Ethical behavior is the firm ground under the feet on which a civilized society walks. Ethics defines what right conduct is and what is not. It draws from moral values which, in turn, are framed by religion. Every tenet of ethics can thus be traced to some religious dictum or belief. Conversely, what religion does not approve cannot be a part of ethical conduct.
If that is how ethics is defined and ethical code of conduct has evolved, can an ethical life be lived without support from religion? Is it possible?
Let us see if there is any historical evidence of it.
Atheist Philosophy provides some testimony that it may be possible. Atheists are non- believers and do not follow religion. They have always been part of the human society though never in significant numbers and rarely conspicuous. ‘Charvaka’ was one such sect in India which has been mentioned as early as the 6th century BCE.
Atheism as a modern philosophical stream came into its own in the 19th century CE under the influence of four German philosophers- Ludwig Feuerbach, Karl Marx, Frederic Nietzsche and Sigmund Freud. They provided the theoretical framework of Atheism, and it appealed to the intellectuals and attracted them. Atheism grew in popularity and by now it has turned into a political movement which openly ridicules the religious society for its lack of reason and unscientific outlook.
The traditional societies all over the world are predominantly religious. The Atheists are part of the same society and live within its acceptable norms of conduct. They generally merge well into the society and it may not be possible to single out an atheist by his personal or social behavior; he is not found lacking. He stands apart for his views and not for his conduct.
Does it mean that an atheist follows the same ethical conduct that a religious person does?
The answer is yes; by and large, it is so.
The principal ethical values of the religious society may be identified as truth, kindness, compassion, non-violence, tolerance, altruism etc. The atheists accept and practice them. Where they differ is their approach: the atheists maintain that what they have accepted as norms of their conduct is derived by rational thinking alone and are not dependent on religious belief. It generally works well on account of overall commonality, but sometimes it does not. Their approach may also take the Atheists far beyond the boundary drawn by the religion – examples are their advocacy of unlimited individual freedom, gay rights etc.
* *
In the discussions above, it has been presumed that there exists a universal ethics which is followed by all religious societies. But it is not so. The core virtues – truth and kindness for example – are common and shared by all religions; we may call them basic and fundamental. But divergence of faith that exists between religions modifies the ethics of its followers. It gives rise to problems when followers of different religion come face to face or live together in a multi-religious society. While minor differences of conduct may be accepted or tolerated (eating of animal flesh by one group but detested by others) but major differences lead to disharmony and unrest in the society. A current example is the custom of the covering of the head and the body of women by followers of Islam which the Christian-majority societies do not approve of and that is causing strife in many European societies.
In a recently published book (2015) ”The force for Good: The Dalai Lama’s vision for the world “ by Daniel Goleman, the His Holiness Dalai Lama laments the absence of a universally accepted ethical code amongst the religions. He observes that religions (he, of course, is referring to all the religions taken together) have had thousands of years to promote ethics – and have often failed.
The Dalai Lama builds upon it further in an interview published by the Reader’s Digest in July 2015. He refers to wars which were fought and still being fought, in the name of religion. He expresses a view that for living together peacefully people can do without religion but they cannot do without inner values, without ethics.
This is a strong argument in favor of the theme we are examining.
* *
In the book, the Dalai Lama goes beyond religion in probing how ethics arises. His first observation is that ethics is innate, we are born with it, and he produces scientific evidence to support it. This is very interesting because it redefines ethics.
The Dalai Lama with his regular interaction with the scientists, some of which he himself organizes, came to realize that ethics, compassion, and social behavior are things we are born with – human infants are born with what amounts to a moral sensibility. This conviction is based upon scientific evidence gathered by developmental psychologists. Experiments conducted on infants from three months onwards showed how, before the age of two, a child is universally attuned to the distress of another child and would try to help him in some way. Strangely, after two and a half year or so, the toddlers begin to diverse in their empathic concern, which is caused by external influences; most likely by the bringing up they receive.
His second observation is that even animals like dolphins and elephants have been found showing altruism and cats and dogs being compassionate. So the emotions leading to ethical behavior are not confined to human race alone but shared by other species also.
Anecdotal evidence on animals showing compassion and altruism abounds. Even the wild animals have been found to be compassionate and caring, and not towards their own progeny and family only, but even to human beings. Jim Corbett, the great hunter turned naturalist, who often came across such incidents during his wanderings in the forests, has recorded them in his various books with remarkable sensitivity and great passion.
The scientific evidence clearly points out that ethical behavior was picked up by the species before the Homo sapiens evolved; it possibly was found essential for the survival of the species. By adopting ethical behavior the species strengthened themselves and protected their members.
So religion, in any case, does not have a monopoly over ethics. It has a biological origin too, and it can also be developed through rational thinking. Notwithstanding its diverse origin, ethical behavior is essential for a society to exist peacefully and harmoniously, and also for its survival.
——
By: Keshav Prasad Varma
Author: Children of the Immortal
Recent Comments