Sermon for 16 November 2003, 1st Unitarian Church of Alton,, Illinois
IS MORALITY BASED ON RELIGION?
Ronald J. Glossop

I. Introduction
A. The question of whether morality is based on religion has two
aspects both of which I want to discuss this morning.
1. The first aspect is whether our moral ideas, our ideas
concerning what is right and wrong, concerning what is good and bad,
are based on religion. Must we have certain religious ideas about
the existence and nature of God before we can have worthwhile ideas
about what constitutes moral behavior?
2. The second aspect is whether our motivations to do what is
right and good are based on religion. Must we have certain religious
ideas about God and life-after-death before we can be motivated to do
what morality requires?
B. There does seem to be a fairly popular belief, especially in
this country, that atheists cannot have sound ideas about what is
right and wrong, good and bad. Also it is widely supposed that those
who do not believe in God and the afterlife will lack the incentive
to act morally when the chips are down.
C. One manifestation of this viewpoint is the idea that parents,
even if they are not particularly religious themselves, should send
their children to Sunday School so that they learn about morality and
the horrible things that will befall them if they act immorally, as
contrasted with the everlasting happiness that awaits them if they do
what is required.

II. To begin to deal with these issues, let us examine the question
of where our moral rules do in fact come from and the kinds of
motivations which lead people to act morally.
A. An important contribution to these issues is the widely accepted
theory of moral development put forth in the 1970's by Lawrence
Kohlberg. He was a development psychologist who then became a
professor of moral education at Harvard University. He conducted the
research studies on which his theory is based at Harvard's Center for
Moral Education.
B. According to Kohlberg, the moral thinking of individuals
develops through six stages.
1. Even before the first stage of moral thinking there is the
pre-moral situation of infants and very young children where nothing
matters but what is wanted or not wanted at the moment. There is no
concept of rules and no awareness of the concerns of others.
2. The first stage in the development of moral thinking,
typically found at the elementary school level, is awareness of the
need to obey in order to get a reward or to avoid punishment. It is
the short-term physical consequences of the behavior which is
important to the child. The culmination of this first stage is the
view that right behavior is acting in one's own interests over a
slightly longer period of time in view of the power of others.
3. The second stage in moral development shows a market-place
orientation, that is, children try to get what they want in the long
run but realize that this requires being fair with others. One
shares with others in the expectation that they will do likewise
(with loud cries of complaint to adults if they don't).
4. The third stage of moral thinking is based on conformity and
approval of others, both authority figures and peers. People should
do what everyone else does and what others expect them to do. The
notion of intending to do what is right becomes important in judging
others.
5. The fourth stage in moral development recognizes the need to
obey the current law and follow the existing rules in order to
maintain the social order. One should do one's duty and respect
authority. This is the culmination of the conventional level of
morality where most adults operate.
6. Some people move beyond the conventional level to the fifth
stage where one begins to think in terms of moral values and
principles that have an enduring validity apart from the temporary
viewpoints of the groups to which they belong. Here we move beyond
just accepting the particular moral ideas and moral behavior which
happen at present to be supported by some authority, political or
religious. At this level moral ideas and moral behavior are based on
some generally accepted more general principles which can be used to
critique the particular views presently being advanced. This is the
kind of moral viewpoint supported by the U.S. Constitution.
7. The sixth and highest stage of moral development is reliance
on personal conscience guided by some abstract universal principles
such as the Golden Rule and equal dignity of all persons regardless
of their accidental features or what is good for humanity and the
universe in the long run.
C. We should note that in his discussion of levels of moral
development Kohlberg makes no mention of God or religion or belief in
life-after-death.
D. But let us review those stages of moral development to see
where religious ideas might become relevant.
1. At the third stage, approval of others, especially authority
figures, becomes relevant to moral ideas and moral behavior. At this
point, if there is a lively belief in God as an ever-present
authority figure, that could impact the moral development of that
child. Ideas about what God commands and approves could be very
important, and the view that God has ways of rewarding and punishing
good or bad behavior could influence behavior. Consider how parents
try to influence behavior near Christmas by noting what Santa Claus
might do with regard to Christmas presents. Such warnings may make
no difference, but it is widely believed that they do.
a. I thank Jim Elliott for sending me an e-mail message about
Ben Franklin's letter to Thomas Paine in which he urges Paine not to
publicize his view that there is no "particular Providence," that is,
no God who intervenes in nature or in an afterlife to reward and
punish people for their behavior.
b. Franklin notes that Paine himself may have attained a level
of moral development where he can live virtuously without belief in a
God who rewards and punishes moral and immoral behavior (that is, he
has proceeded beyond the third stage of moral development) but there
are many others who have not. As Franklin puts it, "But think how
great a portion of mankind consists of weak and ignorant men and
women, and of inexperienced, inconsiderate youth of both sexes, who
have need of the motives of religion to restrain them from vice, to
support their virture, and retain them in the practice of it till it
becomes habitual. . . ."
c. Franklin then applies his view to Paine himself. He writes,
"And perhaps you are indebted to her originally, that is, to your
religious education, for the habits of virtue upon which you now
justly value yourself." Thus Franklin seems to be suggesting that
traditional religion is necessary to inculcate moral behavior at a
certain level of moral development even for those who later can move
beyond that level.
d. The other side of this issue, which Franklin completely
overlooks, is the danger that moral behavior built on this religious
foundation may suddenly be washed away if this base is undermined by
loss of traditional religious belief as the result of intellectual
development. What then happens to moral beliefs and moral behavior?
e. The scientific revolution that has tended to undermine
traditional religious beliefs in the literal truth of ancient
scriptures and the possibility of miracles has raised this issue not
only for individuals but for all of human society. Is it a good idea
to base morality on traditional religious beliefs that are likely to
be undermined as our knowledge of the world increases? Is even the
use of the Santa Claus myth something to be avoided rather than used
as a means of trying to control the behavior of children.
f. We are presently involved in a "culture war"--especially in
this country but also in much of the world--largely on this very
issue. Should we continue to rely on traditional religious beliefs
about miracles and life-after-death as a basis for moral beliefs and
moral behavior even when we have overwhelming evidence that many of
these traditional religious beliefs are not true? We now know, for
example, that the Earth goes around the sun and the sun is but one
star in one galaxy in a vast universe. We know that humans have
evolved from other forms of life and that it is as unlikely that
humans continue to exist after death as that other forms of life do
so. But religious fundamentalists, whether Christian or Jewish or
Muslim, do not want anyone, and especially children, to know about
this evidence. They try to conceal it.
2. Returning to our stages of moral development, at the fourth
stage we find the recognition of the need to obey the current law, do
one's duty, and follow the authorities. Here awareness of the need
to maintain the existing social order becomes a big factor in moral
beliefs and moral behavior.
a. Maintaining the existing social order depends largely on
control by two kinds of social institutions, the government or the
political authority and the church or the religious authority.
b. In human society, these two institutions have often been
used together to control the behavior of individuals, the former
using laws backed by physical force and the latter using commandments
from God enforced by some kind of supernatural power. Furthermore,
the government has usually been able to control the religious
authorities, assisting those who support the government and
eliminating those which do not.
c. But from time to time conflicts develop between the
political authorities and the religious authorities. Then religion
can be used as a basis for individuals to resist the current secular
power on grounds that there is a "higher law" to be followed. Here
there is a conflict between following one kind of authority and
following another kind of authority. There were such disputes
between Church and King in Europe that eventually led to the
Reformation. We saw such conflicts under the Communist regimes in
Russia, Poland, and other eastern European countries. We see this
kind of thing happening now in this country in Alabama in the
conflict between the court system of the federal government on the
one hand and Roy Moore on the other. Moore, who was removed from his
position of Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court because of his
insistence on displaying a monument containing the Ten Commandments
in the rotunda of the state Supreme Court building even after he had
been ordered by a federal court to remove it, claims that he is
following a "higher law" as well as the state constitution of Alabama.
d. But these social conflicts about right and wrong all fall
within the fourth level of individual moral development where one's
moral ideas come from some political or religious authority and are
supported by that authority with whatever kind of power they can
exercise.
3. At the fifth stage of individual moral development we have
moved beyond just accepting the particular moral ideas and moral
behavior which happen at present to be supported by some authority,
political or religious. At this level moral ideas and moral behavior
are based on some generally accepted more general principles which
can be used to critique the particular views presently being advanced.
a. At this level of morality we can see the impact of
philosophical thinking. There is an awareness that the present
pronouncements made by authorities of whatever kind are not always
consistent with their own general principles.
b. There comes an awareness that well-meaning persons can
disagree on what should be done in particular situations.
c. Furthermore, there comes to be a readiness to challenge
authorities, both political and religious, concerning what should be
done to deal with particular issues and situations.
4. At the sixth stage of individual moral development, which
Kohlberg believes only a very few people ever reach, there is a
reliance on personal conscience guided by some universal high-level
principles such as the Golden Rule and equal dignity of all persons
regardless of their accidental features or what is good for humanity
and the universe in the long run. Persons at this moral level may
depart considerably from popular ideas about what is right or wrong
and traditional ways of defending their moral ideas. They reject the
notion that something is right just because some political or
religious authority says so. Their motivation for moral behavior will
be divorced from considerations of personal gain or loss or social
approval or disapproval. They typically are seeking to do what is
right simply because in their view it is the right thing for them
(and others) to do.
a. They will be ready to defend their viewpoint
philosophically by appealing to abstract-level moral considerations.
b. They may use religious terminology when giving a rationale
for their moral view, but it will not be an appeal to merely
following what some person or some religious authority or some
religious tradition prescribed.
5. The challenge for parents and teachers (and grandparents) is
to help children progress to the fifth and sixth stages of moral
development instead of getting stuck at the conventional third or
fourth stages where most people end, just accepting what some
authority says is morally correct. One way to help is talking with
children about moral issues giving special attention to the kinds of
reasons they advance for their views. Keep asking "Why?"

III. A philosophical defense of basic moral principles needs to
address the issue of whether our moral ideas are based on reason or
feelings.
A. This may seem to be a theoretical issue with little practical
significance, but it has consequences for issues such as what kinds
of moral obligations, if any, we would have to robots which seem to
have intellectual capabilities. Looking at this issue also helps us
to refine our own thinking about moral issues.
B. The great German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), as well
as other earlier philosophers such as Plato and Epitetus, claimed
that moral principles are known by reason. They claimed that the
mind just knows, apart from any kind of sense experience, what is
right or wrong, good or bad.
1. If someone were to claim that knowledge of morality comes
through sense experiences, that person could be challenged to
describe the particular sense experiences that provide this
knowledge. Is the "rightness" or "goodness" of anything really a
quality that we can see, hear, touch, feel, taste, or otherwise
sense? What is seen? What is heard? What is felt?
2. Also, if our knowledge about morality comes from sense
experience, it seems that people would probably come to different
conclusions about right and wrong, good and bad, depending on what
particular sense experiences they might have had. We would need to
admit a fundamental moral relativism and the conclusion that there is
no objective right or wrong, good or bad, just different opinions
from time to time and place to place.
3. Kant argued that though reason could not provide us with the
content of rules about right and wrong behavior which apply to all
persons in all times and all places, we still can know just by
thinking about it that the very idea of a law or rule about right and
wrong conduct must be the same for everyone and cannot contain
exceptions for particular persons. Otherwise, it is not really a law
or rule.
4. On this basis Kant formulated what he calls "The Categorical
Imperative," the intuitive truth that whatever moral rules or laws
there are must be the same for everyone. "Act in such a way that you
could will that everyone would always act from the same maxim."
Persons must fill in the content of the rule for themselves, but
whatever moral rule they conclude that others must follow will also
be a rule that they themselves must obey.
5. Kant's observation turns out to be a very philosophically
sophisticated way of defending the Golden Rule as the basis of all
morality. One must oneself follow the same moral rules that one
wants and expects others to follow.
6. There is no room for moral relativism here, nor is your
knowledge of what is right or wrong in any way dependent on what
particular sense experiences you have had. The moral law is known by
reason, not by experience.
7. Furthermore, Kant argues that the only morally praiseworthy
behavior is that which is motivated by the commitment to do one's
duty as indicated by applying the Categorical Imperative to one's own
moral decisions. If your decisions in moral situations are motivated
by other considerations such as what would make you happy (including
going to Heaven) or what would make someone else happy or what will
allow you to escape from some unpleasant experience (such as going to
Hell), then you are not acting morally.
8. So according to Kant, what kind of moral obligations if any
would we have to robots? That seems to depend on whether the robots
could understand the Categorical Imperative and the rationale for it.
If so, they would seem to be part of the community of all rational
beings (which also includes God), the community in which Kant
believes the Categorical Imperative applies.
C. A somewhat different philosophical view on the basis of our
moral ideas is provided by the Scottish philosopher David Hume
(1711-1776). He believes that our feelings or sentiments are the key
to our moral ideas, although he allows that reason also plays a
role. Reason gives us knowledge about the usual consequences of
particular kinds of actions, but something else , a sentiment or
feeling of approbation or disapprobation, is involved in judging
whether the consequences of those actions are good or bad, and
therefore whether particular actions and motives are virtuous or
vicious.
1. For Hume we would not have moral feelings or make moral
judgments if it was not part of our human nature to empathize with
others like ourselves. Noticing others in pain gives us pain and
being with others who are happy makes us happy. Hume notes that it
is this very aspect of our nature which allows us to become so
involved in theater productions. The more others are like ourselves,
the greater the empathy we experience, and the context can influence
the extent of the empathy. As Hume notes at one point in his
Treatise of Human Nature (p. 482), an Englishman feels a special
closeness with another Englishman he happens to meet in Italy, with a
European he happens to meet in China, and with any human being he
might meet on the moon. In most situations our empathy readily
extends to all humans of all ages and sexes and races.
2. Our empathy extends even to other kinds of animals. Can we
watch a dog or other animal in pain without feeling some pain
ourselves? Can we watch squirrels at play without feeling some sense
of playfulness ourselves?
3. Hume notes that it is just our human nature to be pleased by
human actions that make others happy and to be pained by those which
cause pain to others, whether humans or animals. In the very complex
situations of human life, our moral judgments depend on knowing the
usual consequences of actions and motives. Those actions and motives
which tend to arouse pleasure in the persons themselves or others are
viewed as virtues while those which usually lead to pain are viewed
as vices. Useful actions or motives arouse feelings of approbation
while those which are harmful arouse feelings of disapprobation.
4. Hume's analysis of how we make moral judgments about virtue
and vice, about good and bad behavior and motives, is rooted
completely in the nature of human beings. It is based on
observations about how humans empathize with other humans and even
with animals.
5. In the context of our present discussion, what is important
in Hume's view of morality is the absence of any reference to
anything supernatural or divine. For him morality is a completely
natural phenomenon which develops out of the empathetic nature of
human beings.
6. When he does direct his attention to the role of religion in
morality, he criticizes the way that religious superstitions
encourage people to do things contrary to what is generally regarded
as good for human life. For example, he notes how the "monkish
virtues" of chastity, poverty, and obedience are not virtues at all
in ordinary life but are rather the very opposite of what is useful
and fulfilling in human life.
7. An implication of Hume's view is that our interactions with
animals is much more important morally than our interactions with
robots, no matter how intelligent they are. The only way that robots
would be morally relevant to us is if they were able to feel pleasure
and pain. Animals do feel pleasure and pain, and it is morally wrong
to cause them pain when that can be avoided. The more we are able
empathize with certain kinds of animals, the greater is our moral
obligation not to cause them pain. But it is the empathy with pain
and pleasure that is important, not the presence or absence of
intelligence.

IV. Conclusions
A. There is nothing in the development of moral beliefs or moral
behavior within individuals that indicates that religion or belief in
the supernatural is necessary for morality. The fact that moral
beliefs and moral behavior develop even in persons and cultures where
there is no religious belief supports this conclusion.
B. Most adults operate at the level of conventional morality
(stages three and four) where they conform to what is expected by the
reigning authority, political or religious. At this level an appeal
to religious authority may provide a basis for disobeying the
political authority. This may be good or bad depending on what the
various opposing authorities are commanding. Those who have no other
basis for making moral judgments will just be perplexed.
C. Critical philosophical thinking provides an alternative way of
arriving at moral beliefs and providing motivation for moral
behavior. Just following what religious and political authorities
say without question is not necessary or desirable. Such blind
obedience is a bad habit that may be difficult to break. Children
can be encouraged to think critically about these issues by
discussing with them why certain moral ideas are better than others
and why it is good to do what is right. It is ultimately a matter of
what kind of person you want to be and whether you can feel content
about what you have done and are doing.
D. And lastly, a word of warning. Many cases have been reported
where children have learned moral principles from their parents and
teachers and then questioned the behavior of the adults. Why aren't
you doing what you taught me was the right thing to do? And children
will learn more from what they observe us doing than from what we
say. So that is our challenge when it comes to teaching our children
and grandchildren about moral beliefs and motivation for moral
behavior.