BHA Education Humanist Perspectives.Indd

Humanist Perspective: Gods

Humanists try to use reason and evidence to decide what to believe. They typically believe the world is a natural phenomenon and that everything arises from natural causes. This belief is called Naturalism. They do not see any good or persuasive reasons or evidence to believe there are any supernatural beings or forces in the world. This means that they do not believe in a god or gods, or they believe it is impossible to know whether a god exists or not. This is probably the most common thing people know about humanists. However, it is important to understand that the absence of belief in a god or gods is not foundational for Humanism. It is a consequence of the importance they place on evidence when deciding what to believe.

Many religious people do believe in gods (Buddhists are perhaps the most obvious exception). For many religious people, their faith is enough to persuade them a god exists, but for humanists, faith alone is not good enough evidence to believe in something. Humanists are therefore atheists (they don’t believe in a god) or they are agnostics (they believe we cannot know whether a god exists or not).

‘We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.’ Richard Dawkins, scientist

We all find some gods impossible to believe in. Almost everyone today rejects the existence of ancient gods such as Thor, Zeus, and Osiris, despite the fact that many people once believed in and worshipped them. The reason most people don’t believe in them is there is no good or persuasive evidence for their existence. A humanist would apply the same tests to the claims made about the existence of gods today as they do to the gods of the past and, for that matter, to the existence of anything else. They ask, what is the evidence?

Humanists prefer to describe themselves as ‘humanists’ rather than as ‘atheists’ or ‘agnostics’ because they prefer to be defined by their positive beliefs (e.g. I believe we should treat other people with respect; I believe we can find beauty, joy, and meaning in the one life we have; I believe reason and evidence can lead us to truths about the world) rather than with a negative belief (I don’t believe in a god or gods). Some humanists think questions about the existence of a god or gods are not worthy of further investigation and some will not have given much thought to many of the issues surrounding such questions, they are simply not relevant to the way they live their lives. However, others take great pleasure in exploring the philosophical arguments or want to understand why some people believe in gods and whether we have anything to learn about human beings from such beliefs.

For many humanists, the more important question is not whether gods exist, but if you don’t see any good evidence for the existence of gods, what does that mean for how you live your life? Many humanists believe it is perfectly possible to lead an ethical, happy, and meaningful life without a belief in a god or gods.

You can’t prove there’s no god!

Typically humanists accept that they can’t prove there is no god, but they do not think this is a good reason to believe in one. They believe the responsibility should rest on the believer to prove something exists, not on the non-believer to prove it doesn’t. It is impossible to prove that something does not exist, but there are many things that we rationally don’t believe in, even though we can’t prove they don’t exist.

‘Even though there’s no scientific evidence at all for God’s existence, it’s also impossible to prove that God doesn’t exist (or that anything doesn’t).’ Ariane Sherine, writer and Patron of the British Humanist Association British Humanist Association ©2016 Humanist Perspective: Gods

The philosopher, Bertrand Russell, proposed a thought experiment to illustrate the burden of proof. Imagine you were told there was a teapot floating in space and orbiting the sun on the same path as the Earth. Then, imagine you were then told that this teapot was always located on the exact opposite side of the sun from the Earth so that we would never be able to detect it with our telescopes or in any other way. Russell proposed his thought experiment before humans had developed space travel, but you could extend it by imagining the teapot was invisible, inaudible, and intangible. Humanists believe that it would be impossible to prove that the teapot did not exist but it would be perfectly reasonable to doubt it and to be suspicious of those who claimed it existed. They would not say it is as reasonable to believe in the teapot as it is to not believe in it. The important question for a humanist would be: is there any good evidence such a teapot exists?

Many humanists would apply the same question about evidence to the existence of a god or gods. There have been many gods throughout history that we cannot prove don’t exist (Zeus, Thor, Osiris), but we recognise that it is perfectly reasonable to doubt their existence. Many humanists feel that is it is equally reasonable to doubt the existence of any of the gods people believe in today.

What do we mean by ‘god’?

The word ‘god’ means different things to different people. Christians may think it means a loving ‘father’; while Hindus and Sikhs speak of a universal spirit. Some think that god has human attributes, while others think not. Some, such as deists, simply think of god as a force that set the universe going then plays no further role in our affairs. Others think gods can and do intervene in our lives if we pray, meditate, or sacrifice. It has been argued that all religions are in fact worshiping a single god. But that does not seem to be the case in practice. There are many contradictions between different religious perspectives on the nature of a god. Not all of them can be true. There are also many inconsistencies within the nature of particular gods such as the omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent god of monotheism. For many humanists, this incoherence presents problems if arguing for the existence of a god – many of the descriptions of a god or gods simply don’t make sense to them. It is difficult to discuss whether or not a god exists until we are clear about what is meant.

‘Never yet has a god been defined in terms which were not palpably self-contradictory and absurd. Never yet has a god been described so that a concept of him was made possible to human thought.’ Annie Besant, writer and activist (1847 – 1933)

Freedom of belief

Humanists believe in freedom of belief. We should try to be tolerant and respect each other’s personal beliefs, and no one should be persecuted for their beliefs. However, many humanists are concerned when beliefs are used to justify irrational or inhumane actions that violate people’s human rights and other freedoms. Many humanists don’t see anything wrong with questioning other people’s beliefs and values. They believe that, in a healthy society, beliefs and ideas should be open to discussion and debate.

For many humanists, though, whether we believe in gods or not is not the most important thing in life. What is far more important is how we live our lives. Some humanists believe certain questions are unanswerable with certainty and therefore people will naturally believe different things. In that case they think human beings should try to focus on what they do agree on rather than letting their disagreements become a barrier to conversation, friendship, and the pursuit of improving the quality of life for human British Humanist Association ©2016 beings. Humanist Perspective: Gods

If gods don’t exist, why do people believe in them?

‘It was the experience of mystery, even if mixed with fear, that engendered religion.’ Albert Einstein (1879 – 1955)

Throughout recorded human history many people have used the idea of the supernatural (gods, devils, demons, and spirits) to explain the workings of the natural world around them. It is not surprising that people might explain natural phenomena using supernatural ideas. Without greater knowledge of the natural world it would have been difficult to explain why the sun rose and set, why natural disasters occurred, or why people became ill. The most obvious answers to many of our ancestors would be such events were under the control of supernatural beings (often with very human personalities). Before Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection, the apparent design and complexity of the human body and the suitability of animals to their environments would also have persuaded many people of the existence of a creator. Many so-called ‘religious experiences’ would also have been hard to explain (indeed many people find them hard to explain today) and so would have been attributed to a supernatural cause. However, our modern understanding of human psychology and neuroscience is making it easier to understand where such experiences come from. Today we have better explanations for what was once considered evidence of the existence of supernatural forces.

Typically humanists believe that gods are human inventions, rather than the other way around. We are not made in god’s image, but instead gods are made in the image of human beings. The ancient Greek philosopher, Xenophanes, recongised this 2500 years ago:

‘The Ethiopians say that the gods have flat noses and are black, while the Thracians say that the gods have blues eyes and red hair… And if cattle or horses or lions had hands or could draw or sculpt like men can, then the horses would draw their gods like horses, cattle draw their gods like cattle, and both would depict the bodies of the gods in their own likeness.’ Xenophanes (570 – 475 BC)

The philosopher, Ludwig Feuerbach, said god is a human creation. The idea of god is really just ourselves, our own thoughts, values, and nature projected onto the idea of something external to ourselves. What people think of as god is in fact our own human nature.

‘Religion is the dream of the human mind. But even in dreams we do not find ourselves in emptiness or in heaven, but on earth, in the realm of reality.’ Ludwig Feuerbach (1804 – 1872)

Human beings also appear to have a natural desire to seek meaning and purpose even when there is none. It gives human beings a sense of comfort to feel they will live on after they die and their lives are part of a bigger plan. The scientist, Richard Dawkins, speaks of our seeing the world through ‘purpose coloured spectacles’. Because we design things for a purpose ourselves we feel the world around us must also have been designed for some kind of purpose. However, we and the rest of the natural world are here due to the process of evolution, not supernatural design. Skeptic and science writer, Michael Shermer, uses the terms ‘patterninicty’ and ‘agenticity’ to explain why we feel there might be meaning to things when there is none. We find patterns in meaningless noise and we believe intentional agents are behind natural events. If our ancestors heard a rustling in the bushes, it was safest to imagine it was a lion rather than the wind. If you guessed it was a lion and you were wrong, no problem. If you guessed it was the wind and you were

British Humanist Association ©2016 wrong, you were lunch! This means we’ve evolved to see agency all around us. We feel that there is some sort of external, intentional force there even when there isn’t. Humanist Perspective: Gods

There may be natural instincts to believe in gods but there are also very powerful social reasons. The influence of one’s parents and society plays a huge role. Religions are often institutionalised and, in many countries, play a powerful role in the running of the state, particularly in education. Many humanists believe religion should play no role in children’s education. It is fine for children to have the opportunity to learn about religion, but they should not be told what to believe. All young people should have the opportunity to find answers to life’s fundamental questions for themselves. Many humanists believe that, as long as we allow religions to have influence over the education of children, we deny children the right to freedom of belief.

‘If in early childhood… the possibility of a doubt about [certain views] is completely passed over, or hinted at only to show that doubt is the first step towards eternal damnation, the resulting impression will be so deep that, as a rule, doubt about them will be almost as impossible as doubt about one’s own existence.’ Arthur Schopenhauer, philosopher (1788 – 1860)

Society is, however, changing. People today are less likely to follow the beliefs of their parents. If we can remove any privileged role for religion in society then we can be more confident that our beliefs will stem from our own free decisions. They would be more likely to be based on unbiased consideration of all the evidence, rather than being the product of influences from those around us.

Science and a ‘god of the gaps’

‘One can't prove that God doesn't exist, but science makes God unnecessary.’ Stephen Hawking, scientist

Questions about the weather, the apparent motion of the sun and moon, the causes of disease, and the suitability of animals to their environment have all at some point had supernatural explanations – explanations we no longer see as valid. Many questions that were once considered to be ‘ultimate’ questions and needed gods or the supernatural as an explanation are now considered scientific questions. Either they have been answered by science or it is believed that science provides the best means of answering them. This is why many humanists think we should be wary of looking for supernatural explanations for things we do not currently understand. For many humanists, history has shown that scientific enquiry provides the best hope of finding answers to questions about the natural world. We are yet to find any evidence of anything beyond the physical universe or any need for supernatural causes to explain things.

Many religious people now accept all of what modern science teaches us about the world. Fewer and fewer people believe religious books are literally true (e.g. that Moses parted the Red Sea, or that Jesus turned water into wine). Many of the stories are now seen as metaphors. Many religions have also updated their explanations of fundamental questions, such as the origin of human beings and the movement of the planets, and most people now have a natural view of the formation of the Earth and how life evolved. There are, however, some who still deny the weight of scientific evidence (for example, young-earth creationists).

Some say that there is still a space left for a god or gods to explain those questions science has not yet answered. Many humanists would say that this kind of god is a ‘god of the gaps’. Science is progressively shrinking the space left for a god as an answer to questions about the world. Even if we are unable to British Humanist Association ©2016 answer such questions in the future, it does not mean that they necessarily have a supernatural explanation.

Humanist Perspective: Gods

Further resources:

 Humanist perspectives: Atheism, agnosticism and Humanism; Arguments for gods; The problem of evil  Film How do we know what is true?: humanism.org.uk/thatshumanism/  Thought experiments relating to the burden of proof: o en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot o en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_Pink_Unicorn o en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster  The parable of the invisible gardener, John Wisdom, later developed by Anthony Flew  Are we wired to believe in a higher power? www.bbc.co.uk/guides/z3b6hyc - Francesca Stavrakopoulou talks about the psychological reasons why people believe  Baggini, Julian, Atheism, a Very Short Introduction  The Simpsons: Can god create a burrito so hot that he can’t eat it? www.youtube.com/watch? v=JhhXCuUG2pw  BHA: So you think you can live without God? humanism.org.uk/about/humanist- philosophers/faq/so-you-think-you-can-live-without-god/ – Humanist philosophers answer questions about life and meaning  Crash Course Philosophy videos  What is God Like?: www.youtube.com/watch? v=gs_gY1K1AMU&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtNgK6MZucdYldNkMybYIHKR&index=12  Epistemic Responsibility: www.youtube.com/watch? v=AYkhlXronNk&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtNgK6MZucdYldNkMybYIHKR&index=14