| Morality |
|
The priests of any society want you to believe that their God demands your obedience to the moral law which they prescribe. And people generally do behave reasonably morally. If, however, I do not believe that a higher power exists, then I have to believe that peoples' tendancy to act morally is either silly or can be explained on an utilitarian basis. So does morality confer an evolutionary advantage on the species? I believe that this is so. A society where you can believe that you will be reasonably safe in the streets and that people will keep their bargains is one which is efficient. If we rightly feared that we were in danger every time we went out, then our time would be spent on assuring our own security. If we could not believe that others would keep their promises, then we could not benefit from the complex economy which we enjoy. But if we know that the rules are only the product of evolutionary pressures, we will all be tempted to break the rules when it suits us. After all there is no higher authority seeing our every covert action. Clearly, however, I would want everyone-else to abide by the rules, even if I did not, as that would be to my advantage. Purely for my own benefit, it seems therefore that I should encourage others to believe in some higher moral authority. After all, it is not difficult to persuade people to believe absurd things, for example astrology. Perhaps I should become a covert priest and proclaim the message of religious morality instead of reason. And is the general acceptance of authority, of which religion is only one example, an evolutionary advantage in itself because it tends to produce stability - a sort of opium of the people ? |