Heffren 1
Michael Heffren
Mr. Hartman
ENG 111
9 July 2018
Can a Person be Good Without “God?”
What is it that makes people good? Anca Mustea et al. states that over the course of history,
moral codes have varied greatly. Association with religion has been an underlying commonality
in many cases. Philosophers seeking to expose the science behind morality developed innovative
approaches with a “strong emphasis on their empirical bases” (Mustea et al.). Some may argue
that there is an omnipotent being that oversees everything, dictating what is right and wrong, and
that is where humans get their morality. Others believe that good nature comes from within
themselves from centuries of interactions and social behaviors. Either way, there is something
that commands human actions. Morality is part of human nature, and theological beliefs play no
significant role, as shown through altruistic behaviors, the process by which we develop our
certain moral codes, as well as the common understandings of what it means to be morally right
or wrong.
The well-being and survival of others is just as important as the well-being and survival of self.
Albert Einstein said, “From the standpoint of daily life, however, there is one thing we do know:
that man is here for the sake of other men—above all for those upon whose smiles and well-being
our own happiness depends” (qtd. in Dawkins 241). Morality is not a question of who gave out
the commands of which is right or wrong, it is a question of when it became part of human
behavior. Richard Dawkins, English author, believes that “altruistic urges” are already within
Heffren 2
mankind. Mankind is already programmed with needs such as to eat, procreate, defend what is
their own, etc. If mankind can have these predetermined urges, what is to say that the human race
cannot have the same code to present kindness, generosity, empathy, pity and so on. Dawkins
suggests that humans have no more control over having pity for the unfortunate as they do
having feelings towards the opposite sex (Dawkins 252-3). When a member of a community
loses a loved one, has a tragic accident, regardless of theism, humans tend to show empathy. This
is not because “God” says that when something tragic happens. It is because mankind reverts
back to knowing that they would not want the aforementioned event to happen to them and hence
empathizes with the other person.
“Other people matter to us,” Richard Norman, a British philosopher and Humanist, believes that
is the foundation in which morality comes from. Separate from religion, humans can recognize
that which is right and wrong based upon the act of caring about other people’s lives. Humans do
this by holding a standard to which they would want their own lives held at (Norman). Scottish
philosopher David Hume, believes that morality is centered around sympathy. While sympathy
comes in varying degrees from person to person, humans are all capable of being affected by
other emotions, i.e. happiness, misery, so on (qtd. in Norman). Norman goes on to explain that
when the lack of sympathy goes to a degree that person is “Corrupted to the point where, as we
say, they may lose all human feeling and become ruthless and sadistic monsters,” it is called
being dehumanized. Effectively stating that such corruption, is in itself the loss of what makes
one human, their sympathy (Norman). Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher, Norman explains,
believes that morality is based on reason. Kant believed that humans have the mental “capacity”
to be able to rationalize between what is right and wrong. Norman states that Kant was certain
that the idea of universal law was enough for humans to decipher between right and wrong. This
Heffren 3
idea of reason coupled with Hume’s sympathy theory, give two solid foundations for non–
theological morality (Norman). To Aristotle, Norman claims, the act of living in a human
community with “shared values” instills morality. This goes to backing up Hume’s assertion, by
living in a community a person learns to show concern for one another and upholding certain
civic responsibilities. Through a “network of social relations,” humans can develop a sense of
morality (Norman). Aristotle, expands that living in a community brings about moral knowledge.
With the use of familiar words such as “generous, mean, courageous, cowardly, fair, unfair,
honest and dishonest,” associated with the people’s actions within the community clarifies what
moral rights and wrongs are (qtd. in Norman).
The process by which we develop our moral codes is not found in a higher power, but rather
through being a human being. British philosopher, Richard Swinburne asserts that both theists as
