In “The God Delusion”, Richard Dawkins argues that morality does not originate from religion. According to him, people do not need an omnipotent omniscient entity to stop them from turning into wild nasty beasts. To justify his view, Dawkins uses a Darwinian perspective to argue that morality originates from the evolution of altruistic genes that eventually serve the purpose of preserving one’s kind. When put that way, it really doesn’t sound all that altruistic. But Dawkins does manage to build a solid argument backing his theory. You’d have to read the entire chapter, though, to be more or less convinced.Anyways, I can think of another field that might come in handy in explaining why the lack of belief in a supernatural power overseeing every movement and every thought does not necessarily equate primitive immoral behavior: Economics. As unlikely as it might first seem, I think that the concept of “Game Theory” provides an excellent explanation. Game theory is a mathematical tool applied in business economics to study the interaction of a number of firms in different situations. The theory basically concludes that firms who know that they are likely to interact frequently with each other on the long run tend to be more cooperative rather than aggressive towards each other.
On a personal level, if you know you’re going to be seeing your neighbor, for example, for a number of years to come, you’re more likely to act politely towards them. You know it’d make your life miserable to do otherwise. The same idea applies to wider circles. When a person earns a reputation in a community for being particularly nasty, it really just makes everything more complicated for that person. Ergo, no matter what you believe -or don't believe- in, living a decent moral life is pretty much the way to go.