Are theists more moral than non-theists, or is it the other way round? Do theists and non-theists think very differently about ethics?
It used to be easy to argue about these questions because everyone had a story to tell and no-one had any scientific evidence. But nowadays psychologists and others are undertaking scientific studies of religious belief, and have some answers.
Three things I’m not saying
Let’s clear some possible misconceptions before we start.
- This post and these studies are not discussing the logical basis for ethics, which is relevant to the moral argument for the existence of God, but the findings of studies on how people actually behave.
- Neither do these studies say anything direct about the existence of God – the conclusions could be equally true if God exists or if he doesn’t.
- These studies make generalisations based on statistics, but make no claim that everyone behaves the same.
A recent review article
A recent review article in Trends in Cognitive Sciences summarises some of the latest research on ethics and religion. Based on research in the US, it makes the following points.
1. Theists have more social relationships than non-theists
Theists tend to have more and closer relationships, because they generally belong to a religious community.
2. Theists are more charitable, especially to insiders
More close social relationships tends to lead to greater happiness and greater generosity and prosociality (= “voluntary behaviour intended to benefit another”). However this is most likely to be directed towards other members of the group, and can lead to greater prejudice towards outsiders – like atheists, gays or ethnic minorities.
Another study defined this propensity in a little more detail, and concluded that “religion makes you prejudiced but [personal belief in] God doesn’t”.
Atheists have the same tendencies, but less strongly because of their looser social connections.
3. Theists and non-theists have different moral motivations
More moral behaviour can be induced in both groups. Theists are more likely to be moral when thinking about God – belief that God is monitoring their actions adds to societal scrutiny to provide a strong motivation to act unselfishly. Non-theists are not motivated by any ideas of God, but are more likely to behave morally if they have trust in the policing and legal system (factors which can influence theists also).
The theists’ motivation proves the stronger of the two. “Although the drive to appear virtuous to others is all but universal, it is especially pronounced among theists.”
4. Objective and subjective ethics
Theists tend to see morality as objective whereas non-theists tend to see it as subjective. This tends to lead to different assessments of the morality of some actions.
For example, theists and atheists agree that harm and injustice are moral issues, but generally only theists see loyalty to the group, obedience to authority and sexual “purity” as moral issues.
5. Non-theist morality is more utilitarian
Theists tend to be deontological (= morality is about the duty to follow moral rules) whereas non-theists tend to be utilitarian (= the morally right thing to do is what results in the greatest good for the greatest number of people).
6. A common humanity
Regardless of these differences, there is also much in common. Both groups tend to agree about the immorality of torture and unjust harm, and the moral desirability of justice, compassion and reciprocity.
Studies apparently show that, even from infancy, people tend towards prosociality, but have to learn not to behave this way.
A few reflections
Few of these conclusions are surprising. The various attitudes and approaches tend to follow from the basic theistic or non-theistic beliefs. But it is interesting to have them confirmed by studies.
Improved understanding vs crude mockery
Both groups can use these findings in ways that help or hinder the establishment of a peaceful and tolerant society. Each side can try to understand and work with the particular emphases of the other group. Or not. The paper concludes:
the two groups are united in what could be considered ‘core’ intuitive preferences for justice and compassion. Although the two groups may sometimes disagree about which groups or individuals deserve justice or their compassion, these core moral intuitions form the best basis for mutual understanding and intergroup conciliation.
A challenge for christians
Although these conclusions present christianity in a generally favourable light, I believe they also pose a challenge to christians.
They’ll know we are christians by our love?
If christians really are motivated by the love of God, shouldn’t they be less prejudiced and more loving towards outsiders and minorities, including atheists and gays?
Love vs rules
I don’t believe following rules is the essence of christian belief, even if it may be true for other religions. Jesus taught an ethic of loving behaviour, and Paul speaks against following rules – both of which seem closer to utilitarianism, though not the same.
Original sin?
If even children people tend towards prosociality, and have to learn to behave differently, what does that say about the christian doctrine of original sin (a doctrine I don’t necessarily subscribe to in all its forms)?
Photo Credit: mynameisharsha via Compfight cc.
Thanks for the post, UnkleE. This is some fairly interesting information, some perhaps obvious, some much more surprising.
The findings that theists are more charitable is suspect given that two of the top philanthropists in the US are Bill Gates and Warren Buffett both of whom are non-believers and the only countries in the developed world who consistently meet and exceed the international agreement for foreign aid agreed at the UN in 1970, (o.7% of GDP), are the Scandinavians who are some of the most atheistic nations in the world.
Meanwhile the US, reputedly the most religious first world nation wallows at 0.3% of GDP and even that tends to have strings attached as it is being used to back a kind of cultural imperialism.
Are theists more moral than non-theists, or is it the other way round? Do
theists and non-theists think very differently about ethics?
Good day to y’all! As you can see, this is the question. The answer is simple. Some atheists are much more “moral” and caring and loving than those who believe in God, and that is just fine for those who want to be good, kind, and loving.
We we think differently about ethics? Some do and some don’t! So what’s the big deal here? What is the difference? Does believing in God and Jesus make us more “good” or more “moral”? No! Can it? Yes! Does it always? No!
The difference is this, pure and simple. I am as big a sinner as a murderer on death row, IN THE EYES OF GOD. In the eyes of man, there are different punishments for different crimes. God does not put up with sin! Period!!!
If you are I sinned one single sin in our lives, and stand before the Judge, Jesus Christ, on Judgment Day, we ALL FALL SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD, WE ARE ALL SINNERS. So what do we do, and what’s the difference on Judgment Day?
God sent his Son to be the LAMB OF GOD, WHO TAKES AWAY THE SINS OF THE WORLD. When we repent of our sins, believe in Jesus as our Lord and Savior, and get baptized (when we receive the Holy Spirit of God, as Jesus did), we are then redeemed by the blood of the Lamb of God. We are forgiven by our Savior. ALL OUR SINS ARE FORGIVEN, ETERNALLY. That is why He is called our Savior and the Lamb of God.
So, does that mean we can do whatever we want and continue to sin? NO!
Jesus told the prostitute at the well, “Your sins are forgiven; now go and sin no more.” We have to clean up our act. We have to feel very sorry for our sins, and try our very best to get rid of them, even if it takes a lifetime to do so. God knows our heart. We cannot fool God!
So, all we have to do is say, “Dear Jesus forgive me; I believe in You, and I’m going to get baptized soon,” right? No! It takes a lifetime to get closer and closer to the person and image of Jesus. We have to keep the Great Commandment, to love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength,and LOVE OUR NEIGHBOR AS OURSELVES! That takes a lot of work, a lot of time, a lot of heart and caring, yes, and even a lot of money at times.
So, what happens if we don’t do that? Jesus tells us in Matthew 25:41, “What you do for the least of these, you do for me.” Jesus tells us that if we do not care for those in prison, the poor, the homeless, the sick, the naked, etc., then He will “send us into eternal punishment with Satan and his demons.”
Yes, the plan is simple, folks, love! The big question today is, “Do we care for others at least as much as ourselves or not?”
How about you? If you died right now, where do you think you will spend the rest of eternity? Have you sinned? I have too; we all do. What have you done to clean up your act, so when you (and I) stand before Jesus on Judgment Day, we can know that we are good enough to enter Heaven with God forever. I don’t know about you, but I am not “good enough” to make it on my own. I need Jesus to forgive my sins. I can’t work them out, or pay for them to be forgiven, and others can’t pray me into Heaven. You can’t do it for me, and I can’t do it for you. Jesus did that already. All we have to do is acccept the forgiveness, and we are in (to Heaven).
So why doesn’t everyone buy into this simple plan? They don’t want to do what we are commanded to do! I want to do it my way. I’m not going to listen to God. I don’t want to care for others, which brings us back to the issue of being good or better or more moral than someone else. It is so important to be that good and moral person, and to do good for those in need around us, so don’t stop doing that, no matter if you are a believer or not. If you ever want to email directly, please feel free to write to me at “canddwiner@gmail.com” .
Be blessed, and, yes, HAVE A MERRY AND BLESSED CHRISTMAS. Be a blessing. Be you. Help those in need.
THE GREATEST GIFT IS “YOU”, and not the money or the gifts. Lots of love from the Lord and me to you! Peace, y’all!
Hello Gordon,
That is very good on their part, but it is a highly selective demographic that says very little about atheist people on average. UnkleE has in fact discussed wealthy philanthropists before. Just do a search on Google and you’ll find it.
Personally, I like Warren Buffet a lot more than the Koch brothers. But political ideology will also be a factor here.
I am personally a great fan generally speaking of how the Scandinavians do business, but in my experience American atheists tend to overstate the Scandinavians’ atheism or irreligion. According to the Eurobarometer (one of the most reliable sources on the matter) Scandinavian countries aren’t particularly atheist, as France and the Czech Republic outdo them in this respect.
Your average Scandinavian is a nominal member of a Lutheran national (former state) church, will mix a benign and patronising view of Christianity with some sharp criticism when it comes to sexual matters and will prefer personal spirituality in her actual religious life. Christian identity however is very much present as an ethical, ritual or ethnic marker (with an inclusive or). The high nominal church affiliation mirrors other socially uniquely Scandinavian features like high nominal union membership. So calling that “atheism” is a bit of a stretch. In any case, atheists form a minority in every single Scandinavian country and in most European countries.
And ‘Scandinavia’ has quite some diversity in this regard as well. Norway is a rather more religious country than Sweden or Denmark, but it doesn’t diverge that much politically (the historically dominant party is a labour party, the labour party is generally still the largest party, coalitions are usually formed before the elections and are practically permanent along a left-right divide, the form of representation is proportional with a threshold, the political culture is highly influenced by social democracy, there has been a recent increase in right-wing anti-immigrant populism, at least 0.7% of GDP is reserved for development aid).
Ultimately the divergence from other nations (which has recently become more stark) looks like it has mostly political roots to me. The interplay with religion will have been complex, as social democracy has been strongly influenced by Christianity but many social democrats were opposed to Christianity. (This isn’t even relevant in the case of Iceland and the Faroese Islands, which are Scandinavian but have quite right-wing politics.)
Surely these indicators don’t show to a satisfying degree that atheists are generally more altruistic? Note that I am not claiming or implying anything as ridiculous as “atheists are immoral”. I in fact think that if you account for ideology, differences between theists and atheists will become smaller.
Thanks everyone for comments.
Gordon, I agree with what IN has said.
IN, I find your European perspective helpful and interesting. I wonder whether we could collaborate on a post on the idea that Scandinavia, especially Sweden, is an atheist paradise? It could be based on your comment here, but amplified a little and with references.
“Today, only 12% of the population attend church services each month.[1] Citizens born in Norway to one or two Norwegian parents are automatically added to the list of Protestant Christians in Norway” (wiki)
Sound like a good way to keep Norway a “Christian Nation”
Ken, those numbers sound about right. Church attendance in Scandinavia is very low, as many sources can tell you. But you also have to look at how people self-identify, what they believe and how they interact with church. Things then become a lot more complicated than “atheist paradise” or “Christian nation” (which is something I would never claim, by the way, just to make this clear).
UnkleE, that sounds interesting. I shall look up some references and PM you soon (= within a day).
@Ignorantia Nescia
see the Gallop poll results on this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_by_country
As atheism is advancing the situation is probably even more atheistic now. You have been misled by church membership. Most Scandinavians don’t believe in gods and don’t attend church except for hatches, matches and dispatches. It’s a cultural thing. Some of the pastors are also atheists in terms of not believing in a personal god.
David,
Shouting doesn’t make it true. Nor does it make your claims persuasive. In fact, less so, IMO.
I never intended to imply that Scandinavian countries are mostly practicing Christians. To the contrary, I wrote that most are nominal Christians. The phenomenon of nominal religion has a meaning distinct from practising Christianity and unchurched non-theism. Unfortunately, many orthodox Christians with an agenda and many atheists with an agenda are eager to claim the group as “one of us!” So it is incorrect to state that I have been misled by church membership.
The Gallop Poll figures do not indicate non-theism or even irreligion, they show how important religion is in people’s lives. Indeed, it is not very important for large majorities in Scandinavian countries, religious attendance is mostly reserved for baptisms, funerals and holidays. This lack of importance is probably linked to atheism (Sweden and Denmark rank highest), but these figures cannot be used to show that that atheism is advancing. Atheism doesn’t rank anywhere near as high as 80%, around 20% to 25% is a safer bet.
The main change in the religious landscape of several European countries is that spirituality is becoming more separated from organised religion. The majority in such countries often believe in some divine power or life force, but not in a personal God. To state that most Scandinavians don’t believe in gods is dubious, as much depends on how you define “gods”. This mechanism is what underlies the decline in religious affiliation, not a turn to atheism.
The problem with all those (chiefly American) atheists who claim Scandinavia is predominantly atheist is that it ignores what people actually believe. It is true that few believe in the Christian/Islamic/Jewish God, but that’s only part of a very complex picture that is called privatised religion and nominal Christianity.
So please step back for a moment and contemplate: “Whose argument does this information affect?” It doesn’t affect anything I said negatively.
@Ignorantia Nescia
Well in my view the point both of us should have been trying to address is whether religiosity leads to greater charitability as claimed.
I believe the Gallop statistics at the very least show a lack of religiosity and this is further backed up by Zuckerman’s detailed results:
http://www.pitzer.edu/academics/faculty/zuckerman/Ath-Chap-under-7000.pdf
Scandinavia has far fewer practicing theists than the US but always at least meets the international aid target whereas the US never meets the target. All your nit picking about who’s an atheist cannot obfuscate these facts and they are contrary to the assumption that active theism enhances charitability and lack of active theism means less charitability.
I’d like to correct a few of my previous statements based on the Eurobarometer 2010. Some religious indicators show more religious outcomes in Denmark than in Norway. And the percentage of atheists is around 30% to 35% in Norway and Sweden, though they aren’t relative majorities in either countries.
I think that commitment to charity is only part of the picture, willingness to increase state-funded foreign aid should be included for a balanced verdict on altruism. As non-religious people are on average more left-wing, this would likely decrease differences. So we probably do not differ on this point.
But your post made an explicit point that the Scandinavian countries are among the most atheist ones. It is fair game to point out crucial nuances regarding that.
So I don’t see why this is a fair comment:
Yes, but it has never been disputed that Scandinavian countries have proportionally fewer practising theists than the United States. It would be silly to dispute that.
Hi IN, I edited your comment to correct the mistake you mentioned.
Gordon, I see two problems with the use of Scandinavia as an example of the glories of atheism.
1. None of those societies are majority atheist as IN has mentioned. The majority belief across much of Europe is now a difficult to define spirituality, notably a vague belief in a life force or nominal christianity.
2. But even if Scandinavia was majority atheist, it still wouldn’t prove your point. A vague correlation doesn’t prove causation, especially when there are other equally vague correlations – e.g. could the difference between the US and Scandinavia be due to the different economic-political systems (capitalism vs democratic socialism), or gun ownership or murder rate, or the different genetic and racial mix, or history??? All of these, and more, might exhibit similar correlations.
That is why we need the scientific study of religion, where good experimental design accounts for or eliminates extraneous factors and tests a rigorous hypothesis. You would surely agree with that?
So the studies I have quoted do that, while the very generalised statement you and other atheists make does not, and therefore doesn’t merit consideration. It may be that there are decent studies that demonstrate your point, in which case please quote them. But until then, you are using an argument that you would rightly criticise if it gave results the other way round.
“That is why we need the scientific study of religion”
Isn’t this an oxymoron ? I’m not sure how you could ever get straight answers on the subject.
As I showed earlier, “Citizens born in Norway to one or two Norwegian parents are automatically added to the list of Protestant Christians in Norway” Wouldn’t this alone skew any Scientific Study ?
Having traveled throughout Europe extensively the past 30 years, it’s been my observation that many Europeans are agnostic . They cannot know and don’t really care. This is simply an observation.
Hi Ken, there is significant scientific study of religion. I think you may misunderstand. It isn’t a study of the truth of whether God exists, or what he or she is like, but a study of the sociology and psychology of religion in society.
I obviously think God exists and christianity is true, and so I don’t think sociology and psychology explain everything about religion, but I do believe the observations of sociologists and psychologists, made in statistically well-conducted surveys and experiments, can tell us useful information. Such studies generally account for whether belief is intrinsic or extrinsic (as in your quote).
For more, I suggest you look up the Science on Religion blog, where I get a lot of my information.
@unkleE
That depends on whether you define atheists as self identifying or as people who don’t believe in a personal god that interacts with the natural world.
Take Norway for instance:
But, only 20% of Norwegians say that religion occupies an important place in their life (according to a Gallup poll in 2009), the fourth-lowest such percentage in the world (only those of Estonia, Sweden and Denmark are lower)In the early 1990s. Studies estimated that between 4.7% and 5.3% of Norwegians attended church on a weekly basis. This figure has dropped to about 2% – the lowest such percentage in Europe – according to data from 2009 and 2010
To say that this is not a good example of lack of religion and religiosity that has not lead to uncharitability is ridiculous.
Hi Gordon, shouldn’t we let people self identify? And shouldn’t we recognise the difference between formal religion, “quest religion” or spirituality, no religion and atheism, as the studies do?
@unkleE
What you should do is keep your eye on the ball and remember your original claim: “Theists are more charitable”. Any obfuscations which don’t relate to that are not relevant. I would say for these purposes that anybody who states they don’t believe in gods is not a theist however they identify.
You can’t be born into the Christian faith! You have to be “born again,” to enter the Kingdom of God or Heaven.
Being a Christian does not mean simply going to church with your family or friends. It is a life-long commitment to live as Jesus did. That is what a real Christian does. We repent of our sins. We love God and Jesus by reading the Word of God, worshipping Him, praying to Him, and telling others about Him. We get baptized, which is when the Holy Spirit enters into us, as it did Jesus. We love God and our neighbor, as Jesus did. We are there for them. We visit them in prison. We feed them. We clothe them. We visit in the hospital. We share what we have with people.
Being a Christian is giving your whole life to God and others. It is not about getting rich, having a new house, having a new car, or a big bank account; it’s all about sharing that which you have with others who don’t have as much as you do.
Be blessed.
“For more, I suggest you look up the Science on Religion blog, where I get a lot of my information.”
Thanks unkleE ! Maybe we should all be practicing Buddhism . The Science on Religion Blog where you get a lot of your information says, “Buddhism has produced some of the most powerful psychology the world has ever seen, and its practices and insights are, frankly, invaluable. Sharp’s fascinating model gives us another useful insight into why.”
“What you should do is keep your eye on the ball “
Hi Gordon, it seems we are talking at cross purposes. Yes, that was close to what I said in the post (I actually use the word “prosociality”), and that is simply reporting what the studies say. If you disagree, you would need to show how all the studies in my two references are wrong.
But in the comments we have been discussing Scandinavia, and your comments about Scandinavia are what I was addressing.
Hi David, I agree with what you say here, but this post doesn’t discuss faith, but how people self identify and how they behave.
Hi Ken, I think there are things we could learn from Buddhism, like we can learn from many points of view, but I couldn’t practice Buddhism because I don’t think some of its basic tenets are true.
Do you think you could actually practice Buddhism sincerely?
“Do you think you could actually practice Buddhism sincerely?”
Probably not. I simply quoted your source site because I found it interesting they don’t necessarily embrace your Christianity.
Just fueling the fire in a non-hostile sort of way. 🙂
I think the quote about Buddhism refers to social scientific insights it gave from experiments, like that famous meditation experiment, due to its particular practices.
So it only ‘endorses’ Buddhism if you want to be a test subject. :p Otherwise it’s quite neutral. 😉
I was given From Dust to DNA from a friend to read. A fiction novel about a man who is out to disprove the existence of God. The interesting this about it is, there are questions and answers from all sides of this topic, very interesting read for sure. dusttodna.com is the book site, I recommend it.
Thanks for that information Mari.