Sunday, February 16, 2014

Babies & Morality...What Are The Real Implications Of Current Findings?

Anderson Cooper's 360 on CNN has recently taken off on this presentation that 60 Minutes did a couple of years ago when they examined studies on the foundation of human morality at Yale University's Baby Lab. This reintroduction of this material has gotten all kinds of attention and commentary and thoughts are all over the board on this one. 


This is somewhat of a trick question, but, is it even possible to be moral or to distinguish good form evil without God?

Enter the Baby Lab of Yale University

The Baby Lab sets forth scientific information, not spiritual information nor information that is designed to support one dogma or another. The scientists clearly believe in evolution and the evolutionary path, but their findings can be interpreted in a different sense as well. Here's the vid:

As I stated, this is a trick because we can never be or have never been truly "without God". God is present even in the life of an atheist to the extent that the presence of God cannot be removed from his creation or the earth as we know it. At the root of the question however, is does one need God, in the sense of saving faith, to be moral or to distinguish good from evil? 

My answer to this complex question has always been NO. One can be good, moral and distinguish evil from good ONLY because God has built the ability to distinguish good and evil in us as people, so that we are without an excuse for the path that we have chosen at the end of the day. 

Now, there is a perversion of this called "human morality". This is the type of morality that humans establish to prove that they are "better" than God and have higher values. While these attempts arguably fail miserably (because it's like a child crawling in the lap of his mother to slap her in her face and tell how how to take care of babies) We can say that men without God have established their own twisted and perverted sense of what is right and wrong, supposedly rooting that in what they call "rational thought". 

In the world of so called "rational thought" the concept of God and the boundaries that come with religion in general, restrict truth and make discovering truth more difficult. See, according to them, in this world, we should allow everything to and let as thou wilt...y'u-know, all those satanistic values that Anthon LaVey restrictions, no boundaries, but whatever one's will is, that's what one should hedonism...Well that's well and good until someone does what they wish that isn't in accord with your wishes...

Bottom Line
Whether God is acknowledged or not God has communicated certain attributes to man and mankind. Moral and freewill choice being a couple of them, that we can exercise whether we accept HIS reign in our lives or not. In other words, the gift of life and choice between right and wrong does not simply go away because we choose evil. Although we are powerless to "save ourselves" we are able to make a choice freely based on how we are created. 

The Materialist Conundrum: 

If God does not exist and we are merely material or products of natural processes it is impossible to know or distinguish good from evil. Why? It is really rather simple...It goes something like this: 

If we are truly and only products of the material realm, by what process can we ever arrive at morality? Material, rocks, dirt, trees and anything else known as material matter makes no moral assumptions and has no moral values other than the values ascribed to them by human agency for whatever reason that might be. There is no moral position of a rock or material even if acted upon by chemicals and water over time...Morals are not what is called inherent in material mater. So the whole process of evolution, if one believes in evolution, cannot get out of the gate...on top of this, the moral question of materialism becomes a futile effort. 

Morals exist in humans and unlike that of apes and rats (atheists go so low on the chain of life to make comparisons when they hear things like this) Human values do not only promote the species, they fulfill life and cause life to be and become what it is. Interestingly, humans, undertake moral values and questions, on the shoulders of God, not in spite of God. God is the principle that provides the distinguishing factors of truth and the ability to distinguish between good and evil. There is no materialistic mechanism for this in any sense.

Ultimately Speaking... 

Under a truly materialistic paradigm, good and evil receive the same reward. They are merely built in premises that a person is bound and destined to follow fatalistically. Like the Matrix, all individuals are simply acting out their program. Atheist Alex Krauss says, "all physics are deterministic". This means that nothing acts randomly, not even thoughts. In the deepest sense, there is no choice or freewill under materialism. The mind is set from birth. This, by design, excludes any intervention of God to any degree in life's equation. However, it also strips one of any ultimate culpability for their actions in any sense. Duties are only to self or a close group or community, never to any ultimate authority. 

If there is no God, in the most deep sense, all actions are justifiably equal. The raper and robber are as good as the hero and the law abiding citizen.

Thank God that materialism is FALSE! 

The Sin Nature:

Having worked with children in a child daycare for 16 years as a profession, I can readily and easily see the sin nature at work in children at a very young age. What we find the doctors revealing is that a "sin nature" exists. They call it being selfish. The "us vs. them" mentality that these researchers reveal by the behaviors of certain children are the byproduct of sin in our hearts. Any bigotry and racism as outlined are as a result of the fall and our human values after the fall.

This is why man need a savior. Babies can't distinguish these things. However just as God distinguishes them, and men observe the actions, God knows what exists. Form a very early age, we can see that children identify what is right and what is wrong. What they do with that is their freewill even at that age. Interesting. 

Certainly these things will continue to be talked about for generations, and rightfully so.


1 comment:

  1. An atheist said the following: "all this shows is an evolutionary trait...primates having nearly the same morality is evidence that the trait is older than the human species." "...even rats have been shown to be unselfish in lab tests"

    First, monkey morality is an assumption and imposition on monkeys. A mother monkey or chimpanzee taking care of her babies is hardly proof of morality or a monkey defending their dwelling is hardly any morality at all. Whatever it is is vastly different from anything we find in humans. Then to imply that a rodent doing the same, is really concerned about the community of rodents whom they have to compete with for food and who do by the way eat their sick and ill children (so much for morals) is just about as silly as they come as well...

    At either rate what we find is selfishness in animals. We do not find the capacity to reason as we find it in humans unless animals have been domesticated and even then, be careful because you make get your face taken off for no reason at all...


I've switched to real time comments for most posts. Refresh your screen if you post and do not see it right away. Please send me an email if you try to post a comment and cannot do so. Thanks.