Do atheists believe in objective morality?

[Gracchus]

If you came back from the future and found Hitler and tried to kill him knowing if you didn't he would begin a mass slaughter of jews.... In my opinion that would be OK. Although people from that time wouldn't because they wouldn't know what Hitler was going to do.

And what if Hitler's place was taken by someone just as evil but much more competent?

From a christians viewpoint killing is one of the ten commandments, although i'm confused by this because apparently killing in war is not a sin. So where is the line between killing in a war and just straight out murder?

The major difference is that the first will get you honor and adulation, and the second will only get you elected to public office.

Also... Lets say you are faced with a situation where if you lie and steal, you will save someones life. I would go ahead and lie and steal to save someones life, wouldn't you? Or would you watch this person fall over and die?

So you lie and steal, and save a life and the life turns out to be Hitler's. You are now a liar and a thief, and you may have done the world a great disservice.

Christians believe stealing and lying is a sin, so they probably wouldn't do it.

Hippocrates said about the art of medicine: "First do no harm." You are not morally responsible for any evil that arises as a consequence of your good deeds. Sometimes stuff just happens. But you are responsible for the consequences of your evil deeds. Still, from a practical standpoint, you may if you're clever, avoid blame for your evil deeds, but no good deed goes unpunished.

Ya pays yur nickel and ya takes yur chance.

 

[SithDoughnut]

To answer the original post: I cannot speak for all atheists, but I do not subscribe to the notion that any morality exists.

How do you define morality?

 

[allhart]

How do you define morality?

How does consciousness come from matter? For I think there I am? Person-hood??????

 

[SithDoughnut]

How does consciousness come from matter? For I think there I am? Person-hood??????

Was the confused smiley a prediction of my reaction to this post? If so, well done.

 

[allhart]

Why do people tend to ask about a person or person-hood? In-like, Why would God allow evil? It is always raised by a person about a person! Which means person-hood is in dispensable to the question, therefore the assumption is in the intrinsic value and isn't in the question, but is about person-hood. How can anyone be of intrinsic value if time plus matter equals chance......? They can't! The only way anyone can be of value is if the person is of creation of somebody with infinite and intrinsic worth. Which is God Himself! Raising the questions about evil argues against themselves and their worth! Furthermore what is the reality of Good?

 

[SithDoughnut]

Why do people tend to ask about a person or person-hood? Why would God allow evil? It is always raised by a person about a person! Which means person-hood is in dispensable to the question, therefore the assumption is in the intrinsic value and isn't in the question, but is about person-hood. How can anyone be of intrinsic value if time plus matter equals chance......? They can't! The only way anyone can be of value is if the person is of creation of somebody with infinite and intrinsic worth. Which is God Himself! Raising the questions about evil argues against themselves and their worth! Furthermore what is the reality of Good?

I'm going to be honest, and I hope you take this as constructive criticism. I'm currently in Japan, and I see a lot of Engrish. Stuff that looks like this:

This is what your posts read like, albeit with slightly better sentence structures. I know that there's a theme in there somewhere, but half your sentences seem entirely unrelated to anything else. I physically cannot follow your posts, because each sentences is unrelated to the one before or after it. There's no logic. Is there any way you could possibly rephrase them or something to make more sense?

As I've already said, I hope you don't take this as an insult, I just wanted to illustrate my point. I can't reply to your posts because I don't understand them.

 

[allhart]

I'm going to be honest, and I hope you take this as constructive criticism. I'm currently in Japan, and I see a lot of Engrish. Stuff that looks like this:

This is what your posts read like, albeit with slightly better sentence structures. I know that there's a theme in there somewhere, but half your sentences seem entirely unrelated to anything else. I physically cannot follow your posts, because each sentences is unrelated to the one before or after it. There's no logic. Is there any way you could possibly rephrase them or something to make more sense?

As I've already said, I hope you don't take this as an insult, I just wanted to illustrate my point. I can't reply to your posts because I don't understand them.

Thanks for showing some interest, however; I do ramble from topic to topic trying to show multifaceted concepts and precepts around God. Trying to get people to think outside of the God box they put themselves and Him in! We have to seek out the answers from others or of God, especially the mysteries of God!

 

[allhart]

Unity coupled to diversity makes for the word university........ Which unifies us in essence our existence by the first cause. To which our coexistence makes our community! Nothing comes from nothing! How does time, space and matter coexist and in the first place where does it come from? And how does consciousness come from matter?

 

[Exiledoomsayer]

I'm going to be honest, and I hope you take this as constructive criticism. I'm currently in Japan, and I see a lot of Engrish. Stuff that looks like this:

This is what your posts read like, albeit with slightly better sentence structures. I know that there's a theme in there somewhere, but half your sentences seem entirely unrelated to anything else. I physically cannot follow your posts, because each sentences is unrelated to the one before or after it. There's no logic. Is there any way you could possibly rephrase them or something to make more sense?

As I've already said, I hope you don't take this as an insult, I just wanted to illustrate my point. I can't reply to your posts because I don't understand them.

I got to admit you have made this point so clear its impressive.

It really does feel like that, you know there is a theme going on but what is actually being said doesnt make any sense or logic and your left with little more then a rough feeling for what the theme was but not a single idea of what was being said or how to respond to it.

Not meant mean in anyway.

 

[SithDoughnut]

Unity coupled to diversity makes for the word university........ Which unifies us in essence our existence by the first cause.

Unity is people joined together under a common cause or name. Diversity refers to the differences between people.

A university is a centre for higher education. I think you may have missed something here, because your conclusion does not follow.

To which our coexistence makes our community!

Indeed, communities can co-exist.

Nothing comes from nothing!

Depends. I've seen a study (or at least the abstract of a study - it's not my area of expertise) that states that absolute nothing is very unstable, and could theoretically produce something. I should try to find that study again and get someone here to explain it to me.

Of course, you're making the false assumption that it's either God or nothing. It isn't, there are an infinite number of possibilities.

How does time, space and matter coexist and in the first place where does it come from?

Big Bang. There was no before, so I have no idea where the Big Bang came from, if that even makes any sense. The Big Bang was physically the beginning.

And how does consciousness come from matter?

You're assuming that consciousness is independant to matter. I would disagree with that premise.

 

[allhart]

Unity is people joined together under a common cause or name. Diversity refers to the differences between people.

A university is a centre for higher education. I think you may have missed something here, because your conclusion does not follow.

Indeed, communities can co-exist.

Depends. I've seen a study (or at least the abstract of a study - it's not my area of expertise) that states that absolute nothing is very unstable, and could theoretically produce something. I should try to find that study again and get someone here to explain it to me.

Of course, you're making the false assumption that it's either God or nothing. It isn't, there are an infinite number of possibilities.

Big Bang. There was no before, so I have no idea where the Big Bang came from, if that even makes any sense. The Big Bang was physically the beginning.

You're assuming that consciousness is independant to matter. I would disagree with that premise.

Bang of what? Motion, space, energy, mass, matter, time, light, darkness, anti matter, density and on and on! You have assumptions of something before nothing! lol I'd say whatever college of diversity you are getting, needs to get a perspective grip on reality! Their intent is plainly seen prior to their content (contradictions)! The basic building blocks are seen in community! All logical questions proceed with Origin, meaning, morality and destiny! And ya'll leap frog right over origin and cause to the effects! The best educational system is to look at the theory's on all perspectives and opinions to formulate your own! Not one sided. If I want to see about the Christians faith....I don't listen to the atheist on the subject. I got go to a Biblical scholar! Science is clearly not behind it all it is after the fact!

 

[Ayersy]

Why do people tend to ask about a person or person-hood? In-like, Why would God allow evil? It is always raised by a person about a person! Which means person-hood is in dispensable to the question, therefore the assumption is in the intrinsic value and isn't in the question, but is about person-hood. How can anyone be of intrinsic value if time plus matter equals chance......? They can't! The only way anyone can be of value is if the person is of creation of somebody with infinite and intrinsic worth. Which is God Himself! Raising the questions about evil argues against themselves and their worth! Furthermore what is the reality of Good?

Since when does anything have intrinsic value?

We humans are good at assigning personal value to things (Specifically, ourselves), but there's nothing to say that anything has any value or meaning.

 

[allhart]

Since when does anything have intrinsic value?

We humans are good at assigning personal value to things (Specifically, ourselves), but there's nothing to say that anything has any value or meaning.

Measurement of worth. What gold standard on human worth do you measure? What is the reality of Good? It is like when we get lost at night we look to the North star. How and what do you measure your worth or human worth? For some measurements surely don't add up!

 

[JGG]

Measurement of worth. What gold standard on human worth do you measure? What is the reality of Good? It is like when we get lost at night we look to the North star. How and what do you measure your worth or human worth? For some measurements surely don't add up!

According to the American National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a human casualty from a traffic accident (counting funeral costs, lost wages, pain and suffering) would run the cost of about US$200,000 (of course that's based on the value of the dollar in the 1970s). Maybe a little more now.

Hey, you did ask. Just don't shoot the messenger.

 

[Ayersy]

Measurement of worth. What gold standard on human worth do you measure? What is the reality of Good? It is like when we get lost at night we look to the North star. How and what do you measure your worth or human worth? For some measurements surely don't add up!

I'm a nihilist. I don't believe that anything has any objective worth or value.

 

[allhart]

I'm a nihilist. I don't believe that anything has any objective worth or value.

This is where intrinsic value comes in!

 

[allhart]

I'm a nihilist. I don't believe that anything has any objective worth or value.

Then why do you lock your house and car when you leave it or place your money in a bank.... in attempt to draw interest? Why do you get paid wages in scale per hour/salary? Of course you do ,you just discredit the person of intrinsic worth, but that doesn't mean your right.....It all is in how you discern truth even if your don't want to believe or chose not to believe in the truth! Follow the evidence wherever it takes you!

 

[SithDoughnut]

Then why do you lock your house and car when you leave it or place your money in a bank.... in attempt to draw interest? Why do you get paid wages in scale per hour/salary? Of course you do ,you just discredit the person of intrinsic worth, but that doesn't mean your right.....It all is in how you discern truth even if your don't want to believe or chose not to believe in the truth! Follow the evidence wherever it takes you!

Not believing in objective worth doesn't mean you don't believe in worth at all. You just realise that your view isn't the same as other people's, and that you are only using your own personal standards, not some fixed objective list of criteria.

 

[allhart]

Not believing in objective worth doesn't mean you don't believe in worth at all. You just realise that your view isn't the same as other people's, and that you are only using your own personal standards, not some fixed objective list of criteria.

Rules and values are standards of what is good therefore if you stop being better you stop being good.Truth ultimately is good and prevails even if you don't believe it or not! Might look at as though a person who needs glasses! I have 20/15 while most have 20/20......standard of measure. You can see but can you see truly the right perspective?

 

[LoooveLikeFire]

Not believing in objective worth doesn't mean you don't believe in worth at all. You just realise that your view isn't the same as other people's, and that you are only using your own personal standards, not some fixed objective list of criteria.

I said this earlier, but there were no decent responses so I'll say it again in case you missed it or something.

According to Theodore Schick, Jr., Professor of Philosophy and secular humanist; subjective moral values fail to meet the criteria of adequacy for ethical theories for 3 reasons. It sanctions obviously immoral acts, it implies that people are morally infallible and it denies that there are substantive moral disputes.

Prominent atheist and ethicist, Walter Sinnott Armstrong realises that subjectivism is a failed theory and so argues for moral objectivity based on human flourishing but when asked to defend his position he says, ' [William Lane] Craig still might ask, 'What’s immoral about causing serious harms to other people without justification?' But now it seems natural to answer, “It simply is. Objectively. Don’t you agree?”'

And that's his answer. "It simply is." He cannot defend his foundation.

Theists can.

inb4; Please don't throw the Euthyphro dilemma at me because it has been thoroughly defended and exposed as a false dilemma.