Atheism is amoral

[HenryM]

Of course it's amoral, when you think about it. That doesn't mean that individual atheist is amoral. But he or she is moral for reason outside of atheism, not because of atheism.

Atheism is amoral because it's a worldview that everything including life came from nothing, by chance, and that it will all ultimately end in nothing.

So it's nothingness at the beggining and end, and in between is chance. That's the highest principle that sets up atheistic existence.

It's obvious that there's no place for true morality within atheism.

But there is place for hedonism. What seems like morality withinin atheism is just a form of hedonism.

It's "whatever rocks my boat" attitude. There can't be morally good or bad if existence is set up by chance, from nothingness, going into nothingness. But there can be pleasure.

In atheistic worldview, one person can think that peace is good and war is bad. But that's just his or her private hedonism. Other person can think that murder is great, and that's equally fine, since everything came from nothing, is governed by chance, and ultimately goes back into nothing. Both opinions are perfectly in line with foundation of atheistic existence.

So, if hundred people group together and make a weapon that ends up killing everybody on earth, that's neither good or bad within atheistic worldview. That was just an event that was ultimately governed by chance.

Yes, that event is subjectively bad for murdered people who can't exercise their hedonism anymore, but that principle - to exercise own hedonism - is far, far below principles of coming from and ending in nothingness, by chance. Probably even infinitely below those foundational principles.

 

[Nithavela]

Of course atheism is amoral. It is only a position someone holds to one simple yes or no question (Are there gods?). That's like saying that collecting or not collecting stamps is immoral.

I've yet to see someone accuse non-stamp collectors of being okay with murder, though.

 

[HenryM]

That's like saying that collecting or not collecting stamps is immoral... I've yet to see someone accuse non-stamp collectors of being okay with murder, though.

Stamp collecting is not worldview of existence of the universe and everything in it.

 

[fat wee robin]

I was going to rate your post until I saw "if a hundred people group together "etc.
You do realise that in America most weapons carriers call themselves christian , and that this country who has more people who call themselves the same ,have the largest cash of arms on the planet ,and used them to kill people who have done them no harm .

 

[Grace2022]

Of course it's amoral, when you think about it. That doesn't mean that individual atheist is amoral. But he or she is moral for reason outside of atheism, not because of atheism.

Atheism is amoral because it's a worldview that everything including life came from nothing, by chance, and that it will all ultimately end in nothing.

So it's nothingness at the beggining and end, and in between is chance. That's the highest principle that sets up atheistic existence.

It's obvious that there's no place for true morality within atheism.

But there is place for hedonism. What seems like morality withinin atheism is just a form of hedonism.

It's "whatever rocks your boat" attitude. There can't be morally good or bad if existence is set up by chance, from nothingness, going into nothingness. But there can be pleasure.

In atheistic worldview, one person can think that peace is good and war is bad. But that's just his or her private hedonism. Other person can think that murder is great, and that's equally fine, since everything came from nothing, is governed by chance, and ultimately goes back into nothing. Both opinions are perfectly in line with foundation of atheistic existence.

So, if hundred people group together and make a weapon that ends up killing everybody on earth, that's neither good or bad within atheistic worldview. That was just an event that was ultimately governed by chance.

Yes, that event is subjectively bad for murdered people who can't exercise their hedonism anymore, but that principle - to exercise own hedonism - is far, far below principles of coming from and ending in nothingness, by chance. Probably even infinitely below those foundational principles.

Hi
good points. Atheism though is a choice.
I would say to any atheist, be careful, this is the destiny of your soul's you are dicing with. Give real time to it.
How empty and without foundation is a godless person? I know full well, because I was like that myself just a few years ago. I was also miserable, fearful and without real aims.
The difference when you accept Jesus Christ as saviour is utterly amazing. Suddenly it all makes sense.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Pizza is amoral.

Judging moral ideas requires no reference to foodstuffs or the number of gods that one believes in.

 

[Nithavela]

Stamp collecting is not worldview of existence of the universe and everything in it.

Neither is atheism (or theism, for that matter).

 

[Nithavela]

Hi
good points. Atheism though is a choice.
I would say to any atheist, be careful, this is the destiny of your soul's you are dicing with. Give real time to it.
How empty and without foundation is a godless person? I know full well, because I was like that myself just a few years ago. I was also miserable, fearful and without real aims.
The difference when you accept Jesus Christ as saviour is utterly amazing. Suddenly it all makes sense.

None of this has anything to do with the morality or lack thereof in atheism.

 

[HenryM]

Judging moral ideas requires no...

The more atheistic you are the more incapable you are to judge moral ideas, because there's no morality to be found within atheistic worldview.

 

[HenryM]

Neither is atheism (or theism, for that matter).

Of course it is. It's the worldview.

 

[Nithavela]

The more atheistic you are the more incapable you are to judge moral ideas, because there's no morality to be found within atheistic worldview.

One can derive morality from any number of sources, specific religions being only one such source.

If religious people are so moral, why is the vast majority of people in a prison religious?

 

[Nithavela]

Of course it is. But we can always lie to ourselves.

"Of course it is" doesn't cut it as an argument.

 

[HenryM]

One can derive morality from any number of sources...

You don't "derive morality from any number of sources", just like you don't derive life that way. You specifically need air and water, not any gas and any liquid.

 

[HenryM]

"Of course it is" doesn't cut it as an argument.

I am not going to explain how 2+3 equals 5.

 

[Nithavela]

You don't "derive morality from any number of sources", just like you don't derive life that way. You specifically need air and water, not any gas and any liquid.

I think you're oversimplifying both the process of creating life and of creating a moral framework. The christian religion has one of the biggest books in the world (the bible) as a basis for its morality, and many libraries have been filled with works derived from this book, and still your religion is fractured into many derivatives that argue and sometimes kill each other. Also, those same christians STILL show no sign of actually being more moral as a group.

Maybe you're using the wrong book? If you want to look at a religion that turns out VERY moral people, you should look into the Sikh religion.

I am not going to explain how 2+3 equals 5.

Appeal to Common Sense

 

[SkyWriting]

Stamp collecting is not worldview of existence of the universe and everything in it.

Try different clubs for what you seek.

 

[essentialsaltes]

The more atheistic you are the more incapable you are to judge moral ideas, because there's no morality to be found within atheistic worldview.

"The atheistic worldview" is just a lack of belief in gods, much like a lack of belief in unicorns. Of course there's no morality to be found there. That's not where anyone goes looking for morality. There are numerous moral theories, all of which are explored consciously or unconsciously by everyone on earth.

 

[Paulos23]

The more atheistic you are the more incapable you are to judge moral ideas, because there's no morality to be found within atheistic worldview.

You are assuming that religion or some higher power is required. All it takes is understanding of harm and not wanting to do it to others.

Now the world is not that simple, and there are people that lack empathy, in all beliefs, so you have to change your moral code due to new information. But all it takes to start is to pay attention and empathize for others.

 

[HenryM]

If you want to look at a religion that turns out VERY moral people, you should look into the Sikh religion.

Religion doesn't give morality. God gives morality. And He gives some morality to everybody. Someone gets more, someone gets less. Nobody gets all and nobody gets none.

There are less then 30 million Sikhs compared to more than 2 billion professing Christians, including that Jesus testifies that many who call Him Lord and present themselves as His followers are in fact workers of lawlessness which He will deny with words "Depart from me, I never knew you." So it's not really a thing to compare offhand.

But I don't know where this leads anyway, in relation to the topic.

Atheism denies sovereign being who created the universe and life so as a consequence it accepts nothingness and chance as fundamental principles governing existence. From those fundamental principles flow all other principles, including lack of morality.

Christians (true Christians, who Jesus recognizes as such) are sinful humans, like every other human. Bible itself testifies that a Christian is sinful. Without going into calculating the degree of sinfulness and comparing it to others, first difference with atheist is that Christian understands that he or she is sinful being with sinful nature, due to moral law which God provided. At the same time, God's creation is complex and there is more to be said about this, but it takes more time and space.

There is a verse in the Bible when nonbeliever comes to Jesus and says to Him that He, Jesus, is good. Jesus knows that young man doesn't believe that Jesus is God in flesh, Word of God, so He says to him: "Why do you call me good? None is good, save one, that is, God."

 

[HenryM]

All it takes is understanding of harm and not wanting to do it to others.

If there is a principle of "understanding of harm and not wanting to do it to others" within atheistic existence, that principle is way less important than principle of nothingness and chance, which governs atheistic existence. Because "no harm" principle itself comes from nothing, by chance, and is destined to nothingness.

At the same time, everybody who act opposingly to "no harm" principle are also acting fully in line with foundation of atheistic existence. They are not wrong to harm others.