I remember a long time ago in grade school when I told someone I was an atheist. The person immediately asked me what stops me from doing whatever I want, like raping and killing if I dont believe in a god. At first I was stunned, because the need to rape or kill someone had never entered my head. So for all you people who ask the same type of question, here is your answer.
First, ask yourself this question, if you saw a child killed right in front of you, would you just automatically, on a subconscious level feel immediate empathy for the child, which brings about the feelings of sadness, uneasiness, and even anger? Or would you on a conscious level think about the situation, realize that the bible says murdering a child is wrong, and then feel bad? If your answer is the former, than any argument that morality authority based solely on Bible falls apart. If we feel bad about something happening, we will do things to prevent it. If we feel empathy of someone who gets hurt, we will do what we can to prevent it. How much empathy we feel for someone correlates into what we do to prevent it.
Empathy, which is the basis for rational morality, is not the same in everyone. Think of it as an IQ scale for analogous purposes. Just like in intelligence, everyone has a different 'score'. The average would be 100, which is exhibited by most people and would be a general feeling of guilt and sadness when people are wrongfully treated, hurt, or killed. The higher the score, for our sake, correlates to more feelings of empathy. A score of 150 for example would be someone like Gandhi, who was so empathetic to the suffering of others, even his enemies, he figured the only solution to facing the British was total nonviolence. On the other end of the spectrum, lets say 50 and below, would be people like Jeffrey Dahmer, and more recently this Russian 'Chessboard' murderer, who feel absolutely no emotion when they kill. Think about it this way, if we felt no emotion at all for the suffering of someone, it becomes a non issue what happens to the person. Most people would nonchalantly step on an ant and not think much of it, feeling no emotion. But there are actual people out there that would never do such a thing as this because they would actually feel emotion if the ant was killed or suffered in any way. PETA is another good example. The whole reason they do what they do is because they feel tremendous empathy towards animals. Most people dont feel the same way, considering the evolutionary consequences of feeling empathy for the death of an animal would likely make you starve to death if you lived 5000 years ago.
Because of this, one must also understand that all human actions are selfish. Even the person doing charity work in Africa is actually doing it for selfish reasons. The selfish reason in this case would be to make themselves feel better. These are people who feel such a tremendous amount of empathy for others they try and do everything they can to help stop the suffering. This is natural because empathy brings about the feelings of profound sadness, grief, frustration, anger, anxiety, and disgust. Since people naturally do not want to go through these feelings they try and do everything they can to alleviate it. If you didnt feel any empathy for the suffering children in Africa, there is no incentive for you to do anything at all about it. Unless of course you read a book about a god who will reward you with eternal gratification if you help others in this way.
People who fail to understand why people can still be moral and atheist are the type of people who scare me. What they exhibit is a 'fake' morality, based on the premise selfish eternal gratification or damnation, not on your own inherent empathy and sympathy for others. Those who claim that the basis for all moral authority is the bible (or any other religious text for that matter) are not only wrong, but also explain a lot about their own inherent (lack of) morality.
First, ask yourself this question, if you saw a child killed right in front of you, would you just automatically, on a subconscious level feel immediate empathy for the child, which brings about the feelings of sadness, uneasiness, and even anger? Or would you on a conscious level think about the situation, realize that the bible says murdering a child is wrong, and then feel bad? If your answer is the former, than any argument that morality authority based solely on Bible falls apart. If we feel bad about something happening, we will do things to prevent it. If we feel empathy of someone who gets hurt, we will do what we can to prevent it. How much empathy we feel for someone correlates into what we do to prevent it.
Empathy, which is the basis for rational morality, is not the same in everyone. Think of it as an IQ scale for analogous purposes. Just like in intelligence, everyone has a different 'score'. The average would be 100, which is exhibited by most people and would be a general feeling of guilt and sadness when people are wrongfully treated, hurt, or killed. The higher the score, for our sake, correlates to more feelings of empathy. A score of 150 for example would be someone like Gandhi, who was so empathetic to the suffering of others, even his enemies, he figured the only solution to facing the British was total nonviolence. On the other end of the spectrum, lets say 50 and below, would be people like Jeffrey Dahmer, and more recently this Russian 'Chessboard' murderer, who feel absolutely no emotion when they kill. Think about it this way, if we felt no emotion at all for the suffering of someone, it becomes a non issue what happens to the person. Most people would nonchalantly step on an ant and not think much of it, feeling no emotion. But there are actual people out there that would never do such a thing as this because they would actually feel emotion if the ant was killed or suffered in any way. PETA is another good example. The whole reason they do what they do is because they feel tremendous empathy towards animals. Most people dont feel the same way, considering the evolutionary consequences of feeling empathy for the death of an animal would likely make you starve to death if you lived 5000 years ago.
Because of this, one must also understand that all human actions are selfish. Even the person doing charity work in Africa is actually doing it for selfish reasons. The selfish reason in this case would be to make themselves feel better. These are people who feel such a tremendous amount of empathy for others they try and do everything they can to help stop the suffering. This is natural because empathy brings about the feelings of profound sadness, grief, frustration, anger, anxiety, and disgust. Since people naturally do not want to go through these feelings they try and do everything they can to alleviate it. If you didnt feel any empathy for the suffering children in Africa, there is no incentive for you to do anything at all about it. Unless of course you read a book about a god who will reward you with eternal gratification if you help others in this way.
People who fail to understand why people can still be moral and atheist are the type of people who scare me. What they exhibit is a 'fake' morality, based on the premise selfish eternal gratification or damnation, not on your own inherent empathy and sympathy for others. Those who claim that the basis for all moral authority is the bible (or any other religious text for that matter) are not only wrong, but also explain a lot about their own inherent (lack of) morality.
