Does morality exist without God?

[Freodin]

Have you needed 50000.00 dollars in a week or close your business? Pray on Monday receive it all by Friday .

So.... when the business my pious Chrstian friend and me had went broke, God didn't hear his prayers to save his business, his mortaged home, his family because of his evil unbelieving compagnon... or because he wanted to break him before he raised him up again... or because sometimes God answers a prayer with "no, take a hike"... or...

 

[Shane Roach]

Bull... If you have an Atheist, a Jew, a Christian, a Buddhist, a Hindu and a Muslim hanging out together, they could very well say that they have common moral values.... And they probably do for the most part. I would imagine they would be in common agreement that killing, theft, rape and other things like that are wrong... where charity, happiness, success and whatnot are good.

None of those people have a common written book of ethics with each other, yet they can all be in agreement about basic moral values. That says morality is independent of their religions or world views.




I have respect for many people who are religious, that doesn't mean I have to respect their views on a particular subject. If they decide to raise religion as an issue, I'm going to offer rebuttals to points I am not in agreement with.

Peace and universal tolerance doesn't mean you're not allowed to debate points. In fact, open respectful debate is usually key in determining what is true. If having your opinions critiqued offends you, the only advice I can offer is to grow up. I personally enjoy having my opinions tested in a good debate, it's been very enlightening over the years.




Because getting back to your initial fallacious argument... Atheism is not a world view. The only guaranteed opinion they hold in common is that they don't believe in a god.

As Atheists, we do not have dogma, and that is what you are essentially criticizing us for... We don't have a centralized "moral authority", because it's completely irrelevant.

Furthermore, you can't comprehend the idea that people just want to be moral for the sake of being moral... and don't need big brother dictating to us on how to act.

Despite the lack of Dogma, we are all generally in agreement that we want to see the world become a better, more peaceful place. We all generally have the same moral ideals, because most people naturally want to be good people.

But what you are not recognizing, is the ideals expressed above are totally independent of atheism. It has nothing to do with anything at all apart from an opinion on a god claim. Every other opinion a person has, may it be a moral/ethical value, or whatever is totally unrelated. This is why a centralized authority is irrelevant.
If you want to talk worldviews, then the majority of atheists would identify themselves also as secular humanists. That is a worldview, Atheism is not. Again, Atheism is a singular opinion on a single topic. If you want to read up more on Secular Humanism, here's the Wikipedia page: Secular humanism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


So I guess to finally skewer your point, Atheists are not chaotic because Atheists do have worldviews.... Atheism however is not that worldview, because it isn't a worldview. There's a number of different ones someone could choose, and I'd say out of the Atheist demographic, most would go with Secular Humanism. Chaos never enters into the picture.

Secular Humanism is more or less a case in point. From your link --

"See also: Secular ethics Secular Humanism does not prescribe a specific theory of morality or code of ethics. As stated by the Council for Secular Humanism,
It should be noted that Secular Humanism is not so much a specific morality as it is a method for the explanation and discovery of rational moral principles"

I get tickled at your insistence that there are immoral things in Christianity. Immoral to you, I suppose. That is the dogma of the atheist - my opinion is all and in all.

I also get tickled that you continue to try to peg me with this opinion that atheism is a world view when my entire point is it is a singular belief that, for some reason, tends to lead to the inability to draw together an organized group that would then have the capacity to even begin to think in terms of a world view.

I'm almost afraid to ask what teaching in Christianity that is based solely on the existence of a God is also demonstrably immoral.

 

[selfinflikted]

So.... when the business my pious Chrstian friend and me had went broke, God didn't hear his prayers to save his business, his mortaged home, his family because of his evil unbelieving compagnon... or because he wanted to break him before he raised him up again... or because sometimes God answers a prayer with "no, take a hike"... or...

Clearly he didn't have enough faith, nor pray hard and sincerely enough. If those silly SCIA (starving children in africa) would just realize this, they wouldn't be in the shape they're in now, you know.

 

[selfinflikted]

I also get tickled that you continue to try to peg me with this opinion that atheism is a world view when my entire point is it is a singular belief that, for some reason, tends to lead to the inability to draw together an organized group that would then have the capacity to even begin to think in terms of a world view.

Atheism isn't a world view, so why would you think we would all want to come together to formulate one?

 

[Shane Roach]

Atheism isn't a world view, so why would you think we would all want to come together to formulate one?

I don't. Again, that is my entire point. It's as if the point of your atheism is to resist the natural human compulsion to come together and compare notes and come up with some sort of workable system everyone could agree on. Even secular humanists, and there are precious few that come together even under that rather well known banner, come together and make the statement, "We don't really hold to any specific moral or ethical code."

It's like atheists are allergic to any morality or ethical system that might get in the way of their just doing whatever they feel like.

 

[selfinflikted]

I don't. Again, that is my entire point. It's as if the point of your atheism is to resist the natural human compulsion to come together and compare notes and come up with some sort of workable system everyone could agree on. Even secular humanists, and there are precious few that come together even under that rather well known banner, come together and make the statement, "We don't really hold to any specific moral or ethical code."

It's like atheists are allergic to any morality or ethical system that might get in the way of their just doing whatever they feel like.

lol

We don't come together to agree on moral codes because atheism is not a religion, a worldview, or a system of.. anything. That's the point.

It is also a false representation to say that atheists just do whatever they want. Because we don't share dogma or any other religious constraints doesn't mean that we are just hedonistic heathens. Many of us agree on what is moral and what is not - the only difference is we don't need a fictional god to dictate what is right and wrong.

 

[Gadarene]

lol

We don't come together to agree on moral codes because atheism is not a religion, a worldview, or a system of.. anything. That's the point.

It is also a false representation to say that atheists just do whatever they want. Because we don't share dogma or any other religious constraints doesn't mean that we are just hedonistic heathens. Many of us agree of what is moral and what is not - the only difference is we don't need a fictional god to dictate what is right and wrong.

In addition, many of the moral codes based in religion rely on taking incredibly broad human behaviours and declaring large swathes of them verboten - the traditional Christian moral code of no sexuality but married heterosexuality spring to mind.

It's not that many atheists don't agree on rules or don't want to agree on rules, it's that the rules that are arrived at (E.g. a rule like express your sexuality as you please as long as it's between consenting adults) are often much less specific than the religious standards that came before them, for the simple fact that humanity is much more complicated than those initially composing the religious standards ever knew about.

I'm sure it's very comforting for some people to have a bunch of rules like "X is bad, Y is ok, because God says so", or any such rule that oversimplifies a complex behaviour, but such rules are based on a denial of reality.

 

[selfinflikted]

I'm sure it's very comforting for some people to have a bunch of rules like "X is bad, Y is ok, because God says so", or any such rule that oversimplifies a complex behaviour, but such rules are based on a denial of reality.

Yep. And probably come from a need/want for simplicity. After all, one doesn't have to think so hard about things when all the "rules" are spelled out for you.

 

[SithDoughnut]

It's like atheists are allergic to any morality or ethical system that might get in the way of their just doing whatever they feel like.

You misunderstand. Saying that we don't hold to a specific moral code doesn't mean that we don't hold any moral code, just that we may or may not agree with each other. The moral codes that we hold are not dependent on our atheistic worldview, unlike for religions, which contain their own moral code that the members will (largely) agree upon.

 

[selfinflikted]

You misunderstand. Saying that we don't hold to a specific moral code doesn't mean that we don't hold any moral code, just that we may or may not agree with each other. The moral codes that we hold are not dependent on our atheistic worldview, unlike for religions, which contain their own moral code that the members will (largely) agree upon.

But that also isn't to say that atheists don't (largely) agree upon commonly held morals, either. Right?

 

[AnotherAtheist]

But that also isn't to say that atheists don't (largely) agree upon commonly held morals, either. Right?

And that raises an interesting question. If Atheists aren't following a centrally dictated morality, why is the morality of Atheists so similar?

 

[selfinflikted]

And that raises an interesting question. If Atheists aren't following a centrally dictated morality, why is the morality of Atheists so similar?

Because we are all a part of the same society. (And as societies go, most share far more common morals than not)

 

[SithDoughnut]

And that raises an interesting question. If Atheists aren't following a centrally dictated morality, why is the morality of Atheists so similar?

It isn't - it's just that the topics that get discussed here tend to be approached from a similar angle by atheists. If you asked about political ethics, I could almost guarantee that you'd get a far wider range of answers than by asking about abortion or homosexuality.

 

[SithDoughnut]

But that also isn't to say that atheists don't (largely) agree upon commonly held morals, either. Right?

Most people agree on commonly held morals, regardless of belief. That's why they're called "commonly held morals".

 

[selfinflikted]

Most people agree on commonly held morals, regardless of belief. That's why they're called "commonly held morals".

Exactly, so Shane's little tirade about atheists doing whatever they want is patently false.

 

[AnotherAtheist]

It isn't - it's just that the topics that get discussed here tend to be approached from a similar angle by atheists. If you asked about political ethics, I could almost guarantee that you'd get a far wider range of answers than by asking about abortion or homosexuality.

I think there are detail differences. But there's a lot more in common than there is in difference. While there's quite a lot that people discuss and argue about, there's a lot more that doesn't get discussed because it's more or less universally agreed and thereby uncontentious.

I don't personally know of any atheists who feel that homosexuality is immoral. I'm sure there are some, but I don't know any. At least not that they've told me.

Abortion is a more contentious issue. But my point is not that there is no variation in belief as to what is moral, just that there is a lot more agreement that disagreement.

 

[SithDoughnut]

I think there are detail differences. But there's a lot more in common than there is in difference. While there's quite a lot that people discuss and argue about, there's a lot more that doesn't get discussed because it's more or less universally agreed and thereby uncontentious.

That applies to most people, not just most atheists.

I don't personally know of any atheists who feel that homosexuality is immoral. I'm sure there are some, but I don't know any. At least not that they've told me.

Abortion is a more contentious issue. But my point is not that there is no variation in belief as to what is moral, just that there is a lot more agreement that disagreement.

Yes, but morality is not simply abortion and homosexuality - on these forums I've seen a wide range of political views expressed by atheists, each of which are different ethically.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Since God is here and there is only one God

That's a presupposition you can not prove.

and only one religion with a Savior who walked among us and died for us,

That's also a presupposition you can not prove.

I can't say goodness would be present without God because nothing would be present without God. We wouldn't have the freedom to believe or dis-believe His existance, we wouldn't be here.

This is also a presupposition, how do you know nothing would be present without God?


Your whole statement is one big presupposition without supporting evidence made on blind assertion. How would you expect that to be convincing to anyone, or considered a valid argument?

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

You just proved his point for him... all the hell quotes come from the New Testament.

Hell does not appear once in the Old Testament.

Therefore, Hell is a fiction made by later theologians after warping the ideas of the Jews.

Absolutely not.

Hell in the Old Testament.

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

Not if he designed them in a way to fail... if that's the case, he takes on infinite blame.

Interesting. God creates you with a perfect free will. He sets before you two paths, one clearly leads to Life and one to Death. He clearly tells you that you should "Choose Life!"

But you selfishly instead decide to choose Death.

And somehow this is His fault? That is the epitome of arrogance.