If you discovered God didn't exist, would you still want to be moral?

[CrystalDragon]

I'm curious, because I remember seeing some say that if they found out there was no God, then they'd have no reason to have morals and they'd just go around destroying things and killing people because morals would no longer matter.

So I wanted to see what people's own views were on that. Personally I think such a view is horrible and really paints religion in a bad light.

 

[Albion]

There's a probability that many people would react that way. But others would be guided by a simple "do unto others" which is to say there's an appeal to fairness for its own sake, even if God is stripped from the proposition.

But although I like mental teasers, I don't see how this particular one works, since there is no way to prove that God does not exist.

 

[Radrook]

I heard one believer in a God who punishes via literal hellfire ask:

'If nobody is going to burn then why have I been depriving myself off all the things I could have been doing but didn't?" So in her case and in the case of others with the same mentality it definitely would seriously influence just how moral they would be.

 

[RDKirk]

I'm curious, because I remember seeing some say that if they found out there was no God, then they'd have no reason to have morals and they'd just go around destroying things and killing people because morals would no longer matter.

So I wanted to see what people's own views were on that.

The ancient Greeks who invented philosophies such as Stoicism and Epicureanism did not believe in the gods as moral authorities, but developed moral philosophies based on human concepts of an "end good."

Without reference to God or a god as a moral authority, they still figured out that amorality was problematical for a stable society.

 

[-Luca]

I probably wouldn't because there is nothing for me to fight for.

 

[Lazarus Short]

During my days as an atheist, I lead a more moral life than many believers. Go figure.

 

[timewerx]

I'm curious, because I remember seeing some say that if they found out there was no God, then they'd have no reason to have morals and they'd just go around destroying things and killing people because morals would no longer matter.

So I wanted to see what people's own views were on that. Personally I think such a view is horrible and really paints religion in a bad light.

Observing how people who lives in chaos turns out, I'd rather choose order even if God doesn't exist

It's like comparing 1st world vs 3rd world countries. Lots of good things come with choosing order.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I'm curious, because I remember seeing some say that if they found out there was no God, then they'd have no reason to have morals and they'd just go around destroying things and killing people because morals would no longer matter.

So I wanted to see what people's own views were on that. Personally I think such a view is horrible and really paints religion in a bad light.

Some of this depends on whether on not Nietzsche was right about the nature of morality. The fact is, without a God, there is NO absolute ethical framework by which to define, measure or calculate the worth of moral acts. This isn't to say that most people don't try to be moral. But if everyone has a different ethical framework, they won't agree on was is 'most' moral. They might even have varying conclusions as to what is the most moral course of action in any given instance.

Sure, some Christians might think that if no God existed it would mean that people would think they are simplistically 'free' to rape and pillage. But, that's not really the case. What would be more accurate is to say that without a God, we'd be free to have sex with whoever, whenever, and however we choose along with all those who think likewise. And we could socially manipulate our way through life as best as we can.

And if Nietzsche is right, then we might also wish to find ways to achieve a 'will to power' in our own individual lives, without much regard for what we may think are subservient definitions of morality held by other people......that is, if there is no God.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

 

[Hank77]

I'm curious, because I remember seeing some say that if they found out there was no God, then they'd have no reason to have morals and they'd just go around destroying things and killing people because morals would no longer matter.

So I wanted to see what people's own views were on that. Personally I think such a view is horrible and really paints religion in a bad light.

If all the people in the world who do not believe in God acted with no morals our world would be a whole lot worse than it is.
All I can say about the people that you describe is that they, in their hearts, are not Godly people to begin with.

 

[Petros2015]

I'm curious, because I remember seeing some say that if they found out there was no God, then they'd have no reason to have morals and they'd just go around destroying things and killing people because morals would no longer matter.

Sounds like they've been playing too many video games.

 

[bling]

I'm curious, because I remember seeing some say that if they found out there was no God, then they'd have no reason to have morals and they'd just go around destroying things and killing people because morals would no longer matter.

So I wanted to see what people's own views were on that. Personally I think such a view is horrible and really paints religion in a bad light.

Eat drink and be merry, but not moral.

 

[FireDragon76]

short of mental illness, people don't become psychopaths just for being irreligious.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The ancient Greeks who invented philosophies such as Stoicism and Epicureanism did not believe in the gods as moral authorities, but developed moral philosophies based on human concepts of an "end good."

Without reference to God or a god as a moral authority, they still figured out that amorality was problematical for a stable society.

...right, that's why the Greeks (or its elites) practiced slavery...because they knew it was still moral to do so. [Isn't that right, CrystalDragon?]

 

[Roseonathorn]

In a society where people do not believe in God there must be some law. Still the law can not rule them all. The law demands proof. I think If I ignored God I would still care about people and nature. Probably I would care mostly for my own relatives. Certainly I would not become criminal. I also think if You get too many enemies You risk getting killed. If I did not believe in God but only in myself I would have hightened security. I think christian women should take selfdefence classes too, nothing wrong with that, but if You are a strong female You should consider taking a class where also men train so You do not end up kicking weaker girls holding a pillow too far into the room, but get to train with a man instead. Evil people need a change of interest to quit being evil. Not all people that do not believe in God are evil. I would say some people that believe in Gods existance and have seen His pover but have turned away from Him are more evil than those that are ignorant of Gods existance. People that do not believe in God might believe in the good of humanity, however I have seen good gullible people that need protection from evil sceeming criminals that can be nice to their own kids so there are all types of people around the globe.

 

[RDKirk]

...right, that's why the Greeks (or its elites) practiced slavery...because they knew it was still moral to do so. [Isn't that right, CrystalDragon?]

Umm...and the US practiced slavery even though from the very beginning there were Christians such as Roger Williams and atheists like Tom Payne telling them it was a sin. The Pope and the whole of Western Christendom eventually declared slavery a sin, yet the South persisted in it.

So whose guilt is greater? The pagans who led ordered lives that included slavery because their moral systems did not exclude it....

Or the Christians who practiced slavery even though their moral system did exclude it?

 

[FireDragon76]

Stoics were not out to change the world, just the individual's mind. Some were noble, compassionate people that freed slaves and adopted orphans.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Umm...and the US practiced slavery even though from the very beginning there were Christians such as Roger Williams and atheists like Tom Payne telling them it was a sin. The Pope and the whole of Western Christendom eventually declared slavery a sin, yet the South persisted in it.

So whose guilt is greater? The pagans who led ordered lives that included slavery because their moral systems did not exclude it....

Or the Christians who practiced slavery even though their moral system did exclude it?

RDKirk. I should have been clearer as to my intent in my previous response. My context was only within that of which Crystal Dragon is asking about in her OP. I'm not taking issue with the U.S. over slavery, and I'm not trying to turn this conversation into a "is slavery right or not" thread.

My point is that different ethical frameworks can produce various moral conclusions, in this case the (elite) Greeks, despite their supposed sense against the 'amoral,' still didn't have a sense that slavery might be 'immoral,' or that at least some facets or practices within it may be 'immoral.' In fact, people like Plato and Aristotle justified it. So, without a God to unravel morality for us, we can be all over the board...even in the name of secular morality, which is what I'm trying to drop a hint about to Crystal Dragon.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

 

[FireDragon76]

So, without a God to unravel morality for us, we can be all over the board...even in the name of secular morality, which is what I'm trying to drop a hint about to Crystal Dragon.

This attempt to prove the superiority of Christian morality is beyond ridiculous.

Even "with God", morality is all over the place. Furthermore, the concept of "secular morality" is hardly monolithic.

 

[RDKirk]

My point is that different ethical frameworks can produce various moral conclusions, in this case the (elite) Greeks, despite their supposed sense against the 'amoral,' still didn't have a sense that slavery might be 'immoral,' or that at least some facets or practices within it may be 'immoral.' In fact, people like Plato and Aristotle justified it. So, without a God to unravel morality for us, we can be all over the board...even in the name of secular morality, which is what I'm trying to drop a hint about to Crystal Dragon.

Ah. But even with God and a single document to work from, men appear to still be just as "all over the board" with morality even in the name of God...and western slavery is an example. Christian states going to war against Christian states is another example.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

This attempt to prove the superiority of Christian morality is beyond ridiculous.

Even "with God", morality is all over the place. Furthermore, the concept of "secular morality" is hardly monolithic.

...I'm not attempting to prove the superiority of Christian morality. I'm simply pointing out that without a God, we are potentially all over the place ethically, maybe even morally at times. (I'm sorry I'm not making myself clear enough for everyone.)

On the other hand, I don't really accept the proposition that "atheists are moral, too." Because to do so would mean we'd have to equivocate on the meaning of what being moral is.