, that this is correct, it still doesn't help you out when it comes to the truly important moral issue, viz. how do you *justify* morality? No atheist has yet been able to develop a sensible response to this very fundamental question.
Renzo at 9:03PM on Aug 7th 2008
98. @12. Peter, Peter, Peter. What are we to do with a catatonic boy like you. Haven't you had your meds yet? C'mon, take 'em now and relax. Take it easy. Good boy.
emendozajun at 9:11PM on Aug 7th 2008
99.
Morality and ethics are the philosophies that control behavior to preserve a society.
JefFlyingV at 9:11PM on Aug 7th 2008
100. 27. That is an interesting observation allabaster... christian atheists... I like it.
Shannie at 11:34AM on Aug 7th 2008
Thank you, although it is not my own.
Vox Days book The Irrational Atheist is a terrific source of commentary of modern day atheism and it's current champions.
It can be downloaded for free or a charge below.
http://irrationalatheist.com/downloads.html
If you are a fan of Sam Harris, Dawkins or Hitchens i wouldn't recommend it as you will probably not want to get past chapter 4 where most of the chapter by chapter rebutals seem to stall then stop.
allabaster at 9:28PM on Aug 7th 2008
101. Even if we concede, for the sake of argument, that this is correct, it still doesn't help you out when it comes to the truly important moral issue, viz. how do you *justify* morality? No atheist has yet been able to develop a sensible response to this very fundamental question.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't even understand the question. Morality is behavior that conforms to human standards of behavior. What's to justify?
Renzo at 9:03PM on Aug 7th 2008
naturalpuppy at 9:37PM on Aug 7th 2008
102. "Any Christians who believe this don't know much about their Christianity, which famously teaches that the line between 'moral' and 'immoral' isn't drawn between 'us' and 'them,' but is rather drawn straight down the middle of each and every one of us." says Renzo the Magnificent.
I'm not arguing your point here, I'm just saying that someone should clue in Pat Robertson, don't you think?
not-pboyfloyd at 9:40PM on Aug 7th 2008
103. Dinesh, you draw atheists and nay-sayers like a light bulb draws bugs. What you need is some bug spray. Just zap them and forget about them. Some of them might be lightning bugs, but they are more bother than they're worth.
Jerry Rodges at 9:53PM on Aug 7th 2008
104. Renzo: "...the line between 'moral' and 'immoral' isn't drawn between 'us' and 'them,' but is rather drawn straight down the middle of each and every one of us".
Renzo, that is a wonderful quote. What is it from or is it yours?
Ryan Anderson at 10:07PM on Aug 7th 2008
105. No atheist has yet been able to develop a sensible response to this very fundamental question. (how do you 'justify' morality)
Renzo at 9:03PM on Aug 7th 2008
xx
morality is evolutioniary and that should be prima facie.
'Justification' is merely assigning causation. I just did that in the preceding statement you almost certainly disagree with.
Without understanding that morality is evolutionary, justification takes on a new meaning.
If you are trying to solve this in personal terms, you're trying to project personal values on something that is far beyond your person.
Evolution is all the interactions we have all the time. With some, survival is more likely than with others. From our collective experiences some of us learn refinements, some don't.
There isn't much more to it than that, really.
Clif Kuplen at 10:09PM on Aug 7th 2008