Morals without God?

Morals without God?

Perhaps it is just me, but I am wary of anyone whose belief system is the only thing standing between them and repulsive behavior. Why not assume that our humanity, including the self-control needed for livable societies, is built into us? Does anyone truly believe that our ancestors lacked social norms before they had religion? Did they never assist others in need, or complain about an unfair deal?
...

Even the staunchest atheist growing up in Western society cannot avoid having absorbed the basic tenets of Christian morality. Our societies are steeped in it: everything we have accomplished over the centuries, even science, developed either hand in hand with or in opposition to religion, but never separately. It is impossible to know what morality would look like without religion. It would require a visit to a human culture that is not now and never was religious. That such cultures do not exist should give us pause.

Science versus religion, religion versus science... kind of silly to be arguing about it when the two are so inevitably complementary.

Yeah, morals without God.

I have more morals than most religious people. Religious people hate gays and childrens books and I think both of them are pretty alright.WontonSoupSwag

There are PLENTY of moral principles people can live by while being an atheist. The general principles of Nicomachean Ethics doesn't require a belief in god, nor does Kantianism or Singer's Utilitarianism, etc. Absolutely no one needs to believe in a god in order to act morally.

You don't have to believe in God to see that Christianity is the best framework for peace and prosperity.kdawg88

There are PLENTY of moral principles people can live by while being an atheist. The general principles of Nicomachean Ethics doesn't require a belief in god, nor does Kantianism or Singer's Utilitarianism, etc. Absolutely no one needs to believe in a god in order to act morally.

TreebucketLumi

Kant and Singer in this case act as apostoles. Not all religions need a god either.

Atheistic morality is far to subjective for my tastes.Acemaster27

This is a complete non-statement. "Atheistic morality?" There is no unifying atheist moral philosophy. An atheist can believe in the exact same moral rules a religious person believes in.

You don't have to believe in God to see that Christianity is the best framework for peace and prosperity.kdawg88

I dunno. Judaism seems pretty peaceful to me. It's a shame everyone picks on them throughout the ages.

[QUOTE="TreebucketLumi"]

There are PLENTY of moral principles people can live by while being an atheist. The general principles of Nicomachean Ethics doesn't require a belief in god, nor does Kantianism or Singer's Utilitarianism, etc. Absolutely no one needs to believe in a god in order to act morally.

kuraimen

Kant and Singer in this case act as apostoles. Not all religions need a god either.

I have never heard of them being referred to as religions. But you are right, not all religions require a belief in god. My point remains the same -- morality can exist without god.

[QUOTE="Acemaster27"]Atheistic morality is far to subjective for my tastes.TreebucketLumi

This is a complete non-statement. "Atheistic morality?" There is no unifying atheist moral philosophy. An atheist can believe in the exact same moral rules a religious person believes in.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]

[QUOTE="TreebucketLumi"]

There are PLENTY of moral principles people can live by while being an atheist. The general principles of Nicomachean Ethics doesn't require a belief in god, nor does Kantianism or Singer's Utilitarianism, etc. Absolutely no one needs to believe in a god in order to act morally.

TreebucketLumi

Kant and Singer in this case act as apostoles. Not all religions need a god either.

I have never heard of them being referred to as religions. But you are right, not all religions require a belief in god. My point remains the same -- morality can exist without god.

Yeah and that's one of the points of the article if you read it. But the article also ends with this.

Any framework we develop to advocate a certain moral outlook is bound to produce its own list of principles, its own prophets, and attract its own devoted followers, so that it will soon look like any old religion.

You can have a moral system without believing in God. Actually, I don't personally believe an objective moral system exists even from God as I don't see a reason to conclude that his moral system must be right any more than any individual's must be. I suppose a moral system based upon the cateogrical imperative would be the closest to objective morality, though I have my qualms about that as well. Utilitarianism is also interesting as a system of objective morality, though the fact that utility is largely immeasurable makes it overall not viable as an objective moral system.

While I will not deny that immoral behavior happens amongst people of all different religious faiths who do claim to believe in God, my personal experience with Atheists has been that they find more ways to rationalize certain types of behavior. It looks to me like they don't have the proverbial "fear of God," so they think they can do whatever they want if it's not actually illegal, or if they're sure they won't get caught. Like they don't think they have to answer to a higher power. To me, in matters of morality, the point isn't whether or not you get caught, the point is whether or not you are doing something wrong.

Yeah and that's one of the points of the article if you read it. But the article also ends with this.

Any framework we develop to advocate a certain moral outlook is bound to produce its own list of principles, its own prophets, and attract its own devoted followers, so that it will soon look like any old religion.

kuraimen

I never read their entire texts since my classes never required it, and I only have a general passing interesting in moral philosophy. That is a really interesting point though. I'm not certain I agree with it, but it is certainly very interesting!

Edit: I actually bought a couple of Singer's books, and I would love to read them, but I simply don't have the time. :( It's midterms month and these midterms suuuuuuuuck

Atheistic morality is far to subjective for my tastes.Acemaster27

While I will not deny that immoral behavior happens amongst people of all different religious faiths who do claim to believe in God, my personal experience with Atheists has been that they find more ways to rationalize certain types of behavior. It looks to me like they don't have the proverbial "fear of God," so they think they can do whatever they want if it's not actually illegal, or if they're sure they won't get caught.

hartsickdiscipl

I don't claim to be an expert on any moral philosophies or anything, but Walzer is the only person I can think of right off the top of my head who was all about moral subjectivity.

Well, virtue ethics in general is kind of subjective because the virtues themselves are kind of subjective, but you get the idea.

edit: also I'm probably forgetting some guys but it's past midnight and I'm tired and I'm supposed to be reading this other thing and oh god is it really this late

I don't know what to say about those who need a written list of things that they should or shouldn't do to others in order to be a good human being.

You don't have to believe in God to see that Christianity is the best framework for peace and prosperity.kdawg88

[QUOTE="kdawg88"]You don't have to believe in God to see that Christianity is the best framework for peace and prosperity.kussese

[QUOTE="TreebucketLumi"]

[QUOTE="Acemaster27"]Atheistic morality is far to subjective for my tastes.Acemaster27

This is a complete non-statement. "Atheistic morality?" There is no unifying atheist moral philosophy. An atheist can believe in the exact same moral rules a religious person believes in.

Wrong.

Observe ants, birds, fish, wolves, etc.

Essentially ANY social species exhibits something which can be seen as a "moral code". And they don't worship gods.

Morality isn't a result of gods, it is a result of SOCIETY (or...a prerequisite to society). And that means a WHOLE lot, since morality then becomes a basic survival mechanism, like pooping or eating.

[QUOTE="kussese"][QUOTE="kdawg88"]You don't have to believe in God to see that Christianity is the best framework for peace and prosperity.xaos

I know I'm supposed to be reading foucalt but this thread can only go downhill from here

unless someone posts more smbc

We never attached a god to the word "Morals" before religion came along. Now, it's common to assume that we were moral-less goons before religion came along. Ridiculous.

We never attached a god to the word "Morals" before religion came along. Now, it's common to assume that we were moral-less goons before religion came along. Ridiculous.

starfox15

During what part of recorded human history did religion not exist?

We never attached a god to the word "Morals" before religion came along. Now, it's common to assume that we were moral-less goons before religion came along. Ridiculous.

starfox15

I'm not sure if I believe in a "God" in the traditional sense and I have morals and believe in morality.

[QUOTE="starfox15"]

We never attached a god to the word "Morals" before religion came along. Now, it's common to assume that we were moral-less goons before religion came along. Ridiculous.

hartsickdiscipl

During what part of recorded human history did religion not exist?

Why does that matter?

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="starfox15"]

We never attached a god to the word "Morals" before religion came along. Now, it's common to assume that we were moral-less goons before religion came along. Ridiculous.

bloodling

During what part of recorded human history did religion not exist?

Why does that matter?

Read what the other poster said. They insinuated that there was a period in recorded human history in which there was no religion. I don't think there ever was such a time. If there wasn't such a time, then his or her statement makes no sense. Throughout recorded history, there have been those who accepted a higher power, and those who didn't.

The Moral Argument asserts that those who don't believe in God CAN be moral. To say otherwise, would be an argument against religion.

The Moral Argument asserts that those who don't believe in God CAN be moral. To say otherwise, would be an argument against religion.

magiciandude

I think the question then has to be- Where did they get their morals from? From parents who believe in God? From a society that has always had far more believers in God than Atheists? If so, don't they have to give some of the credit for their morals to the very idea of God in the first place?

This goes back to the question that I posed earlier. Has there ever been a time in recorded human history without religion? I think not. So then to say that morals formed without religion and a belief in God, makes no sense. :)

[QUOTE="magiciandude"]

The Moral Argument asserts that those who don't believe in God CAN be moral. To say otherwise, would be an argument against religion.

hartsickdiscipl

I think the question then has to be- Where did they get their morals from? From parents who believe in God? From a society that has always had far more believers in God than Atheists? If so, don't they have to give some of the credit for their morals to the very idea of God in the first place?

This goes back to the question that I posed earlier. Has there ever been a time in recorded human history without religion? I think not. So then to say that morals formed without religion and a belief in God, makes no sense. :)

[QUOTE="starfox15"]

We never attached a god to the word "Morals" before religion came along. Now, it's common to assume that we were moral-less goons before religion came along. Ridiculous.

hartsickdiscipl

During what part of recorded human history did religion not exist?

You don't have to believe in God to see that Christianity is the best framework for peace and prosperity.kdawg88

This is just too easy. How many billions of people in the world disagree with this statement? In fact, I find many aspects of Christianity to be decidedly immoral. And that's just the point. EVERYONE has morals. They may not be the same as your morals, but they are morals just the same.

I have morals. I've never needed a god to give me that. And what morals can you really say you have if you only refrain from doing "bad" or "wrong" things because you're threatened with being stuffed in a fire-filled torture pit for all eternity? You're just scared into doing the right thing, not doing it cause you want to. It's like the ultimate "big brother is watching" deal.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="starfox15"]

We never attached a god to the word "Morals" before religion came along. Now, it's common to assume that we were moral-less goons before religion came along. Ridiculous.

starfox15

During what part of recorded human history did religion not exist?

It's not a futile argument, because it's not an argument at all. What we do know is that as far back as the beginning of recorded history, humans have practiced religions with a belief in God(s). The argument doesn't need to go past that point. That's the fact that we do know. As far as any real, scientific discussion can go, recorded human history is the beginning. What is or isn't considered "moral" has changed an evolved differently in different cultures over time. But the thing that all of these "morals" almost always seem to be tied to is how they tie into prevailing religious beliefs at the time and place. I'd say that religion and a belief in God is central to the development of morals in mankind. It's the minority who may still have some of those morals, but don't openly acknowledge God who deny the reality of where those morals came from.

If your argument is that the original concept of morality came from religion, then I don't have any input on that subject. It may have, but I don't care to have an opinion on that.

My argument is that moral principles can be constructed using nothing but reasoning -- theism is not a prerequisite.

If your argument is that the original concept of morality came from religion, then I don't have any input on that subject. It may have, but I don't care to have an opinion on that.

My argument is that moral principles can be constructed using nothing but reasoning -- theism is not a prerequisite.

TreebucketLumi

Reasoning alone won't get you there, IMO. It takes a fear of a higher power. Having such a fear should (but doesn't always) cause people to be more strict on themselves in their decision-making.

Since we know that religion has been around as long as recorded human history, and that morality lessons are almost always part of religious teachings, it's logical to think that the very concept of morality came from the fear of God. From the idea that it doesn't matter if I can be caught and/or punished by humans for what I'm about to do, but that I am accountable to a higher power who can see everything I do.

Unless you can show me a separate society that has developed with basically compatible moral standards to those that are common in our religiously-dominated world, and has done so without the belief in and worship of a God, there is no basis for saying that morality is based solely on reasoning.

I guess what I'm trying to say to Atheists who believe they have a moral code that's basically compatible with the majority of what society preaches (but doesn't always practice) is this-

Whether you like it or not, no matter how much the thought may upset you.. You have religion to thank for your concepts of moral reality. Religion has been the very basis for "accountability" in our actions since the beginning of recorded history. Whether you like it or not, the morals that are embedded in you come from a society that has been permeated by ideals of morality that stem from religious beliefs. Laws against murder, rape, theft, etc.. all originally came from religious roots. Show me a record of a society with such laws, and I'll show you a society that has been dominated by believers in God since it's beginning.

I'm atheist and I'm not an immoral person. I mean sure, some people may frown on that fact that once in awhile I kill someone with an axe to relieve a little stress. But come on, we have no souls anyway, so what's the difference, am I right?yabbicoke

:lol: Everybody needs to take out somebody with an axe every once in awhile.

But seriously.. Where do you think you got your idea of morality from? Where do you think your influences got theirs from?

It's not very scientific to think that humans come "pre-programmed" with the same sense of morality. All you have to do is look at cultures where moral standards are so drastically different from each other to prove that this can't be true. We get our sense of morality from those around us, who have inevitably gotten their sense of morality from the world around them. The world which has always had religions that teach morality since the start of recorded history.

People didn't necessarily fear God in the past, there have been so many psychopatic killers who have no fear, and even if some of them feared death it's not necessarily because they fear that a God would judge them. I don't fear a higher power in the slightest, and I certainly don't think everyone should.

I'm certainly not going to thank religion for my morals.

I guess what I'm trying to say to Atheists who believe they have a moral code that's basically compatible with the majority of what society preaches (but doesn't always practice) is this-

Whether you like it or not, no matter how much the thought may upset you.. You have religion to thank for your concepts of moral reality. Religion has been the very basis for "accountability" in our actions since the beginning of recorded history. Whether you like it or not, the morals that are embedded in you come from a society that has been permeated by ideals of morality that stem from religious beliefs. Laws against murder, rape, theft, etc.. all originally came from religious roots. Show me a record of a society with such laws, and I'll show you a society that has been dominated by believers in God since it's beginning.

hartsickdiscipl

Again, I have literally zero interest on this origin of morality argument. Certainly it may be the case that religion formed the original concept of morality (and I don't think this is unlikely) but again, I do not care at all if it did or not.

But if a consciousness can reason out why there must be 180 degrees in a triangle (in the absence of god), I certainly don't see why it can't formulate moral principles.

People didn't necessarily fear God in the past, there have been so many psychopatic killers who have no fear, and even if some of them feared death it's not necessarily because they fear that a God would judge them. I don't fear a higher power in the slightest, and I certainly don't think everyone should.

I'm certainly not going to thank religion for my morals.

bloodling

Psychopathic killers are the exception, not the rule. There are plenty of people who claim to fear God and adhere to the rules of their religion, but really don't. That's not the issue. The issue is that some people seem to think that they were born pre-programmed with some moral standards. That's absurd. There are way too many variances in what's considered moral or immoral in different parts of the world for this to be true.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

I guess what I'm trying to say to Atheists who believe they have a moral code that's basically compatible with the majority of what society preaches (but doesn't always practice) is this-

Whether you like it or not, no matter how much the thought may upset you.. You have religion to thank for your concepts of moral reality. Religion has been the very basis for "accountability" in our actions since the beginning of recorded history. Whether you like it or not, the morals that are embedded in you come from a society that has been permeated by ideals of morality that stem from religious beliefs. Laws against murder, rape, theft, etc.. all originally came from religious roots. Show me a record of a society with such laws, and I'll show you a society that has been dominated by believers in God since it's beginning.

TreebucketLumi

Again, I have literally zero interest on this origin of morality argument. Certainly it may be the case that religion formed the original concept of morality (and I don't think this is unlikely) but again, I do not care at all if it did or not.

But if a consciousness can reason out why there must be 180 degrees in a triangle (in the absence of god), I certainly don't see why it can't formulate moral principles.

I won't go into the reasons why I believe things like science, and our knowledge of there being 180 degrees in a triangle came from "God" or more advanced beings.. but I will say this- There is a major difference between a piece of scientific knowledge and an inborn feeling of what's right and wrong. The very concepts of right and wrong don't fit into science. That's what's so unique about morality.