errorlevel.org

Many people have fallen into the trap of assuming that religion is the only source from which one can obtain morality. As an Agnostic Atheist, it doesn't settle well with me that since I do not believe in a god nor follow a religion that I would be considered amoral. Therefore, I would like to share what I have developed as the basis of my morality and hopefully show that it is possible to have morality without religion.

Being an Agnostic Atheist, I do not know whether a god exists. I do not know whether there is an afterlife. I do not know whether there is eternal reward or punishment following this life. I do, however, know that I am alive now. Even if I am really just a figment of some other being's imagination, I am still alive insofar as I can perceive. Also, through my observations and conversations with others around me, I can reasonably assume that they too are alive and are experiencing their lives just as I am able to experience mine. Furthermore, I also am able to extrapolate that people who will be alive after I have died (henceforth referred to as my "successors") will also be able to experience the same.

Without life, I have nothing.

Since I do not know whether an afterlife exists, everything that I do, or will be able to do can only be expected to occur during my lifetime. Any pain, pleasure, joy, sadness or glee I feel will be in this life. However, just as I must deal with the repercussions of those that have come before me (my "predecessors") I also should expect that those that my successors shall live with the repercussions of my actions. It would be immoral for me to harm or hinder the abilities of my successors to enjoy their lives to the fullest of their potential since life is all I know they will have.

The moral choice, therefore, is to help both people living now and people that will be
alive later enjoy their lives to the fullest potential. By helping people live their lives to the "fullest potential", I mean that if there is some way to make peoples' lives easier and to better equip them to achieve their goals (provided their goals do not infringe upon others' ability to do the same), then to try to help them would be the moral course of action. If you intend to harm or inhibit the ability for someone (including yourself) to live his life to its fullest potential, then you are acting immorally. This does not preclude people from living their lives in the service of others. If that is their goal in life, then they should pursue their goal.

Reading through this one might be tempted to come to the conclusion that this basis for morality leads to people only considering the consequences of their actions in order to gauge whether the action was moral, however, I hope to clarify any misconceptions. If one intends to act in a moral way, then by virtue of one's intent one is being moral. It is from a person's intent that others might draw inspiration to actually successfully fulfill that person's goal which would hopefully have the intended moral consequence.

Unfortunately, there will still be some who respond that since I am an Atheist and won't be around to see the effects of my actions, that I shouldn't care what happens when I am gone. However, to those people I feel pity that they cannot comprehend that I am able to feel compassion and love for others. If I have any kids, then I will also have a more self-centered interest in leaving the world in a better condition than when I entered it.