https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=5713
The Despair of Atheism
An
implication is an idea that follows logically from a set of facts which
are plainly stated. The concept of an implication is clearly seen in
math. Take the Pythagorean Theorem, which says that for a right triangle
the sum of the two shorter sides squared equals the longest side (the
hypotenuse) squared—A2 + B2 = C2. So,
if one short side is 3 and the other is 4, then we can know exactly what
the longest side is, even though it is not stated or written down—it is
5. An implication is not less of a fact than what is stated or “seen.”
It is just as factual, only not stated. Another clear example of an
implication is seen in the famous syllogism: All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man. Knowing those two explicit facts, what else can be
known? If a person is thinking logically and correctly, then he or she
can know a third piece of information that is included in the premises
but not written down: therefore, Socrates is mortal.
All beliefs have implications. They may be difficult to uncover and
piece together, but they are there and follow inescapably. If a person
is rational and honest, there is no denying an implication. In light of
that fact, what implications follow from the belief that there is no
God? Many of these implications have been fleshed out in other places.1
This article will deal with only one: The concept of atheism implies
that human life does not have any objective meaning. If atheism is true,
then human life is meaningless.
At first glance, it may seem that the burden is to prove that atheism
implies meaningless. That is not the case, since that task has already
been done eloquently by many of those in the atheistic community.
Leading atheists do not deny that their belief implies meaninglessness.
On the contrary, they openly admit the implication, and spend the bulk
of their discussions trying to incorporate the implication of
meaninglessness into a “fulfilled” human life. Thus, instead of proving
the implication, we will simply cite several unbelievers who have done
so, and then proceed to show that it is impossible to live a fulfilled
human life without the concept of objective meaning. Humans have been designed
to understand that life has real meaning and purpose. When these
concepts are denied, those who take time to consider the loss recognize
that something is amiss. Humans intuitively know their lives have
purpose. To deny that truth forces them into a state of cognitive
dissonance of the worst kind. The only conceivable outcome of knowing
that humans should (and do) have an objective purpose in their lives,
while denying the fact, is a state of despair.
Atheism Implies that Life is Meaningless
A brief look at the writings of unbelievers reveals that
meaninglessness naturally follows from the concept of atheism. Atheistic
philosopher Alex Rosenberg penned a book titled The Atheist’s Guide to Reality: Enjoying Life Without Illusions. Harper’s magazine
reviewed the book, saying: “Rosenberg is admirably frank about the
implications of scientism [atheism—KB].” The back cover of the book
quotes from the New York Times Book Review: “The work of a
well-informed and imaginative philosopher.” At the beginning of the
book, Rosenberg declared: “This book aims to provide the correct answers
to most of the persistent questions…. Given what we know from the
sciences, the answers are all pretty obvious….” He then provided a list of questions with his concise “pretty obvious” answers following each question:
-
Is there a God? No.
-
What is the nature of reality? What physics says it is.
-
What is the purpose of the Universe? There is none.
-
What is the meaning of life? Ditto.
-
Why am I here? Just dumb luck.
-
Does prayer work? Of course not.
-
Is there a soul? Are you kidding?
-
Is there free will? Not a chance!
-
What happens when we die? Everything pretty much goes on as before, except us.
-
What is the difference between right and wrong, good and bad? There is no moral difference between them.
-
Why should I be moral? Because it makes you feel better than being immoral.
-
Is abortion, euthanasia, suicide, paying taxes, foreign aid, or
anything else you don’t like forbidden, permissible, or sometimes
obligatory? Anything goes.
-
What is love, and how can I find it? Love is the solution to a
strategic interaction problem. Don’t look for it; it will find you when
you need it.
-
Does history have any meaning or purpose? It’s full of sound and fury, but signifies nothing.
-
Does the human past have any lessons for our future? Fewer and fewer, if it ever had any to begin with.2
Graham Lawton, Executive Editor of New Scientist magazine,
penned a brief article titled, “What is the Meaning of Life?” He began
with his blunt, one line answer: “The harsh answer is ‘it has none.’” He
went on to say: “Your life may feel like a big deal to you, but it’s
actually a random blip of matter and energy in an uncaring and impersonal universe.”3 Stephen J. Gould, one of the most recognized evolutionary paleontologists of the 20th
century, wrote about atheism’s meaninglessness with his customary
flair: “We are here because one odd group of fishes had a peculiar fin
anatomy that could transform into legs for terrestrial creatures;
because the earth never froze entirely during an ice age; because a
small and tenuous species, arising in Africa a quarter of a million
years ago, has managed, so far, to survive by hook and by crook. We may yearn for a ‘higher answer’—but none exists.”4
Philosopher and self-professed atheist, Thomas Nagel, teaches and
writes extensively on atheism’s implication of meaninglessness. In his
brief book What Does it All Mean? A Very Short Introduction to Philosophy,
he stated: “If you think about the whole thing, there seems to be no
point to it at all. Looking at it from the outside, it wouldn’t matter
if you had never existed. And after you have gone out of existence, it
won’t matter that you did exist.”5
Eminent atheistic author, debater, and spokesperson Richard Dawkins
boldly said: “The universe we observe has precisely the properties we
should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.”6
Edward O. Wilson quipped that “no species, ours included, possesses a
purpose beyond the imperatives created by its genetic history.”7
The late William Provine, atheistic professor in the Department of
Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the distinguished Cornell
University, stated: “Naturalistic evolution has clear consequences that
Charles Darwin understood perfectly. 1) No gods worth having exist; 2)
no life after death exists; 3) no ultimate foundation for ethics exists;
4) no ultimate meaning in life exists; and 5) human free will is nonexistent.”8
The existential philosopher Albert Camus, winner of the Nobel Prize in
literature, struggled greatly with atheism’s lack of meaning and
purpose. So great was his contemplation of it, he declared, “I therefore
conclude that the meaning of life is the most urgent of questions.”9
Camus then championed the idea of the “absurd” man. He used a very
specific meaning for the word “absurd.” In his writing, the concept of
the absurd is the recognition and acceptance that life has no meaning,
rhyme, or reason. He says of the absurd man: “He feels within him his
longing for happiness and for reason. The absurd is born of this
confrontation between the human need and the unreasonable silence of the
world.”10
His whole book begins with the premise that atheism denies any meaning
to the world, and proceeds to flesh out how a person can keep from
committing suicide once he arrives at universal meaninglessness. Thus,
he begins the book, saying: “There is but one truly serious
philosophical problem, and that is suicide. Judging whether life is or
is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental question of
philosophy.”11
And later in the book he concludes, about his entire book, discussion,
and life: “Let me repeat. None of all this has any real meaning.”12
Creating Our Own Meaning?
If there is no God, then the implication that life ultimately has no
real meaning cannot be denied. Knowing, however, that humans have an
innate sense that their lives have meaning and need to have a purpose,
atheism is burdened with the unenviable task of manufacturing meaning
with no raw materials, whipping it into existence out of thin air. How
does this work? One approach put forward by leading unbelievers is that
we simply create our own, individual meaning in our lives. When asked
about the meaning of life, Alom Shaha, author of The Young Atheist’s Handbook, stated:
Yes, of course I know that life is ultimately without meaning or
purpose, but the trick is not to wake up every morning and feel that
way. Cognitive dissonance? Embrace it. Create a sense of meaning and purpose
by doing something useful with your life (I teach), being creative—I
don’t mean that in a poncey hipster way, I mean make a curry, build some
bookshelves, write a poem. And most importantly, find people you like
and love and spend lots of time with them. I regularly have people over
for dinner, throw parties for no other reason than I just want to spend
time surrounded by the people I love. And if you’re really stuck, eat
rice and dal. Physically filling yourself with the food you love really
does fill the emptiness you may feel inside.13
Biology professor, author, and lecturer Jerry Coyne states: “What
people cannot abide is the conviction that the Universe and life are
pointless. Which is what really, science is telling us.
Pointless in the sense that there is no externally imposed purpose or
point in the Universe. As atheists, this is something that is manifestly
true to us. We make our own meaning and purpose.”14
Dr. Pete Etchells, lecturer and science writer, expounded on the idea of creating our own meaning when he said:
Whenever I get involved in conversations about the meaning of life,
and where everything’s headed, I can’t help but feel that there’s an
underlying assumption that because these are “big” questions, they
necessarily need big answers. There aren’t any, though. We’re not here
for a universal purpose, and there is no grand plan, no matter how
tempting it is to believe it. But that’s absolutely fine, because it
means that if there aren’t any big answers, the little ones are all the
more important. So every day, I take my dog for a walk in the field near
my house. Sometimes I get to see a pretty sunset, but usually it’s
either bucketing down and I get soaked, or cold, or the field is full of
mud and bugs and dog [poop], and it’s a pain to navigate through. Whatever
the situation, though, my dog has the most ridiculous fun ever, and
being a part of that little moment of joy is what it’s all about.15
So, the answer to the meaning of life is make curry, build a bookshelf,
or wander through a muddy field full of dog poop and watch your dog
have fun? The problem with this “create-your-own-meaning” approach is
twofold. First, it refuses to take the word “meaning” seriously. It is a
semantic game in which the word can be applied to anything. Meaning
“for you” might be watching your dog run, “for me” it might be watching
paint dry, “for him” it might be watching grass grow, etc. Just because
an activity may bring momentary tranquility or pleasure to a person does
not endow it with any objective meaning. A person’s arbitrary
attachment of the word “meaning” to something does not somehow create
meaning in any real sense—not for that person or for others. Abraham
Lincoln once sagely quipped: “How many legs does a calf have if you call
its tail a leg? Four. Just because you call a tail a leg does not make
it so.” Attaching the words “meaning” and “purpose” to a bowl of shrimp
and grits or a sushi roll will never be sufficient to answer the “most
urgent question” of life.
The second insurmountable problem for this approach of creating meaning
is that those who propound it intentionally hide the dark truth that
necessarily follows. They often paint a picture of self-created meaning
in rosy terms of a tranquil couple viewing a sunset, a man walking his
beloved dog, or a parent running and laughing with a child. What they
are forced to omit, if they want to keep up the ruse, is that
self-created “meaning” can manifest itself through any
behavior, including genocide, serial killing, torture, terminal drug
addiction, overdose, etc. Using the proponents’ own logic, a man could
just as easily say he finds meaning in killing other people’s dogs in
the park as in watching his own pet frolic playfully. As Sommers and
Rosenberg accurately stated:
Darwinism thus puts the capstone on a process which since Newton’s
time has driven teleology to the explanatory sideline. In short it has
made Darwinians into metaphysical Nihilists denying that there is any meaning or purpose to the universe,
its contents and its cosmic history. But in making Darwinians into
metaphysical nihilists, the solvent algorithm should have made them into
ethical nihilists too. For intrinsic values and
obligations make sense only against a backdrop of purposes, goals, and
ends which are not merely instrumental. But the Darwinian philosophers have shied away from this implication.16
If human existence has no real meaning, then neither do moral or
ethical ideas. We may like to think that humans would adhere to some
type of generally accepted guidelines, but we would have no grounds to
insist that they do. I may “create my own meaning” by reading a book to a
child, while another person may contend that they find meaning in
killing their parents and cannibalism. There is no rational grounds upon
which a person could argue that reading a book to a child is more meaningful
than murder and cannibalism. After all, as Camus said, “Let me repeat.
None of all this has any real meaning.” As philosopher John-Paul Sartre
declared: “Everything is indeed permitted if God does not exist.”17 The create-your-own-meaning approach fails miserably.
Life Has No Meaning, But Just Act Like It Does?
Many unbelievers recognize that we cannot create meaning just by saying
we have. They see the failure of attempts to infuse meaning where there
is, or can be, none. Their approach is simple: Admit that life is
meaningless in every sense, but live like there is a meaning. Dr. Loyal
Rue is a strong proponent of what he calls a noble lie. Based on a
naturalistic framework, he writes, “The universe is blind and aimless….
The universe is dead and void of meaning…. The universe just is.”18
He admits that, from a naturalistic standpoint, meaninglessness “is not
something that one can argue away by showing that it results from
fallacious thinking.... It is logically and empirically secure.”19
How does Dr. Rue suggest that humans approach meaninglessness? He
concedes that we cannot live fulfilled lives with the truth before us.
He proposes that we adopt a lie, a noble lie, that the Universe has real
meaning, even though (according to atheism) it does not. His stated
thesis is “to oppose a monstrous truth [meaninglessness—KB] with a noble
lie.”20 Why does Dr. Rue insist we adopt this lie? Because, he says, “without such lies, we cannot live.”21
[One wonders why, in the face of life’s meaninglessness, Rue suggests a
noble lie? If there is no objective meaning, purpose, or morality,
would it not be just as acceptable to adopt an ignoble lie? According to
Rue’s view, what would be wrong with telling yourself that the more
people you kill, the more meaning your life has, or the more money you
steal, the more meaningful you are? After all, if we simply make up lies
to make ourselves feel better, a lie is a lie—and any lie will do.]
Thomas Nagel touched on this avoidance approach when he wrote:
Even if life as a whole is meaningless, perhaps that’s nothing to
worry about. Perhaps we can recognize it and just go on as before. The
trick is to keep your eyes on what’s in front of you…. Some people find
this attitude perfectly satisfying. Others find it depressing, though
unavoidable. Part of the problem is that some of us have an incurable
tendency to take ourselves seriously. We want to matter to ourselves
“from the outside.” If our lives as a whole seem pointless, then a part
of us is dissatisfied…. Life may be not only meaningless but absurd.22
Notice that Nagel realizes that if you take your life “seriously” then
it just won’t do to think about the meaninglessness of it all. What does
he suggest? “The trick is to keep your eyes on what’s in front of you.”
In other words, do not think about it. Act like it is not there. Ignore
the lack of purpose and meaning. Atheism prides itself on rationality,
enlightenment, and intellectual honesty. And yet denial, avoidance, and
deceit must lie at the heart of unbelief in order for humans to be truly
satisfied and live productive lives.
American film director, writer, actor, and comedian, Woody Allen,
understands the problem he and his fellow atheists struggle to face. He
stated:
This is my perspective and has always been my perspective on life. I
have a very grim, pessimistic view of it. I always have since I was a
little boy; it hasn’t gotten worse with age or anything. I do feel that
it’s a grim, painful, nightmarish, meaningless experience and that the
only way that you can be happy is if you tell yourself some lies and deceive yourself.
But I am not the first person to say this or even the most articulate
person. It was said by Nietzsche, it was said by Freud, it was said by
Eugene O’Neill. One must have one’s delusions to live. If you look at life too honestly and clearly, life becomes unbearable because it’s a pretty grim enterprise, you will admit.23
In another interview, he said:
Then after a while, you start to realize, I’m taking the big picture
here, that eventually you die and eventually the Sun burns out and the
Earth is gone and eventually all stars and all the planets and the
entire Universe goes, disappears and nothing is left at all. Nothing of
Shakespeare’s or Beethoven. All gone. Michelangelo, all gone. And you
think to yourself. It is a lot of noise and sound and fury. And where’s
it going? It’s not going any place…. You know it just seems like a big,
meaningless thing. You can’t actually live your life like that. Because if you do, you just sit there. Why do anything? Why get up in the morning and do anything?24
Allen, Nagel, Rue, and others are forced to admit that a meaningless,
hopeless, purposeless Universe incapacitates the most optimistic
unbelievers. Were they to attempt to put into practice a course of
action consistent with their belief, then they would not even get up in
the morning. In fact, there would be no real reason to do anything—ever.
That is why Camus recognized the fact that the only real question to
answer in such a world is why would a person want to stay alive at all?
Nothing left but Despair
What is left in a world where meaninglessness reigns supreme, but its
human inhabitants are wired to need meaning in their lives? As Lawrence
Krauss so brazenly reminds his readers and listeners: “And by the way,
that’s the second of the two things I wanted to remind you of. The first
is that you’re insignificant. And the second, the future is miserable.”25
French humanist, Voltaire, encapsulated this recognition of misery in
his “Poem on the Lisbon Disaster,” in which he wrote: “What is the
verdict of the vastest mind? Silence: the book of fate is closed to us.
Man is a stranger to his own research; He knows not whence he comes, nor
whither goes. Tormented atoms in a bed of mud, devoured by death, a mockery of fate.”26
So, humans are “insignificant,” “miserable,” “tormented atoms in a bed
of mud.” Yet, atheism is not finished painting humanity’s sad plight
with the pale colors of despair. Peter Atkins opined: “We are children
of chaos, and the deep structure of change is decay. At root, there is
only corruption, and the unstemmable tide of chaos. Gone is purpose; all
that is left is direction. This is the bleakness we have to accept as we peer deeply and dispassionately into the heart of the Universe.”27
Albert Camus quoted Kirkegaard, who said: “If man had no eternal
consciousness…what would life be but despair?” Camus then wrote: “This
cry is not likely to stop the absurd man. Seeking what is true is not
seeking what is desirable. If in order to elude the anxious question:
‘What would life be?’ one must, like the donkey, feed on the roses of
illusion, then the absurd mind, rather than resigning itself to
falsehood, prefers to adopt fearlessly Kierkegaard’s reply: ‘despair.’”28 Bertrand Russell bemoaned: “Brief and powerless is Man’s life; on him and all his race the slow, sure doom falls pitiless and dark.
Blind to good and evil, reckless of destruction, omnipotent matter
rolls on its relentless way; for Man, condemned today to lose his
dearest, tomorrow himself to pass through the gate of darkness....”29
Into this chaos of bleakness, meaninglessness, insignificance, torment,
and despair, Christianity offers a hope that can anchor the soul
(Hebrews 6:19) and a truth that does not need a “noble lie” to make it
palatable. Christianity provides the only system that can give humanity a
reason to get up in the morning and live life to the fullest.
A Response to Atheism’s Despair
Madalyn Murray O’Hair was the founder of the American Atheist
organization. She lived a life in complete rebellion against her God.
Her rabid atheism prodded her to attack the idea of God whenever she
could. But her atheism could not bring her joy, only a forlorn heart of
desperation. When her personal belongings were auctioned, it was
discovered that on six different pages of her writings was the
heartbreaking cry: “Somebody, somewhere, love me!”30 The greatest tragedy of atheism is that it strips the world of everything meaningful, including real love.
Atheist Dan Barker admitted that, according to atheism, “In the end of
the cosmos it’s not going to matter. You and I are like ants or rats or
like pieces of broccoli, really, in the big picture...there is no value
to our species...we are no different than a piece of broccoli in the
cosmic sense.”31
As we have seen, according to atheism, humans are nothing more than
matter in motion, “tormented atoms in a bed of mud.” Our actions will
not determine where we spend eternity. And any “feeling” that one person
may have for another person can only be “skin deep.” It can only be a
product of the physical brain. As much as atheists try to discuss love,
hope, honor, or any of the elevated human virtues, they cannot explain
how such can exist in a world without God.
Sadly, just like O’Hair, there is a world full of people who want
someone to love them, but they refuse to recognize that there is Someone
Who does. Their Creator, God, loves them so much that He came to die on
the cross for them. Jesus Christ, God in the flesh, gave His life to
prove His love for humanity and to show humans that they are not cosmic
accidents, but intentionally designed persons who have a meaning and
purpose in life. And He gave His life so that those humans who choose to
obey Him can live eternally in heaven. “For God so loved the world that
He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not
perish but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).
But God’s love has a limit. He will not force anyone
to believe in Him. He loves each person enough to let us all freely
choose whether or not to believe in and obey Him. And our choice will
determine our eternal destiny. Moses once wrote to the Israelites: “I
call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set
before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life”
(Deuteronomy 30:19). The failure to choose the right beliefs and actions
in this life has real consequences. These are not imagined consequences
that have to be endowed with meaning by subjective, arbitrary feelings.
On the contrary, the consequences are objectively real.
We are not ultimately like broccoli or rats. Our decisions really
matter, for now and for eternity. Those who refuse to acknowledge God
can have no hope for an afterlife or joy in death, only despair.
Agnostic Bart Ehrman, who once claimed to be a Christian, wrote: “The
fear of death gripped me for years, and there are still moments when I wake up at night in a cold sweat.”32
The Bible explains that Christ came to defeat death, and “release those
who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage”
(Hebrews 2:15). The only solution to the fear of death and the deep,
abiding despair that stems from atheism is to seek God and His will.
Madalyn Murray O’Hair’s cry, “Somebody, somewhere, love me!” echoes
across the world from millions of voices who are trying to find love and
hope apart from God. The irony of it all is that they have shut their
ears to the voice of God, Who through His Son, calls from the cross, “I
love you.” Instead of the bleak, tormented, useless, meaningless,
purposeless, pitiless, miserable despair that atheism demands, let us
turn our faces to the true light, hope, joy, and love that our Creator
provides.33
Endnotes
1 Kyle Butt (2008), “The Implications of Atheism (Parts 1 & 2),” Apologetics Press, https://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=12&article=911.
2 Alex Rosenberg (2011), The Atheist’s Guide to Reality: Enjoying Life Without Illusions (New York: W.W. Norton), p. 3, emp. added.
3 Graham Lawton (2016), “What is the Meaning of Life?” New Scientist, 231[3089]:33, September 3, emp. added.
5 Thomas Nagel (1987), What Does It All Mean? A Brief Introduction to Philosophy (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press), p. 96.
6 Richard Dawkins (1995), “God’s Utility Function,” Scientific American, 273[5]:85, November, emp. added.
9 Albert Camus (1983), The Myth of Sisyphus, ed. Justin O’Brien (New York: Vintage), p. 4.
15 As quoted in Chivers, emp. added.
16 Tamler Sommers and Alex Rosenberg (2003), “Darwin’s Nihilistic Idea: Evolution and the Meanlessness of Life,” Biology and Philosophy, 18:653-658.
17
Jean-Paul Sartre (1989), “Existentialism is Humanism,” in
Existentialism from Dostoyevsky to Sartre, ed. Walter Kaufman, trans.
Philip Mairet (Meridian Publishing Company),
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/sartre/works/exist/sartre.htm.
18 Loyal Rue (1994), By Grace and Guile: The Role of Deception in Natural History and Human Affairs (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press), p. 3.
21 As quoted in William Lane Craig, “The Absurdity of Life Without God,” Reasonable Faith, https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-writings/existence-nature-of-god/the-absurdity-of-life-without-god.
24 Woody Allen, YouTube video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MsuqvLIttk.
25 Quote from Lawrence Krauss as quoted in Austin Brown’s The Case for Utter Hopelessness: Why Atheism Leads to Unyielding Despair (2017), (Self Published), emp. added.
27 Peter Atkins (1984), The Second Law (New York: Scientific American), p. 200.
28 Camus, p. 40, emp. added.
32 Bart Ehrman (2008), God’s Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question—Why We Suffer (New York: HarperOne), p. 127.
33 See Eric Lyons and Kyle Butt (no date), Receiving the Gift of Salvation (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).
 |
 |
|
Suggested Resources |
Michael J. Behe (1996), Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution (New York: The Free Press), hardbound, 307 pages, $25.00.
