Of Heathens and Heresy

On Mr. Wright's blog an atheist by the name of Rolf Andreassen who also happens to be a physicist asserts that a sense of fairness intrinsic to man by the internal nature-of-his-mind has moral authority arising from its power to compel his mind to agreement.  This is an interesting argument in that it has parallels to orthodox Christian belief and yet shows the caustic nature of heresy but let's set that aside for the moment and unpack his assertion.

For his argument a sense of fairness is considered the ur moral rule that is built into man.  This sense of fairness is then compared by him to eyesight.  For some their eyesight is impaired or underdeveloped, and in others it is missing altogether.  So then, goes his assertion, is the sense of fairness in man.  Interestingly his analogy does not touch upon those whose eyesight is superior to the norm, nor does he address how mechanical correction, to use his term, or enhancement (think of a microscope or telescope) might apply to man's sense of fairness.

Dr. Andreassen's argument is then that through the process of evolution into a social species man has developed a sense of fairness that is commonly though imperfectly shared across all of humankind.  The standard for what is fair is then set by him as what an impartial man with perfect knowledge and understanding of a situation who also has sufficient time to make the decision would do in that particular situation.  Again there is a certain parallel to orthodox Christian belief but more interesting is the inherent contradiction of the logic used.

Starting from the premise that moral authority arises solely from a sense intrinsic to an individual, we find that we have segued into moral authority as authentic because it has broad commonality (though imperfectly realized) among mankind, to finally arrive at a perfect individual (which is understood as being unreal) being the real arbiter (standard) of fairness.  This means that Dr. Andreassen's assertion that moral authority arises from within a man's internal nature compelling his mind into agreement is inchoate and not in agreement with the philosophy that he believes to naturally flow from it.  In other words, a man can and indeed must be compelled by others to submit to their sense of fairness as the group may believe the individual's sense of fairness deficient in some manner or another even if he believes it unfair that he be so coerced.  This situation rapidly devolves into no one is right because everyone is right.

Unless of course his imaginary perfect man could come forward and provide an ethic for men to follow so that they could be more like him.

A word on the caustic nature of heresy.  Before I embraced the Eastern Orthodox faith I was wary of the term heresy.  Heresy seemed to me a hateful phrase and something with which to bludgeon intellectual curiosity.  Instead now, it seems to me, a constraint to help intellectual curiosity by providing a sense of discipline to thought.  When one comes to think, for example, of Jesus as simply a man (or even an imaginary man) then it becomes simple to become unmoored from the truth of His message -- a truth that in many ways apostate and heathen atheists agree with.  But because of the particular heresy or heresies that have been embraced novel ways of arriving at truths have to be found and upon these strange, dark, and twisted pathways men often become lost and find themselves accepting and embracing falsehoods and sin and with no light or map to guide them back to safety or their true destination.