Jacob Clift September 27, 2013 Doctor Hermon Philosophy 1000 Commentary on Religion Gives Meaning To Life Lois

Hope Walker is a pen name, and the authors true identity is unknown. For the purpose of simplicity, I will refer to Walker as a female throughout. She argues that theistic religion- the belief in at least one god- gives special meaning to life that is unavailable in secular views. She also argues that the independence secularists prize is not decreased by religious faith. She begins by writing about an experience with an atheist woman, who was disgusted at the thought that the world should be a gift from our heavenly Father that provides meaning and purpose. The atheist responded to such an idea by saying we dont need a big Daddy in the sky. We need to grow up and become our own parents. Walker claims that the womans two theses were: It is more important to be free.. than to have a grand meaning or purpose to life and religion provides a grand meaning or purpose to life, but it does not allow humans to be free or autonomous. Walker then states that she believes the woman is wrong on both theses, and that she will defend religion against those theses and show that meaning and autonomy are both necessary or important ingredients.. within a religious framework. Regarding the first thesis, she begins by defining autonomy as self-governing, the ability to make choices on the basis of good reasons rather than being coerced by threats or

forces from without, and meaning that life has a purpose. There is some plan to it. Then she takes apart the womans argument, saying that she would choose free will over living in a world with a governing providential hand, which Walker claims to make two mistakes; 1) It makes autonomy into an unjustified absolute, and 2) it makes a false dilemma. To help prove her point, Walker considers two situations, one where you are free to do anything you want, but are locked in a room which is slowly being filled with a deadly gas, and the other situation where you are slightly limited in what you are able to do such as not being able to kill somebody or commit adultery, but where you are in a room with sunshine and fresh air. She states that she would choose the second option, and that autonomy is not the only value in the world, nor is it always the overriding value. She also states that she thinks most people w ould be willing to give a few things up in order to be happy. Walker then asks a hypothetical question, that if each of us was willing to give up a small fraction of our autonomy that we could stop poverty, crime, and suffering, if we would do it. Lois Hope Walker then writes about the second thesis, that religion holds purpose as superior to autonomy, and says that she believes this statement is a misunderstanding of what she called the best types of religion try to do. She quotes John 8:32 in the Bible, Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free, and then notes that theism sees freedom and meaning as bound together, instead of as opposites. Walker writes that theistic religion, such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, claims to give us options of importance, and if those claims are true, then the world is far better if than if it is not. She then elaborates on this, and says that if theism is true and there is a benevolent supreme being governing the universe, that eight theses are true. The first, we know the origins of the universe and can take comfort that there

is a creator that cares about us; the second, that the universe is filled with good and that good and evil will win out over evil; the third, that God cares about us and loves us; the fourth, that theists have the answer to the question why be moral?, and that we get what we deserve good for good, bad for bad; the fifth, that justice reigns in the universe, and that everybody will get what they deserve; sixth, everybody is of equal worth and is a family with God as their Father; seventh, there is grace and forgiveness, and the moral guilt which we experience, even for the most heinous acts, can be removed, and we can be redeemed and given a new start; eighth, there is life after death. We have eternity in our souls and are destined for a higher existence. After giving these theses and their various points, Walker states that if theism is false and secularism is true, then there is no obvious basis for human equality, no reason to treat all people with equal respect. She also brings up the fact that theism does not take away any personal freedom, and that we are equally free to choose the good or the evil whether or not God exists, assuming, Walker says, that the notions of good and evil make sense in a nontheistic universe, then the theists world is more satisfying than a world where God does not exist. I agree with every point that Walker makes, especially the part where religion takes nothing away from our personal freedom. However, I think that Walker somewhat exaggerates the importance of religion for a meaningful life, because I can think of the argument that an atheist can live a meaningful life by devoting him- or herself to a cause that they personally deem right, or just, such as service to others, producing a useful product, or making something that betters everybody who uses it. Karl Marx said that religion is the opium of the

people, and that it tricks them into thinking everything is okay in the world, which would lead to an acceptance of evil and injustice. I think that Marx was partially correct in his statement, but the very faithful would not turn a blind eye to the evil in the world and would try to correct it. In conclusion, Walker wrote that it may be a good thing, to live as if theism is truth, [authors emphasis] because simply believing is enough to give purpose and meaning to the life of the believer. If more people believed in a cause, the world would be bettered because of it and many injustices would be corrected.