Atheism Central for Secondary Schools - The Ladder of Deception

"A man ... invents a theory that he is King of England, and develops all kinds of ingenious explanations of the fact that he is not treated with that respect which his exalted position demands. In this case, his delusion is one with which his neighbours do not sympathise, so they lock him up. But if, instead of asserting only his own greatness, he asserts the greatness of his nation or his class or his creed, he wins hosts of adherents, and becomes a political or religious leader, even if, to the impartial outsider, his views seem just as absurd as those found in asylums. In this way a collective insanity grows up, which follows laws very similar to those of individual insanity. Everyone knows it is dangerous to dispute with a lunatic who thinks he is King of England; but as he is isolated, he can be overpowered. When a whole nation shares a delusion, its anger is of the same kind as that of an individual lunatic if its pretensions are disputed, but nothing short of war can compel it to submit to reason."

Bertrand Russell 1928

"Faith is powerful enough to immunize people against all appeals to pity, to forgiveness, to decent human feelings. It even immunizes them against fear, if they honestly believe that a martyr's death will send them straight to heaven. What a weapon! Religious faith deserves a chapter to itself in the annals of war technology, on an even footing with the longbow, the warhorse, the tank, and the hydrogen bomb."

Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene

"Whatever good you would do out of fear of punishment, or hope of reward hereafter, the Atheist would do simply because it is good; and being so, he would receive the far surer and more certain reward, springing from well-doing, which would constitute his pleasure, and promote his happiness."

Ernestine L. Rose, "A Defence of Atheism" (1878, Women Without Superstition ed. Annie Laurie Gaylor, Madison, WI: FFRF, 1997), p. 85.

Preamble. How do we know what we know?

There are three strands of thought connected with the nature of knowledge. One strand says that there is a hidden reality behind the physical universe that we can see and feel but that nevertheless is possible for us to know of its existence. Although it is hidden it is this hidden reality is that truly governs this universe. We can know of the existence of this hidden reality by glimpses of it which enter our universe. These glimpses would take the form of, for example, miracles and ghosts. Alternatively, or additionally, we may know of the existence of this reality by examining ourselves e.g., "If God does not exist, then why is He living in my heart?" Clearly theists, who believe in the existence of god(s) would be included in this category.

Another strand says that we must be forever in ignorance of whether such a hidden reality exists or not and that we certainly cannot prove that it does not exist. Many things are simply unknowable so although there is no evidence to support the existence of god(s) this cannot be ruled out. Agnostics and 'weak' atheists would be in this category. In general, however, they behave as if there is/are no god(s) and that we can understand and explain the universe by intelligent observation of what physically surrounds us.

The third strand of thought says that we can be confident that no hidden reality exists behind or beyond the physical universe and so nothing behind or beyond the universe has any governing powers over it. This view is held by 'strong' atheists who, unlike agnostics or weak atheists, believe that the non-existence of god(s) is knowable. Of course, strong atheists are confident that the universe can be understood and explained in a meaningful way by intelligent observation of what physically surrounds us.

Thoughtful theists generally accept that it is rational to be an agnostic but say it is irrational to be an atheist. The Catholic Church holds this position. Many theists say there is really no such thing as atheism, suggesting that atheists secretly know there is a god but are just being perverse. Others have more dramatic explanations: "Guess what? Satan is the ring-leader of all atheists. Ask Satan does God exist and he will say "NO!". Ask Satan does Satan exist, and he will say "No!" http://www.hom.net/~angels/atheism.html - link to site quoted from.
Not surprisingly, perhaps, according to the late Ayotolla Khomeini, at least one religion appears to make it a duty to kill unbelievers of any kind.

There is, then, a wide range of responses to questions arising from the knowability of things.

The Ladder of Deception

How can we decide if something is knowable or not? We could start by thinking about our daily lives. When we cross a road we look in both directions to see if a vehicle is coming. If the road is clear we cross. In a potentially life-threatening situation such as this we are prepared to accept the evidence of our senses to establish whether it is safe to cross the road. Our sensory evidence must be good for something if it can be so successful in keeping us alive. Most of us cross the road quite a lot of times every year. This seems to represent a very high degree of knowability indeed.

Our sensory evidence is also supported by evidence from other people who we can think of as experts - our parents, the police - who explain to us how to cross the road safely. Our experience tells us that they are generally right about matters of this kind. Essentially what we are told is that, if no 16 wheel truck is visible on a road with good visibility then we will not be hit by one when we cross.

How do we know when the 'experts' are right? Is it possible for experts to be wrong? In the case of crossing the road this does not seem to present any real problem. The fact that we are able to cross the road safely is sufficient evidence that the experts are right. But let us confront a more difficult problem – let us imagine that the experts give us the following advice:

'There is an invisible 16 wheel truck that will kill you if you do not hold your nose as you walk across the road.'

If we follow their advice we will always get to the other side of the road safely, as before, so we might think that this is proof that holding our noses as we cross the road really does keep us alive. We would also accept that there really is an invisible 16 wheeler that could kill us. The experts who told us this learnt about the invisible 16 wheeler from the experts who taught them. If we're brave enough, of course, we might try crossing the road without holding our noses. If we survive we will stop believing in the 16 wheeler.

The example given is a very simple one and apparently easy for us to refute but it can be made more complex, and harder to overcome. Just a look at The Ladder of Deception will show you how:

1. 'There is an invisible 16 wheel truck that will kill you if you do not hold your nose as you walk across the road.'

2. 'There is an invisible 16 wheel truck that will sometimes kill you if you do not hold your nose as you walk across the road.'

3. 'There is an invisible 16 wheel truck that will not kill you now but the invisible injuries it causes will make you die young if you do not hold your nose as you walk across the road.'

4. 'If you do not hold your nose as you walk across the road a car or truck will suddenly materialise and kill you just like that person who got run over yesterday – she did not hold her nose properly.'

5. 'If you do not hold your nose properly as you walk across the road you will go to hell when you die and it will be truly horrible because you will cease to exist and suffer extreme pain forever, both at the same time.'

6. 'If you do hold your nose properly as you walk across the road you will go to heaven when you die and it will be truly wonderful because you will not really be dead but you will live forever and be happier than happy.'

7. 'Some evil or misguided people will tell you it is not necessary to hold your nose as you walk across the road. They will say that it is only necessary to be careful and no more. They are speaking for the devil. You may even think of these things yourself. That is the devil talking in your ear. If you believe this abomination you cannot go to heaven and we will not like you any more (we will exclude you from our social group).'

8. 'If you do get run over crossing the road even when you are holding your nose properly that is 'God's Will' and anyway the whole purpose of life is to die and go to heaven. The really important thing is that you hold your nose as you are crossing the road (because this is where our ability to exert power comes from). If you are holding your nose properly when you are hit by a car and killed you will go to heaven so don't worry.'

These arguments roughly parallel those given to children, young people and even adults to help develop their 'religious awareness.' It doesn't require bravery to untangle this web of deception – it requires the ability to think clearly about what is knowable, what is unknowable and what is unreasonable.

How did we discover that the tooth fairy does not exist, that Father Christmas does not exist or that daddy is not really the strongest daddy in the world? Unless we were finally told the truth by the 'experts' in our lives we discovered the untruth of these propositions by the evidence of our senses and/or a growing awareness of the way in which the world works. Part of this discovery will probably involve some understanding of the methods used to deceive us.

We can apply the same method of discovery to the invisible 16 wheeled truck:

1. We can use the evidence of our senses to discover that the 16 wheeler is not there.

2. We can use our understanding of the world (for example, our knowledge of science – our capacity for rational thought) to dispel the notion that 16 wheelers can be invisible.

3. We can become aware of the methods of deception (innocent or malevolent) used to make us believe in the existence of the invisible 16 wheeled truck, fairies at the end of the garden, elves, gnomes, gods, angels and so on. We can then realise that we've been 'had' and reject these untruths.

The argument for 'strong' atheism

Should we remain forever in doubt about the existence or non-existence of the invisible 16 wheeler? Should we say that nothing is really knowable because some unknowable thing may trick us into thinking that the unknowable is knowable? If we think this then we must remain agnostics. We would think the invisible 16 wheeler may exist but also doubt its existence, and we should also doubt the existence of the real cars on the road. Perhaps we should experiment by walking in front of them. Although everyone else has died after walking in front of a car, it is unknowable that we shall do so as well.

The strong atheist does not accept the unknowability of the non-existence of god(s) in the same way he/she thinks it is knowable that you risk death if you walk in front of a car. The level of evidence for the existence of god is not sufficient to be meaningful. It is no more meaningful than to believe in the existence of invisible 16 wheeled trucks or that everyone has two parrots sitting on their heads. This means that it is possible to assert with confidence that the existence of god(s) is meaningless and that to hold this position is rational.

Time for scepticism

Are we responsible for our own actions or are other people responsible for them? If we think that we are, or should be, responsible for what we do then it is our duty to ourselves to question the authority of experts rather than always assume they are right.

Final note

Of course, the discussion on this page has only looked at one aspect of a very broad question involving the nature of human behaviour. For example – to understand things better we should ask ourselves why adults like to pretend to their children that there is an immortal called Father Christmas (Santa Claus); or we might consider what link there might be between obsessive-compulsive behaviour and superstition.