
Uncomfortable Questions We’re Not Meant to Ask About Our Secular Culture
Our secular culture tells us that the secular (atheistic) view of life is rational and scientific.
Religions like Christianity, we’re told, are little more than myths that we need to scrap to become enlightened, logical and reasonable people. Christians need to ‘grow up’ and face the reality that Christianity is irrational and false (not to mention harmful).
But is that true? Is the secular view of life rational and logical?
Or does our culture’s secular view of life raise issues that are uncomfortable and difficult to answer?
Here are 5 questions that I’ve found our secular culture has difficulty answering — questions we’re not really meant to ask, because they raise the uncomfortable possibility that the secular view of life just doesn’t fit reality:
1) How does accidental, atheistic evolution give us universal morality and human rights?
A common secular belief is that evolution gave us morality: in this view, ‘love’ is right because it was a beneficial instinct for the survival of our ancestors, thus passed down genetically to us. And so, we hold to loving our neighbour today.
But this raises the question: if ‘love’ is just a chemical reaction that helped our ancestors survive, why would we be morally obligated to obey it today? Furthermore, we have other emotions like ‘selfishness’ (presumably, in this view, also something that helped our ancestors survive). Is selfishness, then, a desire we also should obey?
Another common belief is that human reason alone can give us morality, but this, too, is problematic.
If we’re nothing more than slightly more evolved animals, where do human rights and moral obligations come from?
2) If we get meaning from the things around us (e.g. family, health, money etc.), how does the secular view of life help us when we lose those things?
Our secular world no longer looks to God for meaning and purpose: instead, we make up our meaning and purpose. We look to things around us to give life meaning and purpose.
But how does the secular view of life help us if and when we lose those things, whether through ill circumstances, boredom, age, or death?
3) What resources does a secular view of life give for self-sacrifice or giving up your life for the benefit of others?
Western societies have traditionally valued self-sacrifice, even to the point of giving up your life for the good of others — and to a significant extent, we still value this.
But what resources does a secular view of life — that this life is all there is and that life is ultimately meaningless — give to encourage people to be self-sacrificial?
4) Is the secular view of life as ultimately meaningless ‘livable’?
Can you consistently believe that your life and everyone else’s is, in the ultimate scheme of things, meaningless?
Very few, if any, can live their lives embracing the view that their life is ultimately meaningless. They ignore or suppress that view.
And this leads to the final question:
5) If we need to suppress the secular view of reality to get by in life, is that a rational way to live?
If the implications of the secular view of life are too harsh to think about, such that we need to ignore rather than embrace it, is that a rational way to live? That is, if you need to ‘make up’ another view of life because reality is too harsh to contemplate, how is that rational?
___
Originally published at AkosBalogh.com. Photo by Liza Summer.
2 Comments
Leave A Comment
Recent Articles:
6 August 2026
3.3 MINS
Facing closure, St Mary's church congregation has refused to surrender. The 900-year-old medieval building's dedicated parish has secured a crucial heritage grant to begin its long-overdue restoration.
6 August 2026
2.2 MINS
Transgender actress Elliot Page has sparked debate by citing chimpanzee behaviour to justify gender ideology. We’ve lost God, and now our spiritual collapse means we’re taking moral cues from monkeys. What could possibly go wrong?
6 August 2026
5.3 MINS
Boy George's new song "We Will Dance Again" challenges the anti-Israel narrative dominating cultural discourse. The British pop icon has risked his career to stand for Israel and Jewish people — but the backlash has been swift and severe.
5 August 2026
6.9 MINS
Census night is less than a week away, and the religion question is more confusing than it should be. Here’s exactly how Christians — practising or not — should answer it, and why the ABS’s design deserves scrutiny.
5 August 2026
5.2 MINS
Jesus’ words are not a suggestion, but a call to action for every believer. When we represent Jesus, when His life is formed in us and expressed through us, we become light in a world that still walks in darkness.
5 August 2026
2.3 MINS
What happens when the side arguing 'the West shouldn't be suspicious of Islam' essentially tells their opponents: 'Be nice to us or the mob outside will get you'? An Oxford debate provides the answer.
4 August 2026
5.2 MINS
How do you feel about listening to music that's been made totally through machine learning? Does it matter if you can't tell if it was made by a human or AI? Could the lyrics and emotion still resonate with you? Now, what about AI music made to worship God, or spread the Christian message — does it actually matter?






If a sixth, and in fact more fundamental, reason could be added, it is the very basic act of thought and reason. I came across this article just yesterday from three years ago, where Professor John Lennox quotes atheist philosopher Thomas Nagel and Christian physicist John Polkinghorne, both in agreement in relation to the inability of science to explain how natural causes can lead to our ability to reason.
https://evolutionnews.org/2020/07/why-science-and-atheism-dont-mix/
Another that I’ve found useful is this from C S Lewis:
“Supposing there was no intelligence behind the universe, no creative mind. In that case, nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen, for physical or chemical reasons, to arrange themselves in a certain way, this gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But, if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? It’s like upsetting a milk jug and hoping that the way it splashes itself will give you a map of London. But if I can’t trust my own thinking, of course I can’t trust the arguments leading to Atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an Atheist, or anything else. Unless I believe in God, I cannot believe in thought: so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God.”
Akos, thank you for this debate with the atheist. It was so insightful and thank you Kim for your riders