Christopher Hitchen's Atheist Challenge Answered

"Here is my challenge. Let Gerson name one ethical statement made, or one ethical action performed, by a believer that could not have been uttered or done by a nonbeliever."

Thats the challenge afforded to Micheal Gerson in one of Christopher Hitchen's Washington Post articles. He then claimed that he has been making this challenge "for some time" and has yet to receive a "convincing reply".

So I thought to myself... Every question deserves an answer, right? And while I may not be a renowned theologian or philosopher I figured I might give it a shot.

Well, here it goes. How about: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

The statement itself may not seem to answer the question but thats because its the idea behind it is whats really important which is that there are many ways in which we are unequal from a human perspective, for instance we all have different levels of intellect and physical ability. For example I am not the intellectual equal of Stephen Hawking nor am I the physical equal of Brian Urlacher. Thus it would seem that we are unequal from a purely natural perspective.

But when we look at the difference between us and God it makes the differences we see between each other utterly superficial. And that is the major logical linchpin of this argument. With believe in a higher power comes the perspective necessary for each of us to see ourselves as neither intrinsically superior or inferior to one another.

However, without a belief in a higher power it seems to me that it is impossible to justify any type of egalitarian society. After all, like I outlined before, there are many ways in which we are unequal from a strictly natural standpoint as I noted before.

And trust me I'm certainly not the first to notice the differences that exist among us. In fact these inequalities have been used throughout history to justify things from slavery to genocide to segregation. The Nazis argued they were more highly evolved than everyone else and used that to justify enslaving and killing millions. The Japanese empire did the same. The popular American eugenics movement of the 1920s and 30s used the exact same logic. And on a lighter note even the book the famous Mr.Scopes taught from stated that "At the present time there exist upon the earth five races or varieties of man ... the highest type of all, the Caucasians, represented by the civilized white inhabitants of Europe and America"... Although maybe thats not a lighter note.

Now I am certainly not saying that atheists hold these beliefs, in fact I am quite sure most of them do not approve of this line of reasoning. But regardless I just don't see any way for atheistic philosophy to logically refute the claims of the Nazis, Japanese empire, Eugenicists, or even Hunter's Civic Biology Book (from the scopes case).

Maybe I'm missing something... Perhaps someone can provide me with a sound logical justification for egalitarianism without the relying on belief in a higher power?