Being "moral" has nothing to do with staying in or out of jail. There are lots of immoral acts that are not crimes. Most of us have been indoctrinated in some way to believe in a set of "morals". How does one develop a sense of what is right or wrong? What is the standard that you use? I think a lot of religous ideals have crept into the standards of "right and wrong". People look to these as the standard regardless of whether they believe in a god or not.
Do Atheists have any reason to be moral?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
You are accepting a Darwinistic point of view when it comes to morality. I disagree. Although i believe in evolution, i don't think it explains morality -- because morality remains exclusive to human-kind.Despite what many people believe, religion didn't "invent" morality. What people think is "moral" is a simple biological instinct early man had that would ensure the survival of themselves and others around them. After all, if you killed all your tribesmen just for the heck of it, then who's going to help you hunt that Wooly Mammoth for food? Who are you going to reproduce with? Who's going to help protect you from Sabretooth Cats or other human tribes?
I'm not saying that the entirety of morality was based off the works of cavemen, but that what we see as "right" or "wrong" is based off of our own biological intelligence as to what would benefit you and the others around you more. The use of a caveman example is just a representation of humanity at it's most basic form. When society had evolved towards something greater, so had morality; the ideas of stealing, rape, etc being "wrong" by most societies was taken into consideration and now most people across the world find such actions to be wrong. Not all groups do, however, since morality is subjective.
Also, who cares if somebody has "a reason" to be moral or not? The fact that said people are acting moral (regardless of believing in a religion or not) shows that they have enough intelligence and willpower to overcome such a primitive mindset. I'd respect somebody more if they followed moral guidelines because they felt it was right rather than if they followed moral guidelines because they feared punishment if they didn't.
-Jiggles-
[QUOTE="-Jiggles-"]You are accepting a Darwinistic point of view when it comes to morality. I disagree. Although i believe in evolution, i don't think it explains morality -- because morality remains exclusive to human-kind. The human concept of morality can only be applied to an action driven by conscious and intelligent thought, that's why it's exclusive. Morality as a concept was created by humans to fit human behaviour.Despite what many people believe, religion didn't "invent" morality. What people think is "moral" is a simple biological instinct early man had that would ensure the survival of themselves and others around them. After all, if you killed all your tribesmen just for the heck of it, then who's going to help you hunt that Wooly Mammoth for food? Who are you going to reproduce with? Who's going to help protect you from Sabretooth Cats or other human tribes?
I'm not saying that the entirety of morality was based off the works of cavemen, but that what we see as "right" or "wrong" is based off of our own biological intelligence as to what would benefit you and the others around you more. The use of a caveman example is just a representation of humanity at it's most basic form. When society had evolved towards something greater, so had morality; the ideas of stealing, rape, etc being "wrong" by most societies was taken into consideration and now most people across the world find such actions to be wrong. Not all groups do, however, since morality is subjective.
Also, who cares if somebody has "a reason" to be moral or not? The fact that said people are acting moral (regardless of believing in a religion or not) shows that they have enough intelligence and willpower to overcome such a primitive mindset. I'd respect somebody more if they followed moral guidelines because they felt it was right rather than if they followed moral guidelines because they feared punishment if they didn't.
Stumpt25
[QUOTE="Stumpt25"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]Well OBVIOUSLY (?) when a religious person says he/she feels something (remorse etc) he/she ALWAYS means it, but an atheist by far won't mean it... right? Well I hope you are one of those few religious people that mean what they say and confess cause honestly, I haven't met any. That kind of categorization is at least unfair.Teenagedhuh? did i ever say that atheists can't give a genuine apology? secondly, how do you know whether a religious person asked for forgiveness dishonestly? Did they say to you "I prayed for forgiveness for committing adultery but i didn't mean it lol!" or something...... just seems wierd thing for you to know....It's not all that hard to "read" one's behaviour and I'm not talking about people that are complete strangers to me! Religion is much like a parent. When a child has his parents reminder constantly telling him "do this" "do that" he won't learn to have morals "inside" him but more likely seek out for the parent's consulting. Isn't it time people, like the grown ups they are, acted without the constant reminder of god. OBVIOUSLY (!) some people have felt that are ready to act and to answer to themselves alone. Not because that gives them freedom to do ANYTHING but because they feel mature enough to lead a life without God's watch. No... the initial point i was making is that: a person cannot do every immoral thing that they want to do (murder, rape, or whatever) and then, 5 minutes before they die, say "Sorry god!" and then get into heaven. God can see straight through them, and if they don't feel genuine remorse for doing wrong, he wont let them into heaven. However, IF THEY DO feel remorse, he can. Secondly, i'm guessing that when you said "Well I hope you are one of those few religious people that mean what they say and confess cause honestly, I haven't met any". you basically meant "Loads of religious people don't practice what they preach / they aren't perfect all the time." That's the point though. We are all sinners, and we aren't perfect. Often we'll apologise for sinning and then commit the same thing again a week later - It doesn't matter. As long as your apology is genuine, you are forgiven each time.
Despite what many people believe, religion didn't "invent" morality. What people think is "moral" is a simple biological instinct early man had that would ensure the survival of themselves and others around them. After all, if you killed all your tribesmen just for the heck of it, then who's going to help you hunt that Wooly Mammoth for food? Who are you going to reproduce with? Who's going to help protect you from Sabretooth Cats or other human tribes?
I'm not saying that the entirety of morality was based off the works of cavemen, but that what we see as "right" or "wrong" is based off of our own biological intelligence as to what would benefit you and the others around you more. The use of a caveman example is just a representation of humanity at it's most basic form. When society had evolved towards something greater, so had morality; the ideas of stealing, rape, etc being "wrong" by most societies was taken into consideration and now most people across the world find such actions to be wrong. Not all groups do, however, since morality is subjective.
Also, who cares if somebody has "a reason" to be moral or not? The fact that said people are acting moral (regardless of believing in a religion or not) shows that they have enough intelligence and willpower to overcome such a primitive mindset. I'd respect somebody more if they followed moral guidelines because they felt it was right rather than if they followed moral guidelines because they feared punishment if they didn't.
-Jiggles-
Hello there. :)
You are correct.
I don't know where people get the idea that morality comes from the bible, when not only is the bible brimming with unchecked recklessness by the creator himself, but in the parts of the bible that are actually respectable (suprisingly), where did the authors get their idea of morality from? It didn't just dawn on them at the moment they began to pen their stories. They already had felt that way.
[QUOTE="_______1_______"][QUOTE="-Jiggles-"]Stumpt25
where did the authors get their idea of morality from?
This may not have dawned on you possibly.... but perhaps... God?this, though, is a belief rather than a fact. :)[QUOTE="-Jiggles-"]You are accepting a Darwinistic point of view when it comes to morality. I disagree. Although i believe in evolution, i don't think it explains morality -- because morality remains exclusive to human-kind.Despite what many people believe, religion didn't "invent" morality. What people think is "moral" is a simple biological instinct early man had that would ensure the survival of themselves and others around them. After all, if you killed all your tribesmen just for the heck of it, then who's going to help you hunt that Wooly Mammoth for food? Who are you going to reproduce with? Who's going to help protect you from Sabretooth Cats or other human tribes?
I'm not saying that the entirety of morality was based off the works of cavemen, but that what we see as "right" or "wrong" is based off of our own biological intelligence as to what would benefit you and the others around you more. The use of a caveman example is just a representation of humanity at it's most basic form. When society had evolved towards something greater, so had morality; the ideas of stealing, rape, etc being "wrong" by most societies was taken into consideration and now most people across the world find such actions to be wrong. Not all groups do, however, since morality is subjective.
Also, who cares if somebody has "a reason" to be moral or not? The fact that said people are acting moral (regardless of believing in a religion or not) shows that they have enough intelligence and willpower to overcome such a primitive mindset. I'd respect somebody more if they followed moral guidelines because they felt it was right rather than if they followed moral guidelines because they feared punishment if they didn't.
Stumpt25
That is simply because we evolved to be the smartest organisms on this planet. As humans, we can use our intelligence to use logic and reason to assess any sort of situation that would benefit you and/or the others around you. For example, running up and punching a Wooly Mammoth isn't the most logical way to take it down, but throwing spears at it or dumping boulders down upon them is a lot safer and efficient than the former plan of action.
Since humans are social animals, we tend to stay within groups in order to multiply our chances of being successful in fufilling our basic instincts (eating, reproducing, etc). Through time, however, humans realized that cooperation and survival amongst eachother would be more easily accepted if certain guidelines were established (such as "no stealing of another's pig", etc). These guidelines formed the laws of early governments within society, which in effect helped build the foundation for the first major civilizations as well.
The problem you're encountering is that you're thinking of morality as incredibly broad and complex, when in reality it is not. It is the simple ability of humans to apply logic and reason (due to our intelligence) that allows us to make respectable decisions that'd affect the lives of you and those around you. It is our ability to think "Killing other humans is wrong," etc that have helped separate us from other animals.
[QUOTE="Teenaged"][QUOTE="Stumpt25"] huh? did i ever say that atheists can't give a genuine apology? secondly, how do you know whether a religious person asked for forgiveness dishonestly? Did they say to you "I prayed for forgiveness for committing adultery but i didn't mean it lol!" or something...... just seems wierd thing for you to know....Stumpt25It's not all that hard to "read" one's behaviour and I'm not talking about people that are complete strangers to me! Religion is much like a parent. When a child has his parents reminder constantly telling him "do this" "do that" he won't learn to have morals "inside" him but more likely seek out for the parent's consulting. Isn't it time people, like the grown ups they are, acted without the constant reminder of god. OBVIOUSLY (!) some people have felt that are ready to act and to answer to themselves alone. Not because that gives them freedom to do ANYTHING but because they feel mature enough to lead a life without God's watch. No... the initial point i was making is that: a person cannot do every immoral thing that they want to do (murder, rape, or whatever) and then, 5 minutes before they die, say "Sorry god!" and then get into heaven. God can see straight through them, and if they don't feel genuine remorse for doing wrong, he wont let them into heaven. However, IF THEY DO feel remorse, he can. Secondly, i'm guessing that when you said "Well I hope you are one of those few religious people that mean what they say and confess cause honestly, I haven't met any". you basically meant "Loads of religious people don't practice what they preach / they aren't perfect all the time." That's the point though. We are all sinners, and we aren't perfect. Often we'll apologise for sinning and then commit the same thing again a week later - It doesn't matter. As long as your apology is genuine, you are forgiven each time.First: when I am a religious person and blame atheists for being immoral (honestly not referring to you generaly speaking) and then I act hypocriticaly that's not just being imperfect (I know no one's perfect) but it's posing as a person whose taken the right way, but deep down i am as susceptible to "evil" as anybody else. Believe me, I've seen MANY people do this.
Second: We're all sinners? Why? There's a word in greek called "vioma" (don't know in English). It's described as this: when there's a child and from an early childhood everybody's telling him/her that he/she is stupid in the end by the time he matures he WILL act stupid. For me everyone is potentially equal in smartness. The same with sin. If people are raised believing that they are sinners hoping that if they do enough good in this life MAYBE after death they will go to heaven that will not comfort them enough, because in the minds of everyone there's this a doubt (of 1% strong if you like) that there will be no heaven. Do you know what a torture it is for people to know that there's a part of them that's unhealably evil just because Adam and Eve (who are symbols and not actual people) did what they "did".
[QUOTE="Stumpt25"][QUOTE="_______1_______"]This may not have dawned on you possibly.... but perhaps... God?this, though, is a belief rather than a fact. :)where did the authors get their idea of morality from?
Mr_sprinkles
It is fact, you just don't know it yet. (although my word means absolutely nothing to you, so technically, yes, it is belief)
You didn't pick him up on the fact that he stated that all religious texts WERE NOT divinely inspired which is indeed belief, not fact.
No... the initial point i was making is that: a person cannot do every immoral thing that they want to do (murder, rape, or whatever) and then, 5 minutes before they die, say "Sorry god!" and then get into heaven. God can see straight through them, and if they don't feel genuine remorse for doing wrong, he wont let them into heaven. However, IF THEY DO feel remorse, he can. Secondly, i'm guessing that when you said "Well I hope you are one of those few religious people that mean what they say and confess cause honestly, I haven't met any". you basically meant "Loads of religious people don't practice what they preach / they aren't perfect all the time." That's the point though. We are all sinners, and we aren't perfect. Often we'll apologise for sinning and then commit the same thing again a week later - It doesn't matter. As long as your apology is genuine, you are forgiven each time.Stumpt25Hello there. :) So you're saying God doesn't care what you do as long as you feel like crap about it? God champions shame? Why? Does it reinforce his own superiority over the meek? Does he need to feel this reminder? If he does, isn't he vain? If he is vain, is he really a God? Why is God so obsessed with himself? As a youngster, I read through the bible a couple of times. What I remember more than anything was how many times the idea that we are inferior, and that we owe everything to God, was reinforced. God was the one who was doing most of the preaching, always reminding people to follow his ways in order to avoid his wrath. Not only is that a threat, which would only lead to followers gained from fear, and thus not genuine respect, but I also wondered why God is so obsessed with people worshipping him. I don't understand why such a (supposedly) glorious being could have such a one-track mind, solely focused on reminding his creations of their weakness in comparison to him, their submission to him based upon this weakness, and punishment for those who object. I must say I found the God of the bible to be a distinctly vain and contemptible creature, who seemed to have little interest, or at least a reluctant interest in extending the same respect to those whom he demanded it from.
where did the authors get their idea of morality from?
This may not have dawned on you possibly.... but perhaps... God? Hello there. :) This is a theoretical belief influenced by the convenience one would need to believe in, in order to accept such things. As such, it's completely worthless as an excuse.[QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"][QUOTE="Stumpt25"] This may not have dawned on you possibly.... but perhaps... God?Stumpt25this, though, is a belief rather than a fact. :)
It is fact, you just don't know it yet. (although my word means absolutely nothing to you, so technically, yes, it is belief)
You didn't pick him up on the fact that he stated that all religious texts WERE NOT divinely inspired which is indeed belief, not fact.
Hi again. :)
They can claim they were divinely inspired, but what do we know? Again, another belief out of convenience. The divine could simply be our own majesty inspiring us so much, so overwhelmingly, to the point of confusion, where we have become seperated from ourselves, and think we came from a higher power. Which is was happened, by the way. Because everything is one. We made up God. :)
[QUOTE="Stumpt25"]No... the initial point i was making is that: a person cannot do every immoral thing that they want to do (murder, rape, or whatever) and then, 5 minutes before they die, say "Sorry god!" and then get into heaven. God can see straight through them, and if they don't feel genuine remorse for doing wrong, he wont let them into heaven. However, IF THEY DO feel remorse, he can. Secondly, i'm guessing that when you said "Well I hope you are one of those few religious people that mean what they say and confess cause honestly, I haven't met any". you basically meant "Loads of religious people don't practice what they preach / they aren't perfect all the time." That's the point though. We are all sinners, and we aren't perfect. Often we'll apologise for sinning and then commit the same thing again a week later - It doesn't matter. As long as your apology is genuine, you are forgiven each time._______1_______Hello there. :) So you're saying God doesn't care what you do as long as you feel like crap about it? God champions shame? Why? Does it reinforce his own superiority over the meek? Does he need to feel this reminder? If he does, isn't he vain? If he is vain, is he really a God? Why is God so obsessed with himself? As a youngster, I read through the bible a couple of times. What I remember more than anything was how many times the idea that we are inferior, and that we owe everything to God, was reinforced. God was the one who was doing most of the preaching, always reminding people to follow his ways in order to avoid his wrath. Not only is that a threat, which would only lead to followers gained from fear, and thus not genuine respect, but I also wondered why God is so obsessed with people worshipping him. I don't understand why such a (supposedly) glorious being could have such a one-track mind, solely focused on reminding his creations of their weakness in comparison to him, their submission to him based upon this weakness, and punishment for those who object. I must say I found the God of the bible to be a distinctly vain and contemptible creature, who seemed to have little interest, or at least a reluctant interest in extending the same respect to those whom he demanded it from. omg do i bother.... There's a difference between a genuine sorry and one that isn't. It's not about shame or guilt or anything like that. Simple. If you have a child who hits their sibling, and you tell them to "say sorry", then they say it begrudgingly, being angry with them does't make you a 'champion of shame' or 'driven to reinforce my parental superiority over the meek' or 'vein' or 'obsessed with myself'. You just want them to reckognise that they've done something wrong. Surely you can see that? If they say sorry and they mean it, then they've reckoning their wrongdoing and moved on. again, you aren't an evil parent. The second paragraph. I'm too tired to argue in depth but ultimately --> Hell's doors are locked from the inside. If you don't want god, he regretfully grants you your wish.
[QUOTE="Stumpt25"][QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"]this, though, is a belief rather than a fact. :)_______1_______
It is fact, you just don't know it yet. (although my word means absolutely nothing to you, so technically, yes, it is belief)
You didn't pick him up on the fact that he stated that all religious texts WERE NOT divinely inspired which is indeed belief, not fact.
Hi again. :)
They can claim they were divinely inspired, but what do we know? Again, another belief out of convenience. The divine could simply be our own majesty inspiring us so much, so overwhelmingly, to the point of confusion, where we have become seperated from ourselves, and think we came from a higher power. Which is was happened, by the way. Because everything is one. We made up God. :)
Nobody made up Zeus or Odin. They just happened. The rest of religion is all made up though.[QUOTE="Stumpt25"][QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"]this, though, is a belief rather than a fact. :)_______1_______
It is fact, you just don't know it yet. (although my word means absolutely nothing to you, so technically, yes, it is belief)
You didn't pick him up on the fact that he stated that all religious texts WERE NOT divinely inspired which is indeed belief, not fact.
Hi again. :)
They can claim they were divinely inspired, but what do we know? Again, another belief out of convenience. The divine could simply be our own majesty inspiring us so much, so overwhelmingly, to the point of confusion, where we have become seperated from ourselves, and think we came from a higher power. Which is was happened, by the way. Because everything is one. We made up God. :)
That is a belief. ;)
[QUOTE="Stumpt25"][QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"]this, though, is a belief rather than a fact. :)_______1_______
It is fact, you just don't know it yet. (although my word means absolutely nothing to you, so technically, yes, it is belief)
You didn't pick him up on the fact that he stated that all religious texts WERE NOT divinely inspired which is indeed belief, not fact.
We made up God. :)
I'll quote Mr_sprinkles at this point: "this, though, is a belief rather than a fact."[QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"][QUOTE="Stumpt25"] This may not have dawned on you possibly.... but perhaps... God?Stumpt25this, though, is a belief rather than a fact. :)
It is fact, you just don't know it yet. (although my word means absolutely nothing to you, so technically, yes, it is belief)
You didn't pick him up on the fact that he stated that all religious texts WERE NOT divinely inspired which is indeed belief, not fact.
If it were a fact, you would be able to prove it somehow.[QUOTE="Stumpt25"][QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"]this, though, is a belief rather than a fact. :)Mr_sprinkles
It is fact, you just don't know it yet. (although my word means absolutely nothing to you, so technically, yes, it is belief)
You didn't pick him up on the fact that he stated that all religious texts WERE NOT divinely inspired which is indeed belief, not fact.
If it were a fact, you would be able to prove it somehow.Not necessarily.
[QUOTE="_______1_______"][QUOTE="Stumpt25"]It is fact, you just don't know it yet. (although my word means absolutely nothing to you, so technically, yes, it is belief)
You didn't pick him up on the fact that he stated that all religious texts WERE NOT divinely inspired which is indeed belief, not fact.
Stumpt25
We made up God. :)
I'll quote Mr_sprinkles at this point: "this, though, is a belief rather than a fact."It's a fact, you just don't know it yet :P[QUOTE="Stumpt25"]No... the initial point i was making is that: a person cannot do every immoral thing that they want to do (murder, rape, or whatever) and then, 5 minutes before they die, say "Sorry god!" and then get into heaven. God can see straight through them, and if they don't feel genuine remorse for doing wrong, he wont let them into heaven. However, IF THEY DO feel remorse, he can. Secondly, i'm guessing that when you said "Well I hope you are one of those few religious people that mean what they say and confess cause honestly, I haven't met any". you basically meant "Loads of religious people don't practice what they preach / they aren't perfect all the time." That's the point though. We are all sinners, and we aren't perfect. Often we'll apologise for sinning and then commit the same thing again a week later - It doesn't matter. As long as your apology is genuine, you are forgiven each time._______1_______Hello there. :) So you're saying God doesn't care what you do as long as you feel like crap about it? God champions shame? Why? Does it reinforce his own superiority over the meek? Does he need to feel this reminder? If he does, isn't he vain? If he is vain, is he really a God? Why is God so obsessed with himself? As a youngster, I read through the bible a couple of times. What I remember more than anything was how many times the idea that we are inferior, and that we owe everything to God, was reinforced. God was the one who was doing most of the preaching, always reminding people to follow his ways in order to avoid his wrath. Not only is that a threat, which would only lead to followers gained from fear, and thus not genuine respect, but I also wondered why God is so obsessed with people worshipping him. I don't understand why such a (supposedly) glorious being could have such a one-track mind, solely focused on reminding his creations of their weakness in comparison to him, their submission to him based upon this weakness, and punishment for those who object. I must say I found the God of the bible to be a distinctly vain and contemptible creature, who seemed to have little interest, or at least a reluctant interest in extending the same respect to those whom he demanded it from. Hello there :)
I agree. Because you see, the Bible's God is just an interpretation of the idea of the ultimate Being or w/e. At the end of the day, do you know who does this image serve? The Popes, the priests and all those high in rank within any religion. Again I will say that God may be what it is, but religion is made by people to explain God. It doesn't mean they found (invented) the right explanation.
Religion has nothing to do with morality. If I was to follow THE BOOK id be stoning women and killing gay people now. Atheists are people and thus they have a moral code.rzepakAndroid llama objects.
I don't think our perception of morality came from darwinian evolution. Not all examples of morality have to do with murder. There are many "immoral" acts that have nothing to do with life or death. Their are many behaviors that are considered "morally" wrong, that may actually benefit the survivability of the species or more importanly to darwinian theory the passing on of genes.sonicareIt's a little more complicated than that. The social acceptance you gather from not performing these acts are at times more important for your passing of genes than the acts themselves are.
[QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"][QUOTE="Stumpt25"]If it were a fact, you would be able to prove it somehow.It is fact, you just don't know it yet. (although my word means absolutely nothing to you, so technically, yes, it is belief)
You didn't pick him up on the fact that he stated that all religious texts WERE NOT divinely inspired which is indeed belief, not fact.
Theokhoth
Not necessarily.
well that depends. facts by definition are demonstratable. Perhaps you mean the truth. Either way, when he said "it is a fact, you just don't know it yet" what he meant was "I believe it to be the truth."[QUOTE="Stumpt25"][QUOTE="-Jiggles-"]You are accepting a Darwinistic point of view when it comes to morality. I disagree. Although i believe in evolution, i don't think it explains morality -- because morality remains exclusive to human-kind.Despite what many people believe, religion didn't "invent" morality. What people think is "moral" is a simple biological instinct early man had that would ensure the survival of themselves and others around them. After all, if you killed all your tribesmen just for the heck of it, then who's going to help you hunt that Wooly Mammoth for food? Who are you going to reproduce with? Who's going to help protect you from Sabretooth Cats or other human tribes?
I'm not saying that the entirety of morality was based off the works of cavemen, but that what we see as "right" or "wrong" is based off of our own biological intelligence as to what would benefit you and the others around you more. The use of a caveman example is just a representation of humanity at it's most basic form. When society had evolved towards something greater, so had morality; the ideas of stealing, rape, etc being "wrong" by most societies was taken into consideration and now most people across the world find such actions to be wrong. Not all groups do, however, since morality is subjective.
Also, who cares if somebody has "a reason" to be moral or not? The fact that said people are acting moral (regardless of believing in a religion or not) shows that they have enough intelligence and willpower to overcome such a primitive mindset. I'd respect somebody more if they followed moral guidelines because they felt it was right rather than if they followed moral guidelines because they feared punishment if they didn't.
-Jiggles-
That is simply because we evolved to be the smartest organisms on this planet. As humans, we can use our intelligence to use logic and reason to assess any sort of situation that would benefit you and/or the others around you. For example, running up and punching a Wooly Mammoth isn't the most logical way to take it down, but throwing spears at it or dumping boulders down upon them is a lot safer and efficient than the former plan of action.
Since humans are social animals, we tend to stay within groups in order to multiply our chances of being successful in fufilling our basic instincts (eating, reproducing, etc). Through time, however, humans realized that cooperation and survival amongst eachother would be more easily accepted if certain guidelines were established (such as "no stealing of another's pig", etc). These guidelines formed the laws of early governments within society, which in effect helped build the foundation for the first major civilizations as well.
The problem you're encountering is that you're thinking of morality as incredibly broad and complex, when in reality it is not. It is the simple ability of humans to apply logic and reason (due to our intelligence) that allows us to make respectable decisions that'd affect the lives of you and those around you. It is our ability to think "Killing other humans is wrong," etc that have helped separate us from other animals.
Yes, but evolution programs selfishness into our genes. Perhaps helping others would increase your chance of survival (well, of course it would), but the concept of morality wouldn't be given the chance to develop. Our evolutionary routes would tell us to eat any food we have rather than give it to someone else, or that we could steal in order to help us survive.No.TheokhothWell we obviously do, as atheists have morals. If we had no reason to be moral, then we would be completely amoral.
[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"]If it were a fact, you would be able to prove it somehow.Mr_sprinkles
Not necessarily.
well that depends. facts by definition are demonstratable. Perhaps you mean the truth. Either way, when he said "it is a fact, you just don't know it yet" what he meant was "I believe it to be the truth." Based on what i've seen and the way i've lived, i know it to be fact. However, i could be crazy or just lying so to be honest, i have absolutely no expectation for you to believe me :) I was just throwing it in there.[QUOTE="-Jiggles-"][QUOTE="Stumpt25"] You are accepting a Darwinistic point of view when it comes to morality. I disagree. Although i believe in evolution, i don't think it explains morality -- because morality remains exclusive to human-kind.Stumpt25
That is simply because we evolved to be the smartest organisms on this planet. As humans, we can use our intelligence to use logic and reason to assess any sort of situation that would benefit you and/or the others around you. For example, running up and punching a Wooly Mammoth isn't the most logical way to take it down, but throwing spears at it or dumping boulders down upon them is a lot safer and efficient than the former plan of action.
Since humans are social animals, we tend to stay within groups in order to multiply our chances of being successful in fufilling our basic instincts (eating, reproducing, etc). Through time, however, humans realized that cooperation and survival amongst eachother would be more easily accepted if certain guidelines were established (such as "no stealing of another's pig", etc). These guidelines formed the laws of early governments within society, which in effect helped build the foundation for the first major civilizations as well.
The problem you're encountering is that you're thinking of morality as incredibly broad and complex, when in reality it is not. It is the simple ability of humans to apply logic and reason (due to our intelligence) that allows us to make respectable decisions that'd affect the lives of you and those around you. It is our ability to think "Killing other humans is wrong," etc that have helped separate us from other animals.
Yes, but evolution programs selfishness into our genes. Perhaps helping others would increase your chance of survival (well, of course it would), but the concept of morality wouldn't be given the chance to develop. Our evolutionary routes would tell us to eat any food we have rather than give it to someone else, or that we could steal in order to help us survive.Group evolution may solve that problem...[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]No.MetalGear_NintyWell we obviously do, as atheists have morals. If we had no reason to be moral, then we would be completely amoral.A non-sequitur, surely. Atheists could merely be mistakenly thinking they have reason to be moral, and pointlessly acting morally on that basis.
It is fact, you just don't know it yet. (although my word means absolutely nothing to you, so technically, yes, it is belief)
You didn't pick him up on the fact that he stated that all religious texts WERE NOT divinely inspired which is indeed belief, not fact.
Hi again. :)
They can claim they were divinely inspired, but what do we know? Again, another belief out of convenience. The divine could simply be our own majesty inspiring us so much, so overwhelmingly, to the point of confusion, where we have become seperated from ourselves, and think we came from a higher power. Which is was happened, by the way. Because everything is one. We made up God. :)
That is a belief. ;)
Hello there. :) It is your belief that what I said is a belief. ;) Everything really is one. This is fact, though not everyone wants to accept it for some reason. I've stated this before, but even if there was a God who created us, we would be extensions of him, not seperated from him. Thus, we would all be part of the same energy. There is no God, he is simply a creation of confusion from people who didn't realize everything is the same energy, recycled. We would have known, and seen our creator, if we had one. God is held onto nowadays as the great explanation for all things not yet understood. However, anytime someone uses this excuse, it never truly answers any questions, have you noticed that? God is never the answer, because God is not tangible. God is not tangible, because God is imaginary. God is imaginary because he came from the minds of men, too arrogant to acknowledge the gaps in their disconnected knowledge. People use God as a filler, almost like caulking for a hole in the wall. Anywhere people have knowledge of any given thing, God is not there. Have you noticed that? People only bring god into the picture when they hit a snag in their understanding. Seems as though people would rather not even have, or need God, if it just weren't for all those damn gaps that need to be filled. But you probably knew that already. :)[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"]No.Funky_LlamaWell we obviously do, as atheists have morals. If we had no reason to be moral, then we would be completely amoral.A non-sequitur, surely. Atheists could merely be mistakenly thinking they have reason to be moral, and pointlessly acting morally on that basis.
While correct, be sure not to cut your hand on the razor-sharp edges of that can of worms you're opening. >_>
[QUOTE="Stumpt25"][QUOTE="ithilgore2006"]Yes, they're all just afraid of the law, they want nothing more than to commit crimes. Now religious people, on the other hand, they're definitely model citizens simply out of the goodness of their hearts, it's not like they're only following their respective book's "morals" so they can get into heaven or anything.ithilgore2006You're missing the strength of this guy's arguement, then you totally contradict yourself. Atheists CAN be moral AND afraid of law at the same time. in the same way Religious people CAN be moral AND want to go to heaven. It's not like without god, all religious people would turn into savages. And likewise, it's not like without the law that atheists can't be good... P.s. You have no idea how insulting it is to have you say that all good religious people are closet a-holes, just doing good for self interest. I was just throwing his argument back at him, seeing as I felt fairly insulted myself that he claimed they're merely "afraid of the law". No need to take it as a blanket statement.When did I say that it is "merely" cuz of fear of law?:|
The guy to whom I responded was passing off as if you dont believe in religion then you can go around do anything without any consequences.
[QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"]well that depends. facts by definition are demonstratable. Perhaps you mean the truth. Either way, when he said "it is a fact, you just don't know it yet" what he meant was "I believe it to be the truth." Based on what i've seen and the way i've lived, i know it to be fact. However, i could be crazy or just lying so to be honest, i have absolutely no expectation for you to believe me :) I was just throwing it in there.you did it again. I could equally say that by what i've seen and the way i've lived, i know there to be no god. Since thats all I'm gonna back my facts up with, and clearly thats all you're gonna back yours with, your facts are infact no more or less factual than mine :P It's like answering a every question to a pop quiz "i know the answer, but I'm not telling" If you do not expect me to believe you, don't try and use it in an argument :PNot necessarily.
Stumpt25
Fact is that an athesist would never die for their country.If I was in the recuirement management of the army,I'll secretly make sure that there are less athesists in the army.
Many good athesists would kill someone if it could make them the king of the world or super duper rich.I know this post will be flamed but who are you kidding?An atheisist would kill someone for multi-milion dollars if it was safe,a true religious person would never do that.
[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"]No.Funky_LlamaWell we obviously do, as atheists have morals. If we had no reason to be moral, then we would be completely amoral.A non-sequitur, surely. Atheists could merely be mistakenly thinking they have reason to be moral, and pointlessly acting morally on that basis. A mistaken reason, is still a reason nonetheless. I walk a mile in hopes of seeing a unicorn, as I am pretty sure I'll see one.
I am mistaken, thought my desire to see the unicorn is still the reason for me walking a mile.
[QUOTE="sonicare"]I don't think our perception of morality came from darwinian evolution. Not all examples of morality have to do with murder. There are many "immoral" acts that have nothing to do with life or death. Their are many behaviors that are considered "morally" wrong, that may actually benefit the survivability of the species or more importanly to darwinian theory the passing on of genes.jointedIt's a little more complicated than that. The social acceptance you gather from not performing these acts are at times more important for your passing of genes than the acts themselves are. But why would society accept or not accept the act to start with? There would have to be some evolutionary benefit to doing/not doing some act. Otherwise, what is the evolutionary advantage of that moral?
Hello there. :) It is your belief that what I said is a belief. ;) Everything really is one. This is fact, though not everyone wants to accept it for some reason.
Funny, the religious guy said the exact same thing.
Hi again. :) And what are you? :)Fact is that an athesist would never die for their country.If I was in the recuirement management of the army,I'll secretly make sure that there are less athesists in the army.
Many good athesists would kill someone if it could make them the king of the world or super duper rich.I know this post will be flamed but who are you kidding?An atheisist would kill someone for multi-milion dollars if it was safe,a true religious person would never do that.
C'mon, you know what your saying isn't striclty true by any sense.Fact is that an athesist would never die for their country.If I was in the recuirement management of the army,I'll secretly make sure that there are less athesists in the army.
Many good athesists would kill someone if it could make them the king of the world or super duper rich.I know this post will be flamed but who are you kidding?An atheisist would kill someone for multi-milion dollars if it was safe,a true religious person would never do that.
That's not true. Many atheists have died for their country. Do you think that every person that volunteers for the military is religous?[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="_______1_______"]Hello there. :) It is your belief that what I said is a belief. ;) Everything really is one. This is fact, though not everyone wants to accept it for some reason.
_______1_______
Funny, the religious guy said the exact same thing.
Hi again. :) And what are you? :)Bored as hell. You?
[QUOTE="Thinker_reborn"]C'mon, you know what your saying isn't striclty true by any sense.I truly am sad that there are people with beliefs like Thinker Reborn.Fact is that an athesist would never die for their country.If I was in the recuirement management of the army,I'll secretly make sure that there are less athesists in the army.
Many good athesists would kill someone if it could make them the king of the world or super duper rich.I know this post will be flamed but who are you kidding?An atheisist would kill someone for multi-milion dollars if it was safe,a true religious person would never do that.
MetalGear_Ninty
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment