Are feelings of love, justice, trust, and right/wrong proof that Atheists secretly believe in God?
The example of a magical lawgiver being the only explanation of absolute morality is simply wrong. Many people don’t think that the idea of absolute morality is useful, nor is it an accurate description of the way humans behave. They would argue that all morality is relative, and that there any description of the concept of absolute morality is a misunderstanding and poor description of what how humans behave. In addition, there are alternate scientific theories that offer a theory that purports to explain the process through which morality develops. For example, I suggest that morality is the logical result of long term thinking about how to achieve selfish desires. I won’t provide the full-fledged explanation of the theory here, but I will say this: if we want what is best for us on an individual basis over the long term, I believe we’ll act in cooperative ways, and we will use the golden rule, because that’s the most effective way to get what you want out of life. If I do for you, y
Humans have a very complex understanding of the world. We all come up with convenient ways of dealing with it on a day to day basis as a matter of convenience and as a result of being very social creatures. There isn’t a requirement for a supernatural explanation as to why people use convenient shorthand versions of much more complex and less intuitive interactions to go through daily life – it’s just a good way to live. For example, anyone who has a reasonable level of education understands that all physical objects are composed of atoms, while the atoms are composed of sub-atomic particles. Even so, we don’t think of a chair as a massive collection of atoms – we think of it as a chair. We don’t perform structural analysis and physics equations to determine if it is safe to sit in, we use our very basic, general understanding of how sitting and chairs work and decide if this particular chair is in good shape or has any tacks sticking out of the seat. We could over analyze, but there’s
