Can there be morality without God?

[Verv]

Here are just some basic ideas:

(1) Men are more self-interested than they are good. They will tend to do whatever benefits them most, and even rationalize their own views in such a sense as to match their interests.

So there'll always be hypocrisy in both religion and other ideology.

Seldom are people so ideological that they do not pursue self-interest. And often... when one reaches a certain level of ideological loyalty, one is rewarded for this loyalty (literally or figuratively), and this produces its own course of wanting to expand that ideology's influence.

(2) Conflict is hard-wired into us. Not only is it more or less inevitable because of our conflicting interests, it is also something that gives us pleasure. Competition is pleasurable to all victors, just as is conflict ultimately, and the collective feeling garnered by it is as a powerful drug.

(3) Ultimately man is immoral with or without ubiquitous religiosity, I think.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The spirit of the law is the ultimate intent of the law, and is the antithesis of the written command. The literal commandments were meant to lead Israel toward the real meaning of the law, and were thus only a temporary guideline, a guideline that ended with the advent of the Holy Spirit.



"But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster." (Galatians 3:23-25 KJV)

Gotcha...I'll just disregard everything you were saying earlier about the "spirit of the law"

 

[Strathos]

In that case, neither can mine as you implied.


eudaimonia,

Mark

When did I do that?

 

[High Fidelity]

Yes.

 

[MehGuy]

Without God people are left to decide what is wrong or right. That sounds great to many people because they know what is wrong and right. Oddly, people seldom agree on this. Furthermore, when people gain power over others their view of right and wrong tends to change to right being whatever protects their power or grants them more power. Historical cases of this are:

Ukraine Famine | United Human Rights Council

and

Chronology of Mass Killings during the Chinese Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) - Online Encyclopedia of Mass Violence

Religious death tolls happen, but they tend to be relatively small and with good reason, ie crusades to kick out foreign invaders from Europe or the inquisition to root out subversive elements of society ie Kabbalists who were accused of sacrificing Christian children.

Look at your average atheist, and see how blood thirsty he/she is.

 

[Autumnleaf]

Lol we know quite a bit more of history than just recent history.

I'd like to know what you mean by, "by definition they were right."? You mean by god's definition?

Also, this is now hilarious..."Man's morality would be that killing people is wrong unless it is done in the interest of the greater good of society. ie War, abortion or whatever other LEGAL reason it is justified by."

Of course, god doesn't need a justification... because when he goes around killing, its automatically "right". Why, you ask? Duh...because god says so...

The parent tells the child to be in bed by 8 pm. The child gets mad and complains and has to go to bed by 8 and if they don't they have problems like doing poorly in school and not waking up on time to get to school. The parent stays up later sometimes and sometimes they don't. Sometimes the parent tells the child its okay to stay up later under certain circumstances.

Is the parent a hypocrite who the child should say bad things about? Or does the parent know more than the child and maybe the child is a fool to think they are on the same level as the parent.

 

[Autumnleaf]

Look at your average atheist, and see how blood thirsty he/she is.

What would be the point? The average anything is meh by definition.

Show me atheists who are not average who have contributed something useful to society. Mediocre atheists who take pot shots a Christians via half baked arguments are a dime a dozen and a big reason why America has sunk into mediocrity. When people viewed God as their boss they worked harder and soared to greater heights in all levels than they do when they think man is their boss.

 

[Verv]

Look at your average atheist, and see how blood thirsty he/she is.

But there is no average atheist.

There's prbably well over a billion atheists in the world.

How could one characterize them -- negatively or positively?

And historically, wow, the number grows exponentially.

But I am guessing your concept of the average atheist is probably some Western European or North American liberal. It'd probably be hard to characterize any of these figures as masculine, let alone bloodthirsty.

 

[MehGuy]

What would be the point? The average anything is meh by definition.

Show me atheists who are not average who have contributed something useful to society. Mediocre atheists who take pot shots a Christians via half baked arguments are a dime a dozen and a big reason why America has sunk into mediocrity. When people viewed God as their boss they worked harder and soared to greater heights in all levels than they do when they think man is their boss.

I wasn't aware that a tiny minority had such a big influence on the nation as a whole. I had no idea that atheists posting on forums and making Christians feel bad had such a powerful social impact.

I'm deeply sorry if that's the case. I'm so sorry for my existence.

 

[Verv]

I wasn't aware that a tiny minority had such a big influence on the nation as a whole. I had no idea that atheists posting on forums and making Christians feel bad had such a powerful social impact.

I'm deeply sorry if that's the case. I'm so sorry for my existence.

The actual atheist population is probably.. what? 30-40% among young people, if not greater? Maybe it's only 20-30% in America.

I think you think you are a tiny minority, but you aren't.

I also think you have a complex that you are somehow unique in this fact as a generation but this is only because you are part of a statistical upswing occurring now.

The last major upswing was the 1880s-1910, when probably a comparable number of the urban / suburban population was also atheist while young.

 

[MehGuy]

The actual atheist population is probably.. what? 30-40% among young people, if not greater? Maybe it's only 20-30% in America.

I think you think you are a tiny minority, but you aren't.

I also think you have a complex that you are somehow unique in this fact as a generation but this is only because you are part of a statistical upswing occurring now.

The last major upswing was the 1880s-1910, when probably a comparable number of the urban / suburban population was also atheist while young.

I had 20% in mind. Last I checked. Although that bunches in non-religious people in general and not just atheists.

That would be a minority, and most certainly not the majority. It's ludicrous to blame us for the downfall of America (whatever that really means.. lol). Honestly how much power and influence does the average young atheist even hold, lol. If anything it's the rich old white Christians who should have the finger pointed at them..

 

[MehGuy]

But there is no average atheist.

There's prbably well over a billion atheists in the world.

How could one characterize them -- negatively or positively?

And historically, wow, the number grows exponentially.

But I am guessing your concept of the average atheist is probably some Western European or North American liberal. It'd probably be hard to characterize any of these figures as masculine, let alone bloodthirsty.

What are you trying to argue here? That atheists are all over the place when it comes to morality and being decent?

If you'd talk to any random atheist, I think you'd come to the conclusion that most of them on average are not blood thirsty monsters.. There is some sense of morality and mutual respect.

Fortunately most atheists are not libertines.

 

[MehGuy]

How many people have you met who are totally devoid of any morals?

What does morality without a God even mean? Pure libertines running around everywhere? Are we all just sociopaths? The only thing keeping up for raping and killing is the fear of prison or execution?

On some level most people have some sense of morality/empathy for others..

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Gotcha...I'll just disregard everything you were saying earlier about the "spirit of the law"

I'm sorry that I wasn't more clear 'earlier'.

 

[Autumnleaf]

How many people have you met who are totally devoid of any morals?

What does morality without a God even mean? Pure libertines running around everywhere? Are we all just sociopaths? The only thing keeping up for raping and killing is the fear of prison or execution?

On some level most people have some sense of morality/empathy for others..

I can't see into men's hearts so I don't know. A percentage of people are psychopaths so I'd guess tens of thousands.

Morality without God means mass murder in the name of the greater good.

On some level most people do. Many don't. Having God's rules above the whims of men puts the power mad psychopaths in check. When God's rules are not recognized power mad men can do whatever they want if they have enough men with guns who are willing to enforce their will.

 

[MehGuy]

I can't see into men's hearts so I don't know. A percentage of people are psychopaths so I'd guess tens of thousands.

Morality without God means mass murder in the name of the greater good.

On some level most people do. Many don't. Having God's rules above the whims of men puts the power mad psychopaths in check. When God's rules are not recognized power mad men can do whatever they want if they have enough men with guns who are willing to enforce their will.

Only tens of thousands? And according to Verve there might be over a billion atheists. So the mass majority of them have to possess at least some sense of empathy/morality.

Even men like Hitler seemed to have a sense of morality.

And that is the scary thing about human beings. Back in slavery days masters could whip and mutilate their slaves, yet be gentle and caring to their children and wives. Studies actually show that sadistic people actually have an over abundance of empathy. In reality extremely cruel and harsh men can also quite easily be decent and loving. It's far from black and white.

At least now you can admit that most atheists at least possess some sense of morality. The idea that we're all just sociopaths is just silly.

 

[stevevw]

As I pointed out in my previous post, you have an immense amount of work ahead of you. A moral philosophy of the 'divine' is rife with problems so numerous and so basic, I dismiss it out of hand for the vacuous, incoherent mess that it is.

Also, 'subjective' and 'goddidit' is a false dichotomy.

Well first off I didn't mention God so you have jumped the gun a bit and assumed that. That shows more of a reaction than a response. Lets say there was no God. So we know that humans are fallible and we have a track record for thinking something is good and then finding out its not and having to live with the consequences. That has cost us in many ways throughout time with wars, our health including deaths and probably economically as well. So if we knew of a source that was infallible or at least pretty good at getting things right wouldn't it make sense to then allow that source to be the judge of what is right and wrong.

Now if we knew that this was the case from some evidence would we still put our lives into that sources hand even it we knew that we had a much better chance of living a better life with better consequences. I would say that is questionable because we still have this element of rebellion in us. We dont like being told what to do and when to do it. So it seems there is more to it than just what is the best for us. But gods aside it seems to make sense that if we cant make the right choices and dont really know how to judge things properly then we would be better off putting our lives in the hands of someone or something that did.

Furthermore,

That is nonsense.

Ignoring for the moment the fact that 'divine' moral philosophy is an ontological and epistemological deadzone, utterly incapable of guiding us in any meaningful fashion,

I disagree. As with most religions there are clear morals that are fairly similar. The Christian religion is very specific for what is right and what is wrong. It begins with the 10 commandments and is fulfilled in Christ. We can see the example of Christ in His life and teachings. There is no ambiguity in that. If anything it is subjective views which can confuse things even when it comes to religion.

the Christian dogma of vicarious redemption destroys the entire concept of accountability. Under your system, the lifelong serial street mugger, rapist, arsonist and torture-murdering pederast can have a deathbed conversion and go to heaven, with no accountability to his victims whatsoever. Meanwhile, the lifelong atheist philanthropist goes to hell.

You are taking what salvation and redemption truly means. You are leaving out the every essence of it. Its not something that is a get out of jail free card like you are alluding. That is a very one sided view. For one it would be rare fro someone like that to get to that point of true repentance. God deals with a persons heart not some charade they may put on. You cant fool God and thats the point. He knows peoples true intentions where mankind doesn't and will never be a good judge at what is the right thing to do when it comes to punishment and forgiveness.

But if a person was truly sorrowful and repented for what they have done why cant they be forgiven. The idea is not all about punishment with wrong doing. Its really about the person changing and becoming a good person isn't it. We know from the stats with the way our justice system works that we have failed miserably when it comes to truly changing people and stopping the bad behavior. The death penalty doesn't work, our jails are just getting overcrowded and the stats for re offending are great. Its rare for offender to rehabilitate. Our system is based on revenge and consequence not love and forgiveness. The facts are Jesus has saved many and change people from the inside out, me being one of them.

To even pretend such a system is designed to engender any moral behavior at all is almost too sad to be funny, but not quite.

I think the current system is too sad to be funny. If you think that what we are doing now is a solution then we have no hope. If you think we will get it right in the future then you are kidding yourself. We just dont know how to really judge and punish. The system is full of double standards, dirty deals, corruption, band aid solutions, good intentions, lack of money and to many do gooders that dont know what they are doing.

The thing is when we decide that we know better as humans thats when we get it wrong. We tell ourselves that we are good enough and come up with all the latest and greatest ideas and new ways to do things. But in the end it doesn't work and we end up with just as many problems if not more to deal with. But then we do it all again but tell ourselves it will be different next time. In the end its the lunatic and inmates running the asylum and the system.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I can't see into men's hearts so I don't know. A percentage of people are psychopaths so I'd guess tens of thousands.

Morality without God means mass murder in the name of the greater good.

On some level most people do. Many don't. Having God's rules above the whims of men puts the power mad psychopaths in check. When God's rules are not recognized power mad men can do whatever they want if they have enough men with guns who are willing to enforce their will.

This is a completely unfounded claim...and it's contrary to the evidence. For people struggling with mental illness, religiosity tends to make their struggles much worse. There are even mental illnesses entirely focused upon a person's religious beliefs.

 

[Verv]

Nah, the only people with power are the very most, top-most elite. No one else. It doesn'tmake sense to imply that the ever-aging Christian middle class had power. They were being stripped of it before they were even born -- the feminist movements, the pro-divorce movements, the pro-abortion movements, the nature of public education, etc. were all orchestrated by the most elite people.

In fact the Christian majority that had participated in any capacity in the above were the useful idiots that helped disarm themselves.

But then they all got sucked into some big business Republican talk and ultimately they became useless.

But this doesn't even really matter because the moral climate of a place was bound to sink into the sands.

We're talking about a theologically ignorant people wit tons of money. What more could go morally wrong?

It has resulted in the destruction of the planet, the murders of tens of thousands of Third Worlders with no real elevation of their positions, mass substance abuse and addiction to cheap entertainment... Really, now, how could it not be a decadent civilization slipping into irrelevance?

 

[stevevw]

Don't you automatically agree that all of God's actions were moral, even when they are clearly immoral? For example when god commits genocide and endorses slavery and child sacrifice.

For instance: If I see a Christian priest raping a child, I stop the rapist. When your God sees a Christian priest raping a child he says "Carry on, don't forget to ask for forgiveness", and closes the door. Who is acting morally and who is acting immorally?

Thats what I dont get with atheist non believers. You accuse believers of trying to install our morals onto others. you claim that no one knows the true meaning of right and wrong and especially say that our God is not one who has any claim to being worthy to judge. Yet you then use the same stance and morals to judge God and believers with. Are the moral values you are using to assess that God is immoral the true morals according to you. How do you know that the morals you are judging God with are the truth. How do you know that what God does isn't associated with a greater truth. It seems you are now claiming you know what is truly right and wrong.

You almost deny the truth so that you can accuse God. You claim to know what God thinks. You believe in mans ability to be subjective but you dont apply that to a believer so that you can take away any human aspect involved where God is concerned. You focus on an evil that men do whether they are representing God or not and blame God for it all. But then conveniently overlook any good that people do as Christians at the same time. God and believers are damned if they do and damned if they dont according to that logic.