The Transcendence of Conscience

We are at the mercy of a higher source of truth

Atheism, nihilism and existentialism tell us that fundamentally life is without meaning, and that morality is merely relative. Furthermore, they claim that only reason we even have morality is its utility in maintaining social order, and to regulate ourselves arbitrarily. However, I’d like to explore the possibility that morality may be real in a more fundamental sense beyond our comprehension.

It is noteworthy that one cannot command one’s own conscience. It is not possible to overrule the innate sense of right and wrong that seems embedded deep within each of us. It is not the case that you can choose to act how you wish all the time and not be confronted with a moral feeling. People have tried violating their own conscience and paying no regard to it, but it doesn’t seem to work- if it did then we would likely all become hedonists.

Where this transcendent force within us comes from is not easily explained through social narrative. As the West has turned its back on religion, its inhabitants have not been freed from the effects of conscience. This is what is meant by real; whatever we tell ourselves, we are at the mercy of a greater moral compass, and we know this from how we act. The atheist will still lie awake at 4am for a lie they are responsible for, no matter how hard they try to intellectually deconstruct the morality behind it. No one argues with suffering. Everyone acts as if it is real, rather than claiming it is meaningless. This is because of the profound effect it has on us, and likely why it is a central tenet to multiple religions (for example in Buddhism, one of the four Noble Truths is dukkha, that life is suffering).

And it is also interesting to note that conscience seems to point in a specific direction, as if to orient us towards a ‘real’ truth. It is not the case that we lie awake for having told the truth, but for telling a lie. Why is this?

This is a case to say that you don’t have to necessarily accept all the claims associated with a specific religion to understand that there might be a transcendent truth. Atheism’s rejection of the shallow claims of religion neglects to deal with a more fundamental narrative. In some sense the transcendent force within can be characterised as something like the Holy Spirit, or God, and that can hold as true even if shrouded in mystery.

Nietzsche’s famous proclamation of “God is dead, and we have killed Him” was not one of triumph, but of warning. There is the obvious warning that without God we are lost, and we have no foundation to properly orient ourselves from. But one could say there is a subtle warning, that what we have really destroyed is not morality itself, but our understanding of there being a real transcendent force we must contend with, even if not formulated as God.

Therefore, the utility of conscience, or a moral sense, goes far beyond social order. It points to a truth that we might not understand but still hold. We can run, but we cannot hide. When asked if he believed in God, the psychology professor Jordan Peterson said “I act as if God exists”. This to me seems to be a far more honest answer to the fundamentals of the question.