A Question for Atheists...

[Spinrad]

You atheist chicks, sheesh. What about the pron!?

 

[Boomygrrl]

There are many instances in the bible that promotes what I think is immoral behavior. The ten commandments covers some morality but not all. The old testament 613 (?) commandments some are very immoral. Jesus promoting abandoning your family to serve him, or the concept of hell...immoral.

So, let's start using our brains rather than following a book or automatically rejecting a book. We use our brains to discern what is moral in the bible, we use our brains to discern what is moral in other situations.

I think empathy plays a big role in how we treat others. Wanting to treat others the way you want to be treated (A Christian principle, but also this principle goes way back before Christianity existed). When we are babies we bond with our mothers, if we're fortunate enough. Through our experiences growing up, we generally bond with family and friends. The more we interact with others, the more interrelated we become. Being good makes us feel good about ourselves and about others.

Now, we can debate whether certain behaviors are moral or not. Most agree that rape is wrong. But some instances, killing is okay. In some instances, lying might be more preferable to the truth (not for selfish gains, but to prevent a greater catastrophe). The child lying to the potential perpetrator in order to get out of a bad situation is not doing wrong, for instance. Of course, the debate of whether homosexuality or non-marital sex is right or wrong will continue on. And Christians and atheists are on both sides of many of these issues.


Boomygrrl

 

[Araith]

Hmmmm, this is interesting, because as of yet no one has given me a reason as to why some of this is wrong. All your doing is dancing around the question. I'm beginning to think that you can't answer the question, which disturbs me.

Where does Jesus promote leaving your family to serve him? And depending on your knowledge of Hell, it really isin't immoral, though I don't want to argue that as it would take away from what I asked.

But seriously, no one has of yet answered my question, if you can, please do so.

 

[flicka]

Hmmmm, this is interesting, because as of yet no one has given me a reason as to why some of this is wrong. All your doing is dancing around the question. I'm beginning to think that you can't answer the question, which disturbs me.

Where does Jesus promote leaving your family to serve him? And depending on your knowledge of Hell, it really isin't immoral, though I don't want to argue that as it would take away from what I asked.

But seriously, no one has of yet answered my question, if you can, please do so.

I think people have done a pretty good job of saying why things are considered 'wrong', nobody is dancing around anything. But I'm guessing you have your own definition of the word and why thing are thought to be so, why not share that with the group? Uhh....does it have something to do with God?

 

[EdtheJesusfreak]

Hmmmm, this is interesting, because as of yet no one has given me a reason as to why some of this is wrong. All your doing is dancing around the question. I'm beginning to think that you can't answer the question, which disturbs me.

Where does Jesus promote leaving your family to serve him? And depending on your knowledge of Hell, it really isin't immoral, though I don't want to argue that as it would take away from what I asked.

But seriously, no one has of yet answered my question, if you can, please do so.

You've got a good question here. I was going to post something simular here in a minute.

Maybe I can rephrase the question a bit... If you were sexually frustrated one day what's there to stop you from raping? The worst possible result... the authorities sentence you to a few years of free room and board then you come out live your life. In the end does it really matter? Same for murder except you get more free room and board.

Sarcasm aside what drive's you to live a "moral" life if in the end you die and nothing comes of it. Why not have fun while you're here. Or are you playing the "just in case card"

 

[The Seeker]

Maybe I can rephrase the question a bit... If you were sexually frustrated one day what's there to stop you from raping? The worst possible result... the authorities sentence you to a few years of free room and board then you come out live your life. In the end does it really matter? Same for murder except you get more free room and board.

Because rape isn't very nice, its brutal and wrong and I wouldn't wish it upon my worst enemy. Furthermore, as a society composed of individuals, we all want to be protected from rape (by definition, nobody wants to be raped).

 

[EdtheJesusfreak]

Because rape isn't very nice, its brutal and wrong and I wouldn't wish it upon my worst enemy. Furthermore, as a society composed of individuals, we all want to be protected from rape (by definition, nobody wants to be raped).

I'm not saying that rape is nice, however what's to stop someone who doesn't believe in an after-life and God. It seems to me that whithout an eternal consequense that "being nice" would be irrelevent in the long term sceem of things. In the moment, self gratification would seem be the greater motivator. The same would apply to murder, stealing or insert "undesirable act" here.From the perpitrators stand point it doesn't matter if the victom wants it. But rather if it saticefies him/her in the moment.

 

[The Seeker]

I'm not saying that rape is nice, however what's to stop someone who doesn't believe in an after-life and God.

Empathy, my conscience, society.

It seems to me that whithout an eternal consequense that "being nice" would be irrelevent in the long term sceem of things.

It is to me.

In the moment, self gratification would seem be the greater motivator. The same would apply to murder, stealing or insert "undesirable act" here.From the perpitrators stand point it doesn't matter if the victom wants it. But rather if it saticefies him/her in the moment.

You ignore the concept of mutual protection. That is to say that society can protect its members from the actions of a minority, hence we call those actions "morally wrong", I support social protection from rape, murder etc. because I don't particularly want to be raped or murdered, besides the moral issue.

 

[benjdm]

Sarcasm aside what drive's you to live a "moral" life if in the end you die and nothing comes of it. Why not have fun while you're here. Or are you playing the "just in case card"

It is more enjoyable to be moral than to be immoral and feel guilty all the time. The just in case card is baloney, nearly all the Christians on this board have made it quite plain that if they are correct, we would go to hell no matter what we did. I will anticipate your next question as being why feel guilty ? I try and treat others as I would like to be treated. Call it empathy, golden rule, whatever. But trying to 'do unto others before they do unto you' would be stressful and would result in much less happiness. We use the concepts 'right' and 'wrong' all the time because we believe them as strongly as Christians. We just decided on our own what we thought 'right' or 'wrong' were instead of accepting what we were taught without question.

 

[Araith]

Haha, again, you provide an answer but no why. Where does your empathy come from? You're conscience? Why is it more enjoyable to be moral, is it simply the way of things? If so, then to what end would following it matter? Because it makes you feel better? WHY!

If we truly simply came into existence, then who can say what is better for people, or what is right and wrong? If we are simply here, your words as good as mine. You can't say that rape is really wrong if we all simply evovled on a planet for no other reason than chance. We as a race would have no purpose, because we simply came into existence. And if that's the truth, then we are free to choose what we may in our short lives, and who can tell me that I can't rape or murder or be "immoral"? Your words as good as mine, remember?

But just imagine for a minute that we were created with a purpose, for a reason, not to simply choose as we may and deal and recieve pain all our lives. Imagine we have a conscience because we were created to have one in the image of the One who created us, an empathy for others because we were created to be relational beings. Imagine it feels better to be "moral" because that's the way we were designed to be!

Don't you see, we were created this way, if there were truly no God, and we simply came into existence, then where does your sense of morality come from? Why should it be any different than a rapist? Because that's what you were taught? Because that doesn't seem right? Well it shouldn't! Because we weren't created that way, we were created in the image of God with a sense of his morality.

Think of it this way, if atheism was true, I'm no better than a murderer, you're no better than a drunken abusive spouse, because in the end, the only thing that seperates us is the decisions we make with the 70 years we recieved by chance.

I don't know why I said all that, but it simply came out, sorry if this is offensive but it just seems logical to me.

 

[The Seeker]

Haha, again, you provide an answer but no why. Where does your empathy come from? You're conscience? Why is it more enjoyable to be moral, is it simply the way of things? If so, then to what end would following it matter? Because it makes you feel better? WHY!

Evolution - it is better for the individual to be part of a coherent group. Who am I to question billions of years of natural selection

If we truly simply came into existence, then who can say what is better for people, or what is right and wrong? If we are simply here, your words as good as mine. You can't say that rape is really wrong if we all simply evovled on a planet for no other reason than chance. We as a race would have no purpose, because we simply came into existence. And if that's the truth, then we are free to choose what we may in our short lives, and who can tell me that I can't rape or murder or be "immoral"? Your words as good as mine, remember?
<snip>
Don't you see, we were created this way, if there were truly no God, and we simply came into existence, then where does your sense of morality come from? Why should it be any different than a rapist? Because that's what you were taught? Because that doesn't seem right? Well it shouldn't! Because we weren't created that way, we were created in the image of God with a sense of his morality.

Yep, but should you decide to rape/kill somebody, you could just have easily have decided to do so to me, if we allow people to hurt and brutalise others, we put ourselves at risk. Its not a complicated concept.

But just imagine for a minute that we were created with a purpose, for a reason, not to simply choose as we may and deal and recieve pain all our lives. Imagine we have a conscience because we were created to have one in the image of the One who created us, an empathy for others because we were created to be relational beings. Imagine it feels better to be "moral" because that's the way we were designed to be!

Imagine the Invisible Pink Unicorn (bbhhh) walked the streets at night handing out sweeties to all the good little boys and girls. Imagine whatever the heck you feel like, but it doesn't make it so.

Think of it this way, if atheism was true, I'm no better than a murderer, you're no better than a drunken abusive spouse, because in the end, the only thing that seperates us is the decisions we make with the 70 years we recieved by chance.

I disagree.

 

[Cian]

Haha, again, you provide an answer but no why. Where does your empathy come from? You're conscience? Why is it more enjoyable to be moral, is it simply the way of things? If so, then to what end would following it matter? Because it makes you feel better? WHY!

All that I have in life is my conscience and my personal values, so yes it matters that I live my life according to these values. This is my life and how I live it matters to me, I do not need a God or a holy book to give justification to my values.

 

[Araith]

Evolution - it is better for the individual to be part of a coherent group. Who am I to question billions of years of natural selection

If it is Evolution as you say, then why would it matter, there's no purpose behind it, why follow it, there's no real reason behind it, it simply happened. Why should you go the way it seems you evolved towards? Why does it matter?

Yep, but should you decide to rape/kill somebody, you could just have easily have decided to do so to me, if we allow people to hurt and brutalise others, we put ourselves at risk. Its not a complicated concept.

Complicated, maybe not, selfish to the core, indeed. Rape and murder is wrong 'only' because it could happen to you? Really, take a minute and think about what you said.

Imagine the Invisible Pink Unicorn (bbhhh) walked the streets at night handing out sweeties to all the good little boys and girls. Imagine whatever the heck you feel like, but it doesn't make it so.

I guess this applies both ways.

I disagree.

Why?! What do you think?

All that I have in life is my conscience and my personal values, so yes it matters that I live my life according to these values. This is my life and how I live it matters to me, I do not need a God or a holy book to give justification to my values.

Where do you get your values?

 

[The Seeker]

If it is Evolution as you say, then why would it matter, there's no purpose behind it, why follow it, there's no real reason behind it, it simply happened. Why should you go the way it seems you evolved towards? Why does it matter?

Logically, if evolution favours morallity and social interaction, then they must be rational (since you seem to be coming from the angle that rational actions are those which benefit the individual most, which I don't).

Complicated, maybe not, selfish to the core, indeed. Rape and murder is wrong 'only' because it could happen to you? Really, take a minute and think about what you said.

That's not the only reason for me, but its the only objective argument for social control over an action (that it affects other individuals). I also regard rape as being morally wrong because it goes against my personal values (as explained below), but my personal values are irrelevant in the choices of others.

Why?! What do you think?

For the reasons I've explained at least three times now.

Where do you get your values?

EDIT: I just realised this wasn't addressed at me , but the point still stands.
I'm a strong believer in a form of moral relativism (I don't know what the specific name is), which is based upon the precept that since morality is relative to the individual (not the culture), the only action that can be considered morally wrong is one that violates the person or liberty of another human being. I.e. a sort of mix between the golden rule and "an harm ye none do what ye will".

 

[Araith]

Logically, if evolution favours morallity and social interaction, then they must be rational (since you seem to be coming from the angle that rational actions are those which benefit the individual most, which I don't).

That makes no logical sense, seriously, because 'evolution' favors morality, which I see no proof besides you assume that evolution has somehow caused you to have a conscience and sense of morality, it must be right. Is that what you're saying?

That's not the only reason for me, but its the only objective argument for social control over an action (that it affects other individuals). I also regard rape as being morally wrong because it goes against my personal values (as explained below), but my personal values are irrelevant in the choices of others.

EDIT: I just realised this wasn't addressed at me , but the point still stands.
I'm a strong believer in a form of moral relativism (I don't know what the specific name is), which is based upon the precept that since morality is relative to the individual (not the culture), the only action that can be considered morally wrong is one that violates the person or liberty of another human being. I.e. a sort of mix between the golden rule and "an harm ye none do what ye will".

I'm not talking about if society should control it or not, I'm saying personally to you is it immoral, or wrong. Why is it morally wrong though? What at the bottom of it all makes it wrong? And if your answer is that if it were not then society couldn't exist, then I see that you think it otherwise morally acceptable.

 

[The Seeker]

That makes no logical sense, seriously, because 'evolution' favors morality, which I see no proof besides you assume that evolution has somehow caused you to have a conscience and sense of morality, it must be right. Is that what you're saying?

No, I'm saying that since evolution has favoured empathy and society in humans (otherwise they wouldn't exist on the scale that they do), they must be beneficial to individuals, since evolution selects largely at the level of the individual and the gene, as I understand it.

I'm not talking about if society should control it or not, I'm saying personally to you is it immoral, or wrong. Why is it morally wrong though? What at the bottom of it all makes it wrong? And if your answer is that if it were not then society couldn't exist, then I see that you think it otherwise morally acceptable.

I personally consider things that go against my values (particularly liberty, solidarity, equality, compassion etc.) immoral, you do the same thing with your own values, I'm just honest about it. I don't see why I have to justify it, frankly, considering that I'm not arguing for my will to be imposed on anyone else, merely for protection from others trying to do the same to me and my peers.

 

[Anjinsan]

Araith, let me try.

There is no absolute or transcendental why for my morality.

However, I do have personal whys, social indoctrination whys, empathy whys, and pragmatic whys. Of course, these whys are worthless to most Christians since they lack the almighty supernatural justification.

(Disclaimer: My opinion in no way shape or form represents all atheists)

 

[FSTDT]

Araith,

Do Atheists believe that suffering is wrong. When I say that, I mean, do you see a starving, diseased, much help needed community in a third world country and not like it?
Is rape and murder a bad thing?
Are there things that just shouldn't be done by humans?

Please answer that, but tell me why, as best you can.

Yes, atheists can have morals just as easily as anyone else. You have to keep in mind, atheism != amoral.

That being said, many atheists already understand that suffering is an important moral standard, it is very clear that atheists would not tolerate murder or rape (because that would cause gratuitous suffering).

If you want a little more technical answers, then understand that morality is essentially the capacity to make value judgements and weigh actions against those value judgements.

It is wholly possible to make a value judgement without referring to any hypothetical deities (in fact, understanding suffering as a moral standard does exactly that). Some people believe whatever we value is ultimately rooted in our opinions, but that form of subjectivism is almost universally denied by all moral philosophers. There is good reason to believe that morality has an objective component, I've written many posts on the subject of objective morality on this board, see one of my writings on the subject.



The Seeker,

No, I'm saying that since evolution has favoured empathy and society in humans (otherwise they wouldn't exist on the scale that they do), they must be beneficial to individuals, since evolution selects largely at the level of the individual and the gene, as I understand it.

Evolution does nothing but select the traits which are beneficial to survival. It is very understandable how evolution would select empathy (because obviously people looking after one another will be beneficial), but keep in mind evolution has has no role in prescribing which actions are morally right or morally wrong (I've seen some posts in this thread which mistakenly imply that evolved equals morally good).

 

[benjdm]

Think of it this way, if atheism was true, I'm no better than a murderer, you're no better than a drunken abusive spouse, because in the end, the only thing that seperates us is the decisions we make with the 70 years we recieved by chance.

What is so wrong with being separated / judged by the decisions we make with the 70 years we receive by chance ? Is that not what God separates and judges by, according to christians ? Or do you consider murderers and drunken abusive spouses a different species ? I am completely confused now.

 

[Boomygrrl]

Does the threat of punishment (Hell) or the promise of reward (Heaven) as motivation make one more moral?
I believe the person who has empathy and doesn't look at how it selfishly benefits them (in the afterlife?) is actually more moral.
I'm not good because I think that's what God wants me to be...of course if I believed in God, I would be good for that reason as well. I am good because I truly see value, beyond how it benefits me individually. I don't steal, even if I know I'm not going to get caught. I have a conscience, I feel guilty when I do wrong. Say it's from God, say it's our neurotransmitters in our brain. I don't care what theory you give as an explanation. The fact is I know I feel guilt, I know I have a conscience, I know I have a basic sense of what is right and wrong. I don't always agree on everything that everyone else agrees on (such as non-marital sex or white lies to cheer someone up especially if they cannot do anything about it to change "you have such beautiful eyes.") But when I violate someone else's rights or dignity, I can feel that awful feeling of guilt/remorse. Some of it is due to my upbringing, what my parents taught me. Some of it is empathy...that sense of connecting with others and valuing them as fellow human beings with feelings and needs. How can you prove it's from God or from evolutionary processes or anything else? I say it's a combination of my physiology (having workable neurotransmitters), upbringing, and life experiences.

Boomygrrl