What teaches an athiest to be honest

This is assuming humans require an external guider. Not all seem to require this. Also, reference Maslows Hierarchy of Needs (Google summary)


"How Unmet Needs Create a Need for Authority


The "Jungle" Worldview:

Maslow noted that individuals with extreme insecurity view the world as a dangerous jungle where safety is maintained only through power, dominance, and strict submission.

Trading Freedom for Safety: When lower-level safety and belonging needs are threatened, people often surrender personal autonomy to authority figures or groups in exchange for protection and a sense of inclusion.

Authoritarian Dynamics: Authoritarian groups and cults exploit basic human anxieties, leveraging the need for belonging to punish dissenters and reward absolute obedience.



How Self-Actualized People Relate to AuthorityAutonomy from Culture:

Self-actualizing individuals are intrinsically guided by their own moral compass and independent judgment rather than cultural pressures or external approval.

Resistance to Coercion: Highly mature individuals display democratic values and an active resistance to arbitrary social control, manipulation, or unjust power dynamics.

Respect Based on Competence: Rather than submitting to fear or status, a self-actualized person evaluates authority through mutual respect, truth-seeking, and shared humane purposes.

This is going to be an unpopular statement, but: they don't. Not because humans are incapable of forming moral frameworks based on their own reasoning, but because among them, atheists don't actually exist; we're simply not wired for it.

Broadly speaking, we can divide the gods into three categories: the supernatural, the natural, and the artificial. The supernatural are what most people think of when they hear the word "god": Yahweh, Mazda, Zeus, guys like that. Their existence is a matter of faith. The natural gods DO exist; they're Power, Pleasure, Fear, and so on. The artificial are mostly refinements (often presented as aspects or avatars) of the other two categories. They, similarly, do exist, but rely on humanity for their creation, and usually their sustenance: Status, Approval, and of course, the Almighty Dollar.

You are, likely, dubious, claiming those aren't worshiped in the same way that the supernatural gods are. Experiment, then: take a thick wad of single dollar bills, walk on to a busy road's overpass, and toss them down, one by one- you'll people run into traffic to grab them, risking their health and their lives for what they could get with just a few minutes' work (as per local minimum wage laws). If it walks like a god and quacks like a god...

All that said, if you only practice moral behavior for fear of retribution (be it from god or government or any other external entity), then are you really being moral, or just cowardly?

It doesnt stop someone from being a decent person.

If the only reason you're a good person is the fear of punishment, are you really good?

Common sense, an innate sense of morality. And, looking around the world, believing in a god/goddess sure does NOT seem to have created any kind of universal honesty among believers.

Honestly, I don't think a sizable portion of the population gets that concept. They are able to rationalize any action they take, habitual lying included.

With atheists the choice is a decision to be a good person and not to harm others. They don’t need the incentive of a god watching or punishing.

I would say an innate conscience. That conscience keeps us from doing many things.

But, all humans lie one way or another, even science has proven that.

Well, I am certainly neurodivergent in ways and all I have to say is that my mom's obsession to take me to the priest to confess my sins, and amongst my sins being to never tell any lies, simply encouraged my awkwardness to spill the truth out, even in improper situations. I have suffered for having no filters when it comes to my speech. So, there's that I had to share.

You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.


It basically means you do not need an expert or authority figure to tell you what is obvious.

It would I imagine involve how circumstances are shaped by doing things the proper and the improper way, but to go deeper, which would be needful would require 1) a more in-depth analysis, and 2) someone smarter than me.