Artificial Morality

Many Believers think religion has monopoly on morality. Those who claim that morality is acquired by scripture, without it: "no-one would know right from wrong" are the people being referred to. This is one reason why Nonbelievers are oftentimes seen as being immoral by the Believers — being that they: "have no source of morality". In my opinion the morality derived from religion is artificial. Artificial morality is morality that only exists for conscious personal benefit, this concept is similar to the blog post I made on Self-Centered Charity. Religious charity (like artificial morality) is only done for personal benefit and is not genuine (otherwise it would have nothing to do with religion). People that are only moral for religious reasons are like children that only act good around Christmas to get presents, its pathetic.

Artificial morality is similar to artificial sweeteners (although not a perfect analogy, it can be taken pretty far). When people think of food which is sweet, they automatically assume it contains sugar (sugar = genuine morality) but often instead of sugar, artificial-sweeteners are used in it's place (artificial-sweeteners = artificial morality). While both are sweet, one is found naturally, the other is man-made and is deceptive in appearance. Natural sugar is healthier then artificial sweeteners; artificial sweeteners contain no real sugar ("religious morality" contains no real morality), but it tricks the brain into thinking it does. Humans love the taste of sugar because we evolved to crave the rich calories sugar contains.

If someone made the claim that candy would not exist without artificial sweeteners, they would be laughed at and thought of as being very ignorant (the same should be the case for religious morality). While artificial sweeteners are similar enough in taste to sugar, what they are made of is way different, but it still manages to fool the brain; in the sense that the brain did not evolve to reward the consumption of artificial sweeteners, it was for real sugar (this is what makes artificial sweeteners not genuine). Regardless of how people feel towards sugar (health-wise in large amounts fall outside of my analogy), no one can deny that it brings great enjoyment for people. It is better to eat real sugar in healthy, natural amounts, then to fake it. I can imagine a world without artificial sweeteners, but I don't want to imagine a world without sugar.


The mere fact that the religious claim to be moral for such reasons show the point being made here. Any reason which is religious has primarily to with securing a spot in eternal paradise (referring to more popular monotheistic religions). This makes it self-centered in nature and not the innate morality we get from our biology (the religious claim this as well). I am not saying religious people have no genuine morality, I am saying the "morality" that only exists because of religion is artificial — people who are only moral for religious reasons are not genuinely moral (e.g. certain kids around Christmas). Artificial sweeteners fool the brain in the same way the religious think they are fooling a god (check out: The Gullible God).

People should not be moral because they wish to get a ticket to paradise after death, they should because of love they have of those around them. We all love sweet food, so let's eat real sugar, it tastes better and is better for you.