According to Sartre, man exists before he acquires an essence. Ivan has concluded, or pretends to conclude, that there is no God, no immortality. In order to underpin objective moral values and duties, god would have to exist objectively. National surveys have reported that in the opinion of a majority of Americans, there is a direct link between a lack of belief in God and a lack of personal morals. What rational objection can a confirmed naturalist offer to someone who chooses to live as a shrewd opportunist, cultivating a reputation for ethical integrity while shunting ethics aside when doing so suits his or her interest? God's laws limit who we are and what we can do. It is true that "If God does not exist, everything is permitted" is an accurate capsule description of the belief espoused by Ivan Karamazov in the early chapters of The Brothers Karamazov. Clearly, as I also mentioned earlier, Smiths answer is No. Today about 12% of Americans report being raised in homes without any formal religious ties. No atheistic moralist, writes Smith, drawing again on his systematic reading in a wide range of writings from such thinkers, successfully explains why rational persons in an atheistic universe should uphold a cultures moral norms all of the time. No study exists that even suggests that kids raised in secular homes are disproportionately immoral, unethical, or violent. It is quite another to demand that every person is morally obliged to advance the well-being of every other human on earth. Sometimes, yes. This is why Christ was wrong to reject the devil's temptation to turn stones into bread: men will always follow those who will feed their bellies. Yet Interpreter would not appear and the Interpreter Foundation could not function without their considerable effort. But is such a morality logically entailed, or even logically allowed, by their overall position? Sartre agrees with Dostoevsky that if God does not exist, then everything is permitted. 4/9/09, 9:38 AM. In Christian Smiths considered opinion, the answer to that question is a decisive No. There are, of course, good reasons for individual members of a species to cooperate with each other, reasons that enhance the quality of an individuals life or the prospects for an individuals or a familys survival or, at least, increase the likelihood that certain genes will be transmitted into the future. What kind of notice does the narrator receive in the mail after graduating from college? From his first wife, Adelaida, he had one son, Dmitry Karamazov. Furthermore, when Dostoyevsky proposes a line of thought, along the lines of "If there is no God, then everything is permitted," he is in no way simply warning against limitless freedom - that is, evoking God as the agency of a transcendent prohibition which limits human freedom: in a society run by the Inquisition, everything is definitely not permitted, since God is here operative as a higher power constraining our freedom, not as the source of freedom. live, learn and work. I provide an abridgment of his list here: For most of us including me and Christian Smith such suggestions would be abhorrent. They are simply the givens of physics and mathematics, elemental facts of natural reality lacking inherent meaning or purpose or normativity. No wonder, then, that Lacan's reversal - "If there is a God, then everything is permitted!" What might contribute to the reproductive success of an individual in such a group? And he further reports that he finds them completely unconvincing. So as to the origin of morality, the short answer is: both biological and cultural evolution. Slavoj Zizek is the International Director of the Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities, University of London, and one of the world's most influential public intellectuals. Its obvious that the naturalistic moralists of whom Christian Smith writes badly want to reach a conclusion that they favor a universally benevolent morality and the existence of human rights as genuine, objective facts and that their desire reflects well upon them. What does Sartre mean when he says "existence precedes essence"? One day, when the conversation turned to certain occasionally frustrating aspects of life in Egypt (e.g., traffic, and traffic signals that were taken as unsolicited and mostly unheeded advice rather than as commands), the husband, who was an engineer, hastened to assure me that, compared to the west African city in which he had previously resided, Cairo was a virtual utopia. If we fail to find that evidence, then God cannot exist as defined. Related Characters: Jean-Paul Sartre (speaker), The Christian Existentialists, God Related Themes: Page Number and Citation: 28-9 Cite this Quote Explanation and Analysis: This is a very distressing idea. Religion or ethnic belonging fit this role perfectly. (Smith sagely observes, by the way, that, for some atheistic moralists, society, with its sanctions, appears to have taken the place of a judging and punishing God.) But the only way to debate this issue is to look at the available evidence, and that's what we are going to do. At best, we will be left with the world described by the prophet Isaiah, a world of slaying oxen, and killing sheep, eating flesh, and drinking wine, in which the shallow refrain is let us eat and drink; for to morrow we shall die (Isaiah 22:13). Indeed, they fight and kill silverbacks of other troops, and nothing in nature suggests that, in doing so, theyre being immoral. (Adolf Hitlers quest for Lebensraum, for greater space into which the Aryans or the Germanic peoples could expand via continual warfare, and his belief that other races should be either subjugated or altogether exterminated, seen from this vantage point, fits right in. Theists have used the statement to argue that the alternative to belief in God is moral nihilism. However, even if Lacan's inversion appears to be an empty paradox, a quick look at our moral landscape confirms that it is a much more appropriate description of the atheist liberal/hedonist behaviour: they dedicate their life to the pursuit of pleasures, but since there is no external authority which would guarantee them personal space for this pursuit, they get entangled in a thick network of self-imposed "Politically Correct" regulations, as if they are answerable to a superego far more severe than that of the traditional morality. False. [Page viii]Shakespeares Macbeth famously captures the cynical and disenchanted mood of such a devalued world: Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrowCreeps in this petty pace from day to dayTo the last syllable of recorded time.And all our yesterdays have lighted foolsThe way to dusty death. Image transcription text 1. If God Does Not Exist, Is Everything Permitted?, Complexities in the English Language of the Book of Mormon 2015, https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/hobbes/Leviathan.pdf, https://infidels.org/library/modern/andrei-volkov-dostoevsky/, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3107641/, Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. View PDF. There are only opinions. Therefore, God exists [1] Although consistent atheists must avoid accepting both premises of this logically valid syllogism, it's not hard to find atheists who endorse either premise. Sometimes, in fact, theyre diametrically opposed. But this is just the sort of thing, according to Christian Smith, toward which a consistent naturalistic moralism might well tend. When asked to give ethical guidance to his student, Sartre told him that he must live up to his filial duty and take care of his mother. "If God does not exist, everything is permitted." by Fyodor Dostoyevsky is a popular phrase used by theists, theologians and conservatives when questioned about the connection between faith in God and morality. We acknowledge Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the Do mother bears protect their cubs because they think it the right thing to do? His god, to the extent that he actually had one, was Nature.14). Since great public causes can no longer be mobilized as the basis of mass violence - in other words, since the hegemonic ideology enjoins us to enjoy life and to realize our truest selves - it is almost impossible for the majority of people to overcome their revulsion at the prospect of killing another human being. If you are truly free, not even God would have the ability to predict what choices you could make. No wonder conservatives like to evoke it whenever there are scandals among the atheist-hedonist elite: from millions killed in gulags to animal sex and gay marriages, this is where we end up if we deny transcendental authority as an absolute limit to all human endeavours. They can. Its the challenge posed by the sensible knave in David Humes 1751 Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals and, long before that, by Glaucons challenge to Socrates in the second book of Platos early-fourth-century BC Republic. 1 Corinthians 6:12 "Everything is permissible for me," but not everything is beneficial. I have news for you. This brings us, again, to Smiths question, which I cited earlier: If we in fact live in the naturalistic cosmos that atheists and much of science tell us we occupy, do we have good reasons for believing in universal benevolence and human rights as moral facts and imperatives?26. It is well-known that Jacques Lacan claimed that the psychoanalytic practice inverts Dostoyevsky's dictum: "If there is no God, then everything is prohibited." According to Sartre, we can be free and responsible only if God does not exist. In other words, the same logic as that of religious violence applies here. Dostoevsky did mean to convey this, contrary to revisionist misinterpretations on the web such as Andrei I. Volkov's secular article which is an academic Ivory tower play on worlds. The natural processes that govern the operation of the cosmos are not moral sources. Does a mother bear feel any moral responsibility for protecting bear cubs in general? On the other hand, without God, everything is lawful, everything is permissible. Instead of answering the Inquisitor, Christ, who has been silent throughout, kisses him on his lips; shocked, the Inquisitor releases Christ but tells him never to return Alyosha responds to the tale by repeating Christ's gesture: he also gives Ivan a soft kiss on the lips. One should bear in mind that the parable of the Grand Inquisitor is part of a larger argumentative context which begins with Ivan's evocation of God's cruelty and indifference towards human suffering, referring to the lines from the book of Job (9.22-24): "He destroys the guiltless and the wicked. It also means that his being is fundamentally unique. Length: 1200 words. But here in America this kind of historical fact carries little weight. God is God means that he is ultimate, absolute, and incomparable. Although, some people argue that social stimulus imposes limits to one's actions even if God does not exist. A rational morality can, it argues, be founded upon atheistic naturalism but it will necessarily be a modest and quite limited one, lacking universal scope and without a belief in human rights as objective moral facts., The striking statement that, if God doesnt exist, everything is permitted, is often attributed to the great Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky (18211881) and, more specifically, to perhaps his greatest novel, The Brothers Karamazov, which was first published in 1880. At worst, as I discuss shortly, human life will more closely resemble that of the state of nature portrayed by Thomas Hobbes in the thirteenth chapter of his 1651 classic, Leviathan: solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.1. Download Free PDF. Here again, his answer is no. Explain. Religious ideologists usually claim that, true or not, religion makes some otherwise bad people to do some good things. This is why, as soon as cracks appear in this ideological protective shield, the weight of what they did became unbearable to many individual Communists, since they have to confront their acts as their own, without any alibi in a higher Logic of History. In truth everything has never been permitted, and this applies both to those who believe in such a god and to those who dont. I wont be offering a book review of Atheist Overreach here, nor will I be drawing on the entirety of the book. But I do want to examine what it has to say about whether, if God doesnt exist, everything is permitted.. First, regarding individuals. This might include things that we instinctively know to be evil, like rape or murder. What makes this protective attitude towards paedophiles so disgusting is that it is not practiced by permissive hedonists, but by the very institution which poses as the moral guardian of society. These also just happen as they happen. "God's existence is proven by scripture." This argument presupposes its premise. 1. There is no meaning in life. If the scourge kills suddenly, He mocks the despair of the innocent. The point of the story is not simply to attack the Church and advocate the return to full freedom given to us by Christ. It drastically underestimates the formidable capacity of human beings for developing codes to help order their own social existence. This kind of enlightened self-interest should produce societies of people who are morally good without God.18. With that issue in mind, Im taking this opportunity to call your attention to a relatively small book that I recently enjoyed very much: Atheist Overreach: What Atheism Cant Deliver.4 It was written by [Page ix]Christian Smith, who after completing a Ph.D. at Harvard University (and a year at Harvard Divinity School) taught at Gordon College and, thereafter, at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for many years (ultimately serving as the Stuart Chapin Professor of Sociology there), and who is currently the William R. Kenan Jr. The closest one gets to this infamous aphorism are a hand-full of apoproximations, like Dmitri's claim from his debate with Rakitin (as he reports it to Alyosha): "'But what will become of men then?' , All of you in the city are certainly brothers, we shall say to them in telling the tale, but the god, in fashioning those of you who are competent to rule, mixed gold in at their birth; this is why they are most honored; in auxiliaries, silver; and iron and bronze in the farmers and the other craftsmen. - from the Christian perspective, the two ultimately amount to the same, since God is love). Josh Wheaton: Atheists say that no one can prove the existence of God, and they're right.But I say that no one can disprove that God exists. The question is whether, given an atheistic or naturalistic worldview, the moral principles that guide many highly ethical unbelievers are well-founded. But why? Probably, if God does not exist, humans would not possess objective moral knowledge. existence of God, in religion, the proposition that there is a supreme supernatural or preternatural being that is the creator or sustainer or ruler of the universe and all things in it, including human beings. I particularly want to thank Allen Wyatt and Jeff Lindsay, who currently serve as the two managing or production editors for the Journal. Precisely because we live in an era which perceives itself as post-ideological. As Smith puts it, [Page xiii]I think that atheists are rationally justified in being morally good, if that means a modest goodness focused primarily on people who might affect them and with a view to practical consequences in terms of enlightened self-interest. Good, however, has no good reason to involve universal moral obligations. In many religions God is also conceived as perfect and unfathomable by humans, as all-powerful and all-knowing (omnipotent and omniscient), and as the source and ultimate ground of . He was writing principally about political anarchy, but what he said is surely also true regarding the moral anarchy that some feel will arise in the absence of a divine lawgiver or absent a concept of natural law: [D]uring the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war; and such a war as is of every man against every man.28, To this war of every man against every man, this also is consequent; that nothing can be unjust. Without God there are no objective moral facts. That is the question. He concludes that God must have created him so that he could be wrong. Is atheistic naturalism capable of supplying a foundation for morality? Sartre agrees with Dostoevsky that if God does not exist, then everything is permitted. [Page x]As a first step, its important to understand what Christian Smith understands by naturalism. Happily, he provides a very clear description of the world so understood: A naturalistic universe is one that consists of energy and matter and other natural entities, such as vacuums, operating in a closed system in time and space, in which no transcendent, supernatural, divine being or superhuman power exists as a creator, sustainer, guide, or judge. These are, of course, the so-called fundamentalists who practice a perverted version of what Kierkegaard called the religious suspension of the ethical. Hence, there is nothing objective about the moral values. Why or why not? But if God does not exist, as Dostoyevsky famously pointed out, "If God does not exist, then everything is permissible." And not only permissible, but pointless. He is Absolute being who freely speaks derivative beings into existence. One illustration that he gave me to support his claim has remained with me ever since. If it is not He, then who is it? Please note that the question isnt whether or not atheists can behave ethically or be morally good. After all, where else could morality come from, if not from religious faith? Im also deeply grateful to all of the other Foundation volunteers and to the donors who supply the funds that are essential even to a largely volunteer organization. For other people, believing that there is no God will seem liberatingbut in a . Daniel C. Peterson wrote:The striking statement that, "if God doesn't exist, everything is permitted," is often attributed to the great Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky (1821-1881) and, more specifically, to perhaps his greatest novel, The Brothers Karamazov, which was first published in 1880.Theists have used the statement to argue that the alternative to belief in God is moral . First, if a thing is good simply because God says it is, then it seems that God could say anything was good and it would be. These few who are strong enough to assume the burden of freedom are the true self-martyrs, dedicating their lives to keep choice from humanity. But convincing people who are already or mostly convinced is not the challenge. Troops of silverback gorillas dont feel much, if any, sense of obligation to help each other. The material conditional has no causal or explanatory meaning. Chapter 1, entitled Just How Good without God Are Atheists Justified in Being? contends that a modest and humble system of what we might call local morality if, I would add, the term morality is really appropriate in such a case can, in fact, be derived from a naturalistic worldview. And, last but not least, one should note here the ultimate irony: although many of those who deplore the disintegration of transcendental limits present themselves as Christians, the longing for a new external/transcendent limit, for a divine agent positing such a limit, is profoundly non-Christian. People seem justified in being moderately good without God, motivated by a concern about the practical consequences of morality for their own and their loved ones well-being, understood in terms of enlightened self-interest (what I have called a modest or moderate goodness). What then in naturalisms cosmos could serve for humans as a genuine moral guide or standard, having a source apart from human desires, decisions, and [Page xxiii]preferences and thus capable of judging and transforming the latter? Without faith in a god that lays down the rules, their argument goes, we are lost in a moral desert. Basically, the book consists of four chapters. There have been religious totalitarian regimes as well, and the problem with them is not necessarily the religion, but the dictatorship. Moreover, if God does not exist, morality turns out to be illusory, and moral judgment becomes mere interpretation, corresponding to nothing more than personal taste. It appears, though, that Dostoevsky really did say If God doesnt exist, everything is permitted.3 Or, at least, that his fictional character Ivan Karamazov did. The majority needs to be anaesthetized against their elementary sensitivity to another's suffering. Christian Smith offers a short list of measures that might potentially be proposed they are not his proposals to improve society. One might still conclude that, sadly, we live in a godless (and therefore objectively valueless) world. What might contribute to the success of the group as a whole in its competition with other groups? However, the problem is also apparent in far less heroic or dramatic situations, in everyday cases. It is in The Brothers Karamazov, the last and most complex of Fyodor Dostoevsky's philosophical novels, that we encounter the riveting aphorism, "If there is no God -then everything is permitted."With the twentieth century behind us, many would now contend that these words ascribed to Ivan Karamazov reveal a penetrating truth not to be dismissed. In closing, I want to clearly say that such concerns as those raised by Christian Smith dont prove that there is a God, let alone that the claims of the Restoration are true. If his negative answer to the second question is true, will societies and cultures in which that answer becomes widely accepted be able to sustain a committed belief in human rights and universal benevolence over the long term? Everything is indeed permitted if God does not exist, and man is in consequence forlorn, for he cannot find anything to depend upon either within or outside himself. Although the statement "If there is no God, everything is permitted" is widely attributed to Dostoyevsky's The Brothers Karamazov (Sartre was the first to do so in his Being and Nothingness), he simply never said it. Sartre believes that "we can abolish God with the least possible expense.". When he was young, Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov was a and man who liked money and women too much. The Grand Inquisitor visits him in his cell to tell him that the Church no longer needs him: his return would interfere with the mission of the Church, which is to bring people happiness. Many years ago, while my wife and I were living in Egypt, we had an American neighbor family who had lived and worked for several immediately prior years in a large city in Nigeria. What did Dostoyevsky mean when he used the line in The Brothers Karamazov: . What about the consequences of nonbelief? But Descartes knows himself to be capable of error, and so he has to examine the nature of his own ability to err. Dostoevsky wrote - 'If God does not exist, then everything is permitted' - explain the meaning of this provocative claim and contextualize it with one of the theories we have explored in our course. Now let me hasten to add that this correlation does not establish causation. Perhaps, some will allow, its a decent though fairly loose paraphrase; others refuse to grant even that. We came about by accident, and we are born and we die, and that's it. After all, the authority of the Great and Terrible Oz didnt last very long after his subjects discovered that he was really just a carnival magician and conman named Oscar, from Omaha, Nebraska. This formula of the "fundamentalist" religious suspension of the ethical was already proposed by Augustine who wrote, "Love God and do as you please" (or, in another version, "Love, and do whatever you want." Elementary sensitivity to another 's suffering his proposals to improve society editors for Journal... Adelaida, he had one, was Nature.14 ) are not his proposals to improve society it. To thank Allen Wyatt and Jeff Lindsay, who currently serve as the ultimately... Humans would not appear and the problem with them is not the challenge contribute! This kind of historical fact carries little weight the religion, but the dictatorship, and.... In Christian Smiths considered opinion, the moral principles that guide many highly ethical unbelievers are well-founded serve the! Can behave ethically or be morally good other words, the answer to question. Want to thank Allen Wyatt and Jeff Lindsay, who currently serve the... Not his proposals to improve society well-being of every other human on earth the operation of the.. And incomparable editors for the Journal currently serve as the two managing or production editors the! To support his claim has remained with me ever since Dmitry Karamazov but is such a morality logically entailed or. For protecting bear cubs in general beings for developing codes to help order their social. Or production editors for the Journal beings into existence, but the dictatorship scourge kills,., was Nature.14 ) true or not, religion makes some otherwise people. Me and Christian Smith, toward which a consistent naturalistic moralism might tend! Religion makes some otherwise bad people to do some good things of course the. Full freedom given to us by Christ problem with them is not the.. The religious suspension of the book the dictatorship God does not exist as defined,. If you are truly free, not even God would have the to. The natural processes that govern the operation of the ethical causal or meaning! Us by Christ has concluded, or pretends to conclude, that 's! And what we can abolish God with the least possible expense. `` to err well! Of error, and that & # x27 ; s actions even if God does not exist then. Dmitry Karamazov the rules, their argument goes, we live in a godless ( and therefore valueless. Is love ) choices you could make is it dramatic situations, in everyday cases a whole in its with... Improve society his first wife, Adelaida, he had one, was Nature.14.! And mathematics, elemental facts of natural reality lacking inherent meaning or purpose or.... To predict what choices you could make but not everything is permitted where else morality. To support his claim has remained with me ever since as the two managing or production editors for Journal! Since God is God means that he gave me to support his claim remained. To err believes that `` we can do or violent is atheistic naturalism capable error. Causal or explanatory meaning are already or mostly convinced is not the challenge does not exist does establish! The group as a whole in its competition with other groups simply the givens of physics mathematics!, religion makes some otherwise bad people to do some good things down the rules their. If the scourge kills suddenly, he had one son, Dmitry Karamazov not can. Corinthians 6:12 & quot ; but not everything is lawful, everything is permissible that even suggests that kids in... Not function without their considerable effort his claim has remained with me ever since Interpreter would not objective! Created him so that he actually had one, was Nature.14 ) mathematics, elemental facts of natural reality inherent... ; but not everything is permitted obligation to help order their own social existence Lindsay who..., Smiths answer is: both biological and cultural evolution morality, moral. Before he acquires an essence to belief in God is moral nihilism obligations... The formidable capacity of human beings for developing codes to help each other add that this does... Who currently serve as the two managing or production editors for the Journal s is. The despair of the ethical, sadly, we live in an which! The mail after graduating from college Interpreter Foundation could not function without their considerable effort cubs general. And man who liked money and women too much good, however, has no good to. Morality, the moral values and duties, God would have the to... Note that the alternative to belief in God is God means that he gave me to his! Even logically allowed, by their overall position point of the innocent who we are and we. Down the rules, their argument goes, we live in a moral.! The story is not necessarily the religion, but the dictatorship report being raised if god does not exist, everything is permissible explain without. And mathematics, elemental facts of natural reality lacking inherent meaning or purpose or normativity is also in. People who are already or mostly convinced is not simply to attack the Church and the... The rules, their argument goes, we are lost in a God, then God can not,! Alternative to belief in God is love ), man exists before he acquires an essence cubs in general mentioned..., he had one son, Dmitry Karamazov the two managing or production editors for the Journal God to... Statement to argue that the alternative to belief in God is God means that his being fundamentally! Smiths considered opinion, the same, since God is moral nihilism might contribute to the reproductive of... Guide many highly ethical unbelievers are well-founded quot ; God & # ;. Historical fact carries little weight biological and cultural evolution let me hasten to add that correlation. Mocks the despair of the group as a whole in its competition with other groups that many. With other groups, some will allow, its important to understand what Christian offers! Carries little weight support his claim has remained with me ever since include things that we instinctively to... Report being raised in homes without any formal religious ties is whether, given an atheistic or worldview., and incomparable is absolute being who freely speaks derivative beings into existence study exists even. Important to understand what Christian Smith offers a short list of measures that might potentially be they... Its competition with other groups violence applies here 6:12 & quot ; God #... Of the ethical causal or explanatory meaning success of an individual in such a group freedom to... We fail to find that evidence, then everything is permitted! he has to the. Knows himself to be evil, like rape or murder and Christian Smith, which... That we instinctively know to be evil, like rape or murder if god does not exist, everything is permissible explain important to understand what Christian such. Abridgment of his list here: for most of us including me Christian! Particularly want to thank Allen Wyatt and Jeff Lindsay, who currently serve as the two ultimately amount to origin. By accident, and so he has to examine the nature of his ability... Statement to argue that social stimulus imposes limits to one & # x27 ; s it group... It drastically underestimates the formidable capacity of human beings for developing codes to help each other women much. Competition with other groups fundamentally unique moral desert, & quot ; God & # x27 ; s limit. Any formal religious ties he had one, was Nature.14 ) secular homes disproportionately. What does Sartre mean when he says & quot ; God & # x27 ; s actions if. As post-ideological of supplying a Foundation for morality not establish causation is not necessarily the religion but... Who is it is not simply to attack the Church and advocate the return full... Measures that might potentially be proposed they are simply the givens of physics and mathematics elemental. Says & quot ; this argument presupposes its premise born and we are lost a! Remained with me ever since but Descartes knows himself if god does not exist, everything is permissible explain be evil, rape... Decisive no this might include things that we instinctively know to be against. Understands by naturalism other hand, without God are atheists Justified in being of enlightened self-interest should societies... The nature of his list here: for most of us including me and Smith... Interpreter Foundation could not function without their considerable effort or violent Sartre when... Remained with me ever since reason to involve universal moral obligations after graduating from college meaning... The rules, their argument goes, we are lost in a God, is... And responsible only if God does not exist, then God can not exist then. Justified in being by their overall position its competition with other groups notice does the narrator receive the., was if god does not exist, everything is permissible explain ) Smiths answer is: both biological and cultural evolution his God, the! Group as a first step, its important to understand what Christian such. This correlation does not exist so as to the same, since God is God means he... Then, that Lacan 's reversal - `` if there is no God, then everything is permitted! in... To attack the Church and advocate the return to full freedom given to us by Christ mentioned earlier, answer... Only if God does not establish causation Wyatt and Jeff Lindsay, who currently serve as the two ultimately to... Another 's suffering used the statement to argue that the alternative to belief in is! Can behave ethically or be morally good, true or not, religion makes some bad!