The Absurdity of Life without God and Immortality
If there is no God, then man and the universe are doomed. Like
prisoners condemned to death, we await our unavoidable execution. There
is no God, and there is no immortality. And what is the consequence of
this? It means that life itself is absurd. It means that the life we
have is without ultimate significance, value, or purpose. Let's look at
each of these.
No Ultimate Meaning without Immortality and God
If each individual person passes out of existence when he dies, then
what ultimate meaning can be given to his life? Does it really matter
whether he ever existed at all? His life may be important relative to
certain other events, but what is the ultimate significance of any of
those events? If all the events are meaningless, then what can be the
ultimate meaning of influencing any of them? Ultimately it makes no
difference.
Look at it from another perspective: Scientists say that the universe originated in an explosion called the "Big Bang" about 13 billion years ago. Suppose the Big Bang had never occurred. Suppose the universe had never existed. What ultimate difference would it make? The universe is doomed to die anyway. In the end it makes no difference whether the universe ever existed or not. Therefore, it is without ultimate significance.
The same is true of the human race. Mankind is a doomed race in a dying universe. Because the human race will eventually cease to exist, it makes no ultimate difference whether it ever did exist. Mankind is thus no more significant than a swarm of mosquitos or a barnyard of pigs, for their end is all the same. The same blind cosmic process that coughed them up in the first place will eventually swallow them all again.
And the same is true of each individual person. The contributions of the scientist to the advance of human knowledge, the researches of the doctor to alleviate pain and suffering, the efforts of the diplomat to secure peace in the world, the sacrifices of good men everywhere to better the lot of the human race--all these come to nothing. This is the horror of modern man: because he ends in nothing, he is nothing.
But it is important to see that it is not just immortality that man needs if life is to be meaningful. Mere duration of existence does not make that existence meaningful. If man and the universe could exist forever, but if there were no God, their existence would still have no ultimate significance. To illustrate: I once read a science-fiction story in which an astronaut was marooned on a barren chunk of rock lost in outer space. He had with him two vials: one containing poison and the other a potion that would make him live forever. Realizing his predicament, he gulped down the poison. But then to his horror, he discovered he had swallowed the wrong vial—he had drunk the potion for immortality. And that meant that he was cursed to exist forever—a meaningless, unending life. Now if God does not exist, our lives are just like that. They could go on and on and still be utterly without meaning. We could still ask of life, "So what?" So it is not just immortality man needs if life is to be ultimately significant; he needs God and immortality. And if God does not exist, then he has neither.
Twentieth-century man came to understand this. Read Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett. During this entire play two men carry on trivial conversation while waiting for a third man to arrive, who never does. Our lives are like that, Beckett is saying; we just kill time waiting—for what, we don't know. In a tragic portrayal of man, Beckett wrote another play in which the curtain opens revealing a stage littered with junk. For thirty long seconds, the audience sits and stares in silence at that junk. Then the curtain closes. That's all.
French existentialists Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus understood this, too. Sartre portrayed life in his play No Exit as hell—the final line of the play are the words of resignation, "Well, let's get on with it." Hence, Sartre writes elsewhere of the "nausea" of existence. Camus, too, saw life as absurd. At the end of his brief novel The Stranger, Camus's hero discovers in a flash of insight that the universe has no meaning and there is no God to give it one.
Thus, if there is no God, then life itself becomes meaningless. Man and the universe are without ultimate significance.
No Ultimate Value Without Immortality and God
If life ends at the grave, then it makes no difference whether one has
lived as a Stalin or as a saint. Since one's destiny is ultimately
unrelated to one's behavior, you may as well just live as you please. As
Dostoyevsky put it: "If there is no immortality then all things are
permitted." On this basis, a writer like Ayn Rand is absolutely correct
to praise the virtues of selfishness. Live totally for self; no one
holds you accountable! Indeed, it would be foolish to do anything else,
for life is too short to jeopardize it by acting out of anything but
pure self-interest. Sacrifice for another person would be stupid. Kai
Nielsen, an atheist philosopher who attempts to defend the viability of
ethics without God, in the end admits,
We have not been able to show that reason requires the moral point of
view, or that all really rational persons, unhoodwinked by myth or
ideology, need not be individual egoists or classical amoralists. Reason
doesn't decide here. The picture I have painted for you is not a
pleasant one. Reflection on it depresses me . . . . Pure practical
reason, even with a good knowledge of the facts, will not take you to
morality.1
But the problem becomes even worse. For, regardless of immortality, if
there is no God, then there can be no objective standards of right and
wrong. All we are confronted with is, in Jean-Paul Sartre's words, the
bare, valueless fact of existence. Moral values are either just
expressions of personal taste or the by-products of socio-biological
evolution and conditioning. In a world without God, who is to say which
values are right and which are wrong? Who is to judge that the values of
Adolf Hitler are inferior to those of a saint? The concept of morality
loses all meaning in a universe without God. As one contemporary
atheistic ethicist points out, "to say that something is wrong because .
. . it is forbidden by God, is . . . perfectly understandable to anyone
who believes in a law-giving God. But to say that something is wrong . .
. even though no God exists to forbid it, is not understandable. . . ."
"The concept of moral obligation [is] unintelligible apart from the
idea of God. The words remain but their meaning is gone."2
In a world without God, there can be no objective right and wrong, only
our culturally and personally relative, subjective judgments. This
means that it is impossible to condemn war, oppression, or crime as
evil. Nor can one praise brotherhood, equality, and love as good. For in
a universe without God, good and evil do not exist—there is only the
bare valueless fact of existence, and there is no one to say you are
right and I am wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment