Are Humans Valuable? If I Were an Honest Atheist

AtheismThe following is a satirical article on how I would see the world if I were an atheist/Humanist. I am convinced that atheism requires one to hold conflicting views of reality by suppressing the contradiction - atheism holds onto the Christian belief that human's are valuable, but then embraces views and beliefs that show this to be impossible. Since they have dropped Christianity they should not whimsically pick what parts they like; they must drop it all. Human rights are an illusion if there is no God.

Christians hold to the idea that humanity, while being material and a part of the universe, is distinct from all other matter and holds intrinsic value. The notion goes that the Judeo-Christian God, Yahweh, created them in His image and, therefore, they are more valuable than other, dense collections of matter like rocks or trees. This idea stands in contrast to what real scientists know; life was, in fact, not planned and humanity is the blind result of unbiased forces that could not have resulted in anything different. Humanity is not special because we occupy an insignificant planet in a remote and insignificant solar system. There is no loving, all powerful being that looks out for our good and sympathizes with our suffering - God is dead. 

When we observe the universe, and more specifically our planet, we see that violence and oppression are not atrocities to be avoided at all costs because they are the very mechanisms by which our species has arrived at the dominate position we are in. With that said, we need to talk about the creature known as the "ignorant atheist". There are some non-theists who refuse to acknowledge the facts. Quite often they come from a religious background, usually Christianity, and when they adopt free thinking and science, they can’t seem to leave behind everything from their pasts. They continue to engage in ridiculous, circular arguments with those who reject science; more specifically, they can’t drop the notion of human value and believe that fighting for human rights is somehow still their prerogative. I can empathize with them on this because it is extremely unpopular, and could potentially do our cause harm, to admit what science has revealed to us. On the other hand, was it not also unpopular to admit that the earth was a sphere and traversing its oceans would, in fact, not bring you falling off the edge into the emptiness of space? Free thinkers and advocates of science, it is time we leave behind such nonsensical notions. How can we embrace the truths that Darwin revealed to us and hold such incompatible ideas without batting an eye?

For some I might have gone too quickly so I will reiterate. What are the facts that lead to such ideas? Well, we know that there is no loving God who created us a few millennia ago, for that ship has long departed the realms of the enlightened mind. We also know then that everything is nothing but organized molecules; there can be no superior collections of matter as we have already said that the universe is not in the business of favoritism, for she is unbiased. What I am saying is that though we might feel strongly that certain actions are unfavorable and that certain creatures have value, this is nothing more than our biology at work. For an example, let’s turn to the human that is typically deemed "subhuman". The rapist is looked down upon by the majority of society and said to be in the wrong, but we know that that person no more chose to be a rapist than he chose his biological parents or his eye color – science has shown us that the universe is a programmed sequence of events that derived from the first cause. The correlation between cause and effect can be nothing other than what it is. There is no choice involved since every action (including this sentence) is a chain result of the action before it leading back to the big bang. With that fact now in place, we are open to see the nonsensicality of arguing that action A is favorable to action B, for when action B occurs it could not have been any other way. When a rapist carry’s out his actions, nature has still none-the-less succeeded because the species has followed its biological orders to reproduce in the way it was programmed to.

Now, some might assert that this is horrifying and maddening, but why? In light of the facts that science reveals to us, what new information do they have that counters everything science has revealed since Darwin? No, this is nothing but an emotional tantrum resulting from the refusal to follow the facts of science where they lead; humanity has thrived because of our violent natures and we can readily observe this in the animal kingdom. The strong eat the weak for the betterment of the species, so why are we any different? God is dead and with him goes any romantic ideas of worth or values. David Hume’s question, “How does one get an 'ought' from an 'is'?” has been answered by science: there is no ought - for the very ideas of an “ought” are really just the “is” masquerading in disguise.

There is yet another elephant in the room that many refuse to deal with. One-hundred percent of the species known as "man" ends in the exact, same manner: the death of the body. A human might live for seventy-five years and another might live for five years, but what difference does it matter? Sure, someone might say that it makes a difference for those they leave behind, but we know that these differences are ultimately pointless. Science has told us how the universe ends; the point here is not to argue the exact nature of how it ends but that it does end. The universe is like a wound up clock that is ticking down towards the end of its cycle. Since humanity is no more valuable than rocks, trees, birds, or bees, when the universe ends, whatever perceived significance there was for the person whose life was extended by medical technology, thus allowing their loved ones to have more time with them, is meaningless. It makes zero difference if that person died at seventy-five from a stroke or cancer or at the age of five from polio, the result is still the same. The effect of these actions results in the same thing: a cold and dark universe that remembers nothing. No triumphant motives will be recalled, Beethoven’s compositions will be forever forgotten, and, however great society becomes, it will end with the mass expansion of the universe to the point of nothingness.

As we know, the Christians believe differently. They believe that in the end everything that was wrong will be put right. Is this a bad thing? Well, of course it is inferior to scientific truth, but let them have their romanticized view of reality if that brings them comfort. Let them have their hope if it gets them through the dark nights. However, make no mistake, for those who have embraced free thinking and science, we know better; there is no choice, no actions are superior to others, and life is essentially meaningless. Take comfort in the truth that this small period of time is all we have. Live it boldly and unashamed of the truths we have discovered. 




Worship, What Happened?
The Skeptic's Creed