Atheists: Why don't you steal, rape, pillage, etc?

I will just have to check it out. Thanks.

derGroßmütige said:

If I was 100% sure He didn't exist. Yes. Of course. Why not?

Click to expand...

Then please stay a believer. You can't handle atheism.


eudaimonia,

Mark

When I saw the title of this thread I thought it was a joke. I was unpleasantly surprised that it wasn't.

dgiharris said:

It is my belief that the morality of an atheist is more sincere and of more value than that of a religious person.

The reason I feel this way is that whenever an atheist does a good deed or fails to do an evil one, he does so by choice without fear of any unearthly consequence or reward whatsoever. So his actions are a true testament to his character. What you see is what you get.

Or put another way, if an adult hovers over a child you will observe one set of behaviors (group #1). However, if said child believes he isn't being watched and you observe him with hidden cameras you will see his "true" character (group #2). It is my belief that for the most part, religious types are group #1 whereas atheists are group #2.

Click to expand...

So the group that acts like others want them to while being watched, but commits crimes in secret is more sincere and of more value to you? So what you see is not what you get....as you described it.

SkyWriting said:

So the group that acts like others want them to while being watched, but commits crimes in secret is more sincere and of more value to you? So what you see is not what you get....as you described it.

Click to expand...

What are you on about?

GrimKingGrim said:

What are you on about?

Click to expand...

"Or put another way, if an adult hovers over a child you will observe one set of behaviors (group #1). However, if said child believes he isn't being watched and you observe him with hidden cameras you will see his "true" character (group #2). It is my belief that for the most part, religious types are group #1 whereas atheists are group #2."

When people misbehave while others are not looking is better?

KCfromNC said:

No one knows what the heck gods are supposed to be or do, so that does add the the problem.

Click to expand...

You're projecting. Seems you haven't asked around. Lot's of people have put much thought into it.

SkyWriting said:

.......

When people misbehave while others are not looking is better?

Click to expand...

I'm always amazed how I go out of my way to make a simple and clear unambiguous point using paint-by-numbers logic and yet still there will be those incapable of understanding what I'm saying or twisting my argument such that they can feign misunderstanding.

If you took a sociopath evil person and attached a special microchip in his brain that gave him a painful jolt every time he was mean or acted in a negative manner, you would get a person who on the outside "seemed" nice but in reality was still evil.

Contrast that with a person who has no microchip in their brain yet said person acts nice....

Which of the two people is the better or more moral person if their actions are equivalent?

My point via analogy is simply that religious people have another dimension of positive and negative reinforcement that atheists do not have. This extra dimension "can" mask the religious person's true character and true self. Their actions may or may not be a true reflection of their character. However, since atheist do NOT have this extra dimension of positive/negative reinforcement, there is more certainty in their actions being truly representative of their true character and true self.

I mean, who is the nicer person. Someone who acts nice only out of fear of eternal torment, or a person who acts nice because they choose to.

Not to say that religious people can't also choose to be nice... sure they can. My point goes back to the source of your morality.

If you can derive and understand and choose your own morality, that is more sincere than arbitrarily following a laundry list of moral rules from an authoritative body (regardless of what the body is, secular or non secular).

I don't need the bible to tell me that rape and murder are wrong. 2 + 2 = 4. The sun rises in the east and sets in the west. And rape and murder are wrong. There are a ton of different secular arguments and reasons for why a rational person would choose to have morals conducive to a positive utilitarian society. So I'm always shocked at how religious people just can't fathom how or why an atheist can have morals...

i'm starting to rant so I'll just stop and leave it at that...

derGroßmütige said:

Another thing is they say they are "good" people often, and isn't good a construct of religion?

Click to expand...

No. Morality =/= religion. I am good according to my own system of morality, but it's not a religious one.

dgiharris said:

I'm always amazed how I go out of my way to make a simple and clear unambiguous point using paint-by-numbers logic and yet still there will be those incapable of understanding what I'm saying or twisting my argument such that they can feign misunderstanding.

Click to expand...

Exactly what I was thinking. I'm not sure where that extra part came in.

derGroßmütige said:

My point is Evolution. Animals kill other animals for territory, rape their females. The strong crush the weak, which helps the species improve.s

Click to expand...

That is a misunderstanding of evolution and natural selection. A "species" is a collection of individuals. Individuals compete for scarce resources. There is no thought for "improvement" of the species, only that individuals are trying to earn a living. Whatever in their genetic makeup helps them earn a living will be passed on to their offspring.

In many species, cooperation helps ALL the individuals survive. There are just as many examples of cooperation within species as there are examples of cutthroat competition.

Also, this is the Naturalistic Fallacy. http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/naturalistic/ Basically you are making the non-sequitor that because something happens in nature, then it ought to happen in human behavior.

A glaring example of this is to say "since gravity means everything falls to earth, it is OK to shoot a bird."

Another thing is they say they are "good" people often, and isn't good a construct of religion?

Click to expand...

Is it? This gets back to the question "Is something good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is good?" If you answer "because God commands it" then you have the ultimate in relativistic morality. Morality depends on the whim of God. To say "God is good" only begs the question. And, of course, then you run into the problem of why God commanded and condoned the genocide of the Amelekites (among other examples). By our morality, genocide is immoral, right?


If you answer "because it is good", then morality exists independent of God. So morality is independent of religion. What God does was give us shortcuts to morality. It's like our parents telling us to share, play nice, not lie, etc. As we grow up we can all think of good reasons we should have these morals, but when we are young, we do them because our parents tell us to and punish us when we don't obey. Scripture dates to a time when we were younger as a group. Today we can reason our way to morality, and that reasoning is open to theists and atheists. So the statement "If you are Atheist then there is no "good" or "evil" " is wrong. It's flawed deductive logic.

What logical arguments can you have for not stealing a car if you know you can get away with it? Or robbing a bank? Or kidnapping the women you want who rejects you?

Click to expand...

The same logical argument we theists make! Do you think we refrain from theft only because there is a Commandment against it? If that were the case, then we would never see the levels of false witness we see from creationists. Yet that level is there.

So your homework is to put your brain to work and come up with the logical arguments behind theft and kidnapping and rape. Why did God consider these behaviors "bad". He had His reasons, did He not? Since we are created in the image of God, don't you think we can find those reasons?

dgiharris said:

I'm always amazed how I go out of my way to make a simple and clear unambiguous point using paint-by-numbers logic and yet still there will be those incapable of understanding what I'm saying or twisting my argument such that they can feign misunderstanding.

Click to expand...

Pearls before swine, as they like to say.

dgiharris said:

My point via analogy is simply that religious people have another dimension of positive and negative reinforcement that atheists do not have. This extra dimension "can" mask the religious person's true character and true self. Their actions may or may not be a true reflection of their character. However, since atheist do NOT have this extra dimension of positive/negative reinforcement, there is more certainty in their actions being truly representative of their true character and true self.

Click to expand...

One of the revolutionary things Jesus did was make our inner character and "true self" responsible. Check our Matthew 5:20-28.

If we even think angry thoughts or look at woman with desire then that is the same as murder or adultery.

So, for Christians, simply refraining from acting is not enough and cannot "mask the religious person's true character and true self." God knows. This is one of the ways that Jesus made forgiveness such a necessary and essential theological requirement. Acting "nice" is not enough. Our thoughts matter.

If you can derive and understand and choose your own morality, that is more sincere than arbitrarily following a laundry list of moral rules from an authoritative body (regardless of what the body is, secular or non secular).

Click to expand...

When you were a child, your morality consisted of following a "laundry list of moral rules from an authoritative body" -- your parents.

I don't need the bible to tell me that rape and murder are wrong.

Click to expand...

I agree. You don't. But at some point in your life you did need your parents telling you that some behaviors -- such as hitting other kids or taking their toys -- are wrong. Now you are old enough to reason through why those behaviors are wrong -- and are hopefully being the authority in telling your children. I tend to think of humans as a group in "growing up". When we were "children" 4,000 or so years ago, then yes, we did need an authority to give us a short-cut to morality. As we have learned more, we can see the reasons behind God telling us that morality, just like you can now see the reasons your parents told you not to hit other kids or take their toys.

So I'm always shocked at how religious people just can't fathom how or why an atheist can have morals...

Click to expand...

I am too. But probably not for the same reasons you are. I am shocked at either how little they understand God or how much they like to disrespect God. The basis of their argument is that God arbitrarily made up those rules/morality. You, as an atheist, therefore can't have access to that morality.

But having God act so arbitrarily means God is irrational. He just made up those rules for no reason? You can't worship or trust an irrational deity. No, God had to have some reasons for making those rules. Well, those reasons apply whether God is in the picture or not, just as not stealing or not hitting apply independent of your parents. Thus, anyone can find the reasons.

Also, God loves everyone. That is a basic message of scripture. Not just the people who worship Him, but everyone. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son". There is no footnote that says "only believers". Thus, He isn't going to have a system that, unless you believe in Him, you are condemned to think that all kinds of bad behavior is OK. That is a terrible, vindictive deity. In fact, is the root problem if you take Ezekiel 20:25 out of the social and historical context. A deity that deliberately constructs a system that condemns people to unacceptable behavior is simply not a deity anyone can love, trust, or worship. But it is that type of deity that theists who use this argument are advocating.

dgiharris said:

If you took a sociopath evil person and attached a special microchip in his brain that gave him a painful jolt every time he was mean or acted in a negative manner, you would get a person who on the outside "seemed" nice but in reality was still evil.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('div-gpt-ad-1431698694306-1'); });
Contrast that with a person who has no microchip in their brain yet said person acts nice....

Which of the two people is the better or more moral person if their actions are equivalent?

Click to expand...

The two are no different. People DO have programming in their heads from millions of sources. Some have been tortured physically, some mentally. (Mentally is worse.) Some have been nurtured, some have been beaten. Some learn lessons from poverty, some from affluence. We all have "chips in our head" telling us how to act. Some just follow the money. Some follow anything offering pleasure. Some prefer pain.

Your argument about religion has no merit. Nice try though.
Especially the anquish over being misunderstood at the beginning.

.

SkyWriting said:

So the group that acts like others want them to while being watched, but commits crimes in secret is more sincere and of more value to you? So what you see is not what you get....as you described it.

Click to expand...

Please tell me about the secret atheist crimes.

derGroßmütige said:

My point is Evolution. Animals kill other animals for territory, rape their females. The strong crush the weak, which helps the species improve.

The weird thing about Atheists is they always use religious arguments ("don't hurt the weak", "I'm a good person", etc.) instead of logical arguments like evolution, euthanizing the weak/burdens on society, etc.

Another thing is they say they are "good" people often, and isn't good a construct of religion? If you are Atheist then there is no "good" or "evil". i.e. Atheists saying Hitler is an "evil monster" make no sense. Or do you atheists not believe in Evolution? Are you against euthanizing the elderly or handicapped?

What logical arguments can you have for not stealing a car if you know you can get away with it? Or robbing a bank? Or kidnapping the women you want who rejects you?

Click to expand...

They say; integrity is the desire to do the right thing; even when nobody is looking.
Perhaps the reason these atheists behave in a way that you do not understand is because they have integrity; something you lack.

Ken

SkyWriting said:

So the group that acts like others want them to while being watched, but commits crimes in secret is more sincere and of more value to you? So what you see is not what you get....as you described it.

Click to expand...

He said just the opposite of what you claim.

jacknife said:

Please tell me about the secret atheist crimes.

Click to expand...

They are no different than believers sins. The God-chip in the head does not exist in action. Christian are not "controlled" in any way. Following Gods will is always a choice and very few are even mildly accomplished at it.

It always interests me that some people genuinely believe the only thing restricting them from doing awful things is a belief in God. So this has been a rather interesting thread. Naturally I'm going to add a completely unneeded and rambling post to it.

Being a good person is not the reserve of the religious, and if we are to be good Christians we should strive to be good with or without God. There are certain values that we are taught, as Christians, that are not present for those who do not believe, but not living to these values does not turn someone into someone intent on a pillage-murder-rape approach to life. Rot is rot, regardless of faith, and as much as some would like to believe otherwise this rot does not come from a lack of belief.

You can go further and say that, due to the length of time religious teachings have been present in various parts of the world, they have ingrained a basic understanding of what is good within people, even when they no longer have faith in God. In some respects what is considered good and true is cultural, handed down over the generations until it becomes fixed within us. Even then you have to consider that there are animals who exhibit behaviours which, arguably, are what we'd term good, moralistic behaviours.

Not all animals run around killing others of the same species (within their own social group), there may be death involved but largely it seems that you get more through cooperation and being 'good' than running around being a great big pain in the groups side by causing disruption. Going out and fighting/killing a rival group (something humans do, Christian or otherwise) is not the same as causing disruption within your own group. There are individual animals who do such things, I believe there was a macaque (I think) in a troop located in Gibraltar who seemed to intentionally kill young females of the same species within his group. That's not a common thing, a behaviour which ultimately serves no purpose other than the death itself, and eventually leads to group exclusion.

Social animals generally avoid causing more disruption than is needed within their social group. From a human stand point even some career thieves have expressed the sentiment that you do not steal from your neighbours. You steal from someone outside of your social group, away from the community you directly relate with. Not every single one expresses this sentiment, but when you start listening to people who do immoral things on a frequent basis there is generally a moralistic logic to the way they go about it. Those who do things in a purely destructive manner with little care for any form of morals (except of course for those who derive pleasure from deliberately going against moralistic teachings) are not as common as perhaps people believe.

As a Christian there are things I do not do despite the fact that, from a secular point of view, there is nothing morally wrong with doing it. These things are perhaps exclusive to Abrahamic faiths. There are things I do not do because I have an intense gut feeling at the thought of carrying out such actions, a gut feeling that says to carry out such acts, to behave in such a way, is wrong. They may relate to Christianity, but they are not exclusive to it.