Ladner's Thought Experiment

Recently, my friend and fellow philosopher, posed a question that I'm sure has been posed before, and I'm sure will be posed again. It is this, "If we awoke tomorrow morning without any religious notions of morality and ethics, would we be happy?" I hope I captured the gist of the question. If I didn't, I'm sure and I hope my friend will correct me. But let me clarify, so we won't be confused about the topic.

For many years, the debate about humanism or evolution vs. religion (more specifically Judeo-Christian values) or creationism has been going on for eons. From the snake convincing Eve that God lied, to Paul debating the Stoics on Mars Hill, to Dawkins and Collins. This will never end. But what if it did, and the humanist and evolutionist won. And, not only did they win, but we have no knowledge of God or religion. Would this make us more happy? Without getting in a long discussion about what happiness is, let us say that generally happiness is defined as the absence of that which would causes us duress. So that, if we could get rid of all that would cause us duress, we are happy.

If we were to pick out the negative aspects of religion, this, consequently, would remove all duress that would follow from that side of the debate, e.g. religion's incessant propensity to war against other belief systems--"killing in the name of God!" However, that which would cause duress for the humanist or evolutionist when religion is eliminated would appear to increase. The answers that we found in religion are no more, which increases the frustration that would normally plague us. One of those problems is meaning. Why are we here? What is our purpose? This is not so easy to explain on a humanist or an evolutionary level. Sure one can argue that our purpose is to reproduce and protect our offspring. But somehow--to me anyway--this seems to reduce us to the level of extremely intelligent animals, than the more nobler human race created by God for a specific purpose. It also would appear to move ethics and morality to a more relativistic level, even though humanist and evolutionist could make an appeal to Kant's Categorical Imperative. But, who's to say I agree with it and would stick with?

In addition, if we leave out all the religiousness that we would miss out on or not, then this turns into a purely epistemological context. Without any appeal to religion, everything must be rationalized, and tested to make sure it works. I believe this would further frustrate humanity. (Which by the way, makes the author's of religious texts not just geniuses but hypergeniuses, because they got it right the first time--assuming there is no God). In this context, we aren't able to get out of the skeptic's trap let alone for it to make us happy.

In conclusion, a world in which we have forgotten all religious aspects, would make for a frustrating and joyless life. But, I'm bias. I'm keenly aware of my need for my religious beliefs. It is how I live my life. This makes me happy even in the times when I think all is lost. And, the reason for that is because this life is not the end.