Morality without religion or god(s)

[TraumaRN]

God is not by my definition good. God is the be all and end all. This is His world, he created it. B/C he owns it and created it, it is His to with as He pleases. If someone mischaracterizes His actions as evil, it is b/c they do not understand their place in the world, their responsibility as a being in God's world, or God's place in the world.

Look back again at the pale blue dot(Earth)... Take a good long look at it. Stare at the dot for any length of time and then try to convince yourself that God created the whole Universe for one of the 10 million or so species of life that inhabit that speck of dust. Now take it a step further: Imagine that everything was made just for a single shade of that species, or gender, or ethnic or religious subdivision. If this doesn’t strike you as unlikely, pick another dot. Imagine it to be inhabited by a different form of intelligent life. They, too, cherish the notion of a God who has created everything for their benefit. How seriously do you take their claim?” Carl Sagan

 

[spittledip]

God has definitely told people to do Evil. Sorry, those are the Facts, straight from the Bible itself. Your failure to see it is what is most disturbing.

I understand that the answer would not be satisfying to you. However, I have already answered this. You disagree with my explanation of morality which answers this question and that is fine. However, in disagreeing with my answer you would naturally come around to the post you just posted. We just have to disagree and that is that.

 

[spittledip]

Look back again at the pale blue dot(Earth)... Take a good long look at it. Stare at the dot for any length of time and then try to convince yourself that God created the whole Universe for one of the 10 million or so species of life that inhabit that speck of dust. Now take it a step further: Imagine that everything was made just for a single shade of that species, or gender, or ethnic or religious subdivision. If this doesn’t strike you as unlikely, pick another dot. Imagine it to be inhabited by a different form of intelligent life. They, too, cherish the notion of a God who has created everything for their benefit. How seriously do you take their claim?” Carl Sagan

I would never say that God created the universe for man. I say God created it for Himself. The Bible says this as well.

 

[sandorski]

I understand that the answer would not be satisfying to you. However, I have already answered this. You disagree with my explanation of morality which answers this question and that is fine. However, in disagreeing with my answer you would naturally come around to the post you just posted. We just have to disagree and that is that.

Your explanation of Morality is useless. It contains no Moral standard, at all. It justifies suicide bombings, assassinations, abortion clinic bombings, and even 9/11.

 

[spittledip]

Defining morality as objective doesn't make morality objective, Einstein.


I am very familiar with the idea.

You are lost, hopefully not on purpose for the sake of obfuscation/confusion in order to "win." Go read the posts in order, or stop bothering me. I have discussed things with you before, and this is exactly what happened last time. You mischaracterize arguments and you redefine words to your benefit.

How do you know which one is wrong?

Exactly!

This is your completely baseless claim.

That would only be true if morality were objective, which is not something anyone -- especially you -- has been able to demonstrate.

My personal moral code says that killing without justification is absolutely wrong.

HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE??!??

I think you understand, but refuse to accept. Either wrong is wrong or it isn't. If wrong isn't wrong, the we are not talking about morality or good and evil. We are talking about personal preference. If you think that which defines good and evil is merely personal preference and held to as a belief, then you are not talking about morality. If my preference is to kill people, who are you to say that I am wrong? B/C you have a preference that killing is wrong? If this isn't how you believe, please tell me why you think killing without "justification" is wrong.

 

[TraumaRN]

I would never say that God created the universe for man. I say God created it for Himself. The Bible says this as well.

Your OPINION is God created the universe for himself? Well that settles everything.

And using the Bible as your source is equally ridiculous. A book written thousands of years ago with no original copies, tons of various translations written by a sundry of anonymous authors and that is your valid claim for the purpose and creation of the universe?

I may not know what our greater purpose in the universe is but at least I can admit that. And that goes for what was there before the universe began although I consider that a slightly irrational question.

As far as how the universe came to be well science has a really great theory on that part.

 

[Moonbeam]

Your OPINION is God created the universe for himself? Well that settles everything.

And using the Bible as your source is equally ridiculous. A book written thousands of years ago with no original copies, tons of various translations written by a sundry of anonymous authors and that is your valid claim for the purpose and creation of the universe?

I may not know what our greater purpose in the universe is but at least I can admit that. And that goes for what was there before the universe began although I consider that a slightly irrational question.

As far as how the universe came to be well science has a really great theory on that part.

Cargo cults don't mean there are no real planes. The God you can't believe in because of the evidence you can't see doesn't exist.

 

[TraumaRN]

Cargo cults don't mean there are no real planes. The God you can't believe in because of the evidence you can't see doesn't exist.

But cargo cults exist because of real objects. Things that you can build touch smell taste etc. Cargo cults exist because any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

If I was presented with valid, verifiable, factual evidence for the existence of any supernatural beings I'd then consider the evidence using my reason, logic and intelligence. But so far there is no compelling evidence for the existence of supernatural that would stand up to rigorous scientific investigation.

 

[spittledip]

Your explanation of Morality is useless. It contains no Moral standard, at all. It justifies suicide bombings, assassinations, abortion clinic bombings, and even 9/11.

If you are worried that I would heed some "mystical call" to go kill people at God's behest,
you needn't trouble yourself with that. There is no changing with God, and it has been made very clear that murder and other such things are wrong. Christians are not supposed to be agents of change through the manipulative means of politics, violence, or any such thing. We are supposed to be agents of change through sacrifice of our lives to Him and allow Him to work through us in acts of love and peace and generosity, etc. Unfortunately,
Christianity has been hijacked by political forces throughout history, and has been hijacked
again by both conservative and liberal forces in this country.

In regard to "atrocities" committed by God:

http://sntjohnny.com/front/why-woul...cy-the-justice-dawkins-and-others-ask/65.html

I found the above link that I think offers some good explanations, although not enough. He does not mention that God commissioned Israel to be His Holy people that were to represent His holiness to the other nations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_Unto_the_Nations)

and how God warned Israel that other nations would drag them down if they did not remove them from the land (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+7&version=NIV)

I was reading Acts 7 the other day- the account where Stephen was about to be stoned to death, and the speech he made right before getting killed. In that speech he made mention of how Israel had been in slavery for 400 years. That kind of struck me b/c God allowed His people to suffer for 400 years for His purposes which seem pretty cruel. Of course there are all the prophets killed and disciples martyred, and Job who was tormented also, etc. It may come down to me and other Christians in this country being persecuted in one way or another as the years progress. It is hard stuff to accept, but it is stuff one really should mull over and ask God who is not really afraid of your questions. What it really comes down to is perspective. You have to get that proper perspective on life to be able to accept these things. Of course, If you don't believe in God, then it is moot.

Also, you have to remember that as God does not spare His own servants, nor did He spare His Son.

 

[spittledip]

But cargo cults exist because of real objects. Things that you can build touch smell taste etc. Cargo cults exist because any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

If I was presented with valid, verifiable, factual evidence for the existence of any supernatural beings I'd then consider the evidence using my reason, logic and intelligence. But so far there is no compelling evidence for the existence of supernatural that would stand up to rigorous scientific investigation.

You want material evidence for the immaterial? Science only measures the material, so that is a cop out more or less.

Existence of the material, which includes time, should be evidence enough.

 

[TraumaRN]

You want material evidence for the immaterial? Science only measures the material, so that is a cop out more or less.

Existence of the material, which includes time, should be evidence enough.

Science is not a cop out and asking for evidence is not a cop out. Its simply what ones does when you wish to investigate a claim further.

Ignorance is a cop out.

Claiming time as proof divine existence is a cop out. You still have not actually presented any evidence. Asking people to believe in a magical sky fairy on faith alone is a cop out.

If you really want to use time as evidence of God then why did he create the universe then wait billions years to create us?

 

[spittledip]

Science is not a cop out and asking for evidence is not a cop out. Its simply what ones does when you wish to investigate a claim further.

Ignorance is a cop out.

Claiming time as proof divine existence is a cop out. You still have not actually presented any evidence. Asking people to believe in a magical sky fairy on faith alone is a cop out.

If you really want to use time as evidence of God then why did he create the universe then wait billions years to create us?

Time means nothing to God. 1 day is as 1000 years to God- 2 Peter 3:8

I shouldn't have said that asking for empirical proof of the immaterial is a cop out, but it just doesn't make sense...

If you an explain how everything came to be out of nothing, you might have a point. It doesn't take faith to believe in a god really, or something outside of the material/time world, it only makes sense.

 

[TraumaRN]

Time means nothing to God. 1 day is as 1000 years to God- 2 Peter 3:8

I shouldn't have said that asking for empirical proof of the immaterial is a cop out, but it just doesn't make sense...

If you [c]an explain how everything came to be out of nothing, you might have a point. It doesn't take faith to believe in a god really, or something outside of the material/time world, it only makes sense.

Quoting the Bible as defense means nothing. As I stated before the bible is not proof.

Your second point is a little harder to decipher. Science is working on filling in the gap of how something came from nothing. Until then inserting god in that gap isn't proof of god.

And last sentence its doesn't take faith but it only makes sense...makes not a lick of sense at all. It is some serious mental gymnastics at best.

 

[IronWing]

My sock puppet created your sock puppet because it wanted something to laugh at. Prove me wrong.

 

[Moonbeam]

But cargo cults exist because of real objects. Things that you can build touch smell taste etc. Cargo cults exist because any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

If I was presented with valid, verifiable, factual evidence for the existence of any supernatural beings I'd then consider the evidence using my reason, logic and intelligence. But so far there is no compelling evidence for the existence of supernatural that would stand up to rigorous scientific investigation.

You mean so far as you know. If you want to perform an experiment as to how an orange tastes, you have to taste it. You will know what it tastes like even if folk who have never tasted one tell you it tastes like a banana. If you want to know who God is you have to have experienced the conscious state in which he can be known. That is a science that is not known to science but it is known to others. When you study religion you study instrumentation that is our of date and no longer in full operation. They are old and abandoned factories for psychic transformation, museum pieces of planes that once flew. You will not understand as long as you think you are going to find supernatural beings. The experiment takes place completely within. It is an alchemical operation.

 

[classy]

On this forum especially, people who are not religious have the tendency to use as examples those who do wrong in the name of religion ignoring the dozens who live right in the name of religion. So most debate on religion especially between a religious person and non religious person is really not possible.

 

[Orignal Earl]

 

[Atreus21]

So I feel I should say this first, I realize I'm potentially opening a can of worms with this thread, and potentially testing the potential limits of this new forum. I sincerely hope not as the discussions so far seem very civil and well argued. With that out of the way onwards to the topic at hand.

Morality without religion or god(s). This has been a quietly hot button issue in my life over the last few months especially because I'm an atheist. I believe myself to be literal anecdotal proof that you don't need religion to be moral. I believe the function of morality is make life around us more ordered, to make coexisting with others less of a struggle. I believe we are rational animals who can make a reasoned and intelligent choices regarding cause/effect of our actions, and that morality allows us to live happier, more harmonious, more peaceful lives. Morality should allow to live our lives without suffering, or at least minimize any suffering.

But whenever I end up in a discussion of morals with people, I find my lack of belief in god being thrown back in my face. Such as one of the doctor's I work with saying that without God she wouldn't have the strength to care for sick people and that without God her patients would die because she wouldn't care as much about that, and that without God you just can't be moral and just. Let's just say when she said that I immediately recused myself. Let me just say for the record how terrifying it is to hear someone claim they need God or anything else to be able to care for sick people. It makes me think you have no empathy, no ability to care for others. As an aside this same doctor refused to give Plan B to a rape victim in our ER because her religion and morals wouldn't allow her to do that. Thankfully another provider stepped in to help, but I digress(that will be another thread I think). It goes without saying I try to avoid working with this particular doctor.

The second example was one of my former friends, I broke the news to her I was atheist and her reaction was not good. She told me that I had turned away from God and towards evil and that she couldn't trust me because I didn't have God as a proverbial anchor for my morals.

Which brings me to my point for debate. I personally think that part of the problems specifically in America is our moral beliefs. I think too many of the people in power use religion as a basis for morals and it is causing massive amounts of harm. I believe that we have a massive lack of critical thinking as a society at large. We are too selfish, too enamored with this idea of "I'm self reliant you should be too, if you aren't you get nothing!" My own profession of health care is the perfect example of that. Why in 2013 do people have to make a choice between paying for food and keeping the lights on or paying for their own health. That is morally reprehensible to me. Cheap(or free access) to health should be a basic human right for EVERYONE, regardless of your circumstances. And let me be clear on my final point, I'm not advocating atheism by any means here, I'm advocating for using critical thinking, reason and intelligence to build a more moral society. Sorry if I got a little wordy!

Critical thinking, reason, and intelligence do not get you to morality. That's the whole point. Morality is itself an extra-rational concept. That is not to say atheists can't be moral. They can be, just as theists can be immoral.

The question is this: Without God or something like it to give meaning to all of existence, on what basis can moral acts be anything other than silly? If everything we do will inevitably lead to nothingness, why should we care if what we do is right or wrong?

 

[sandorski]

Critical thinking, reason, and intelligence do not get you to morality. That's the whole point. Morality is itself an extra-rational concept. That is not to say atheists can't be moral. They can be, just as theists can be immoral.

The question is this: Without God or something like it to give meaning to all of existence, on what basis can moral acts be anything other than silly? If everything we do will inevitably lead to nothingness, why should we care if what we do is right or wrong?

Negative. What is "extra-rational" about it?

 

[Moonbeam]

Critical thinking, reason, and intelligence do not get you to morality. That's the whole point. Morality is itself an extra-rational concept. That is not to say atheists can't be moral. They can be, just as theists can be immoral.

The question is this: Without God or something like it to give meaning to all of existence, on what basis can moral acts be anything other than silly? If everything we do will inevitably lead to nothingness, why should we care if what we do is right or wrong?

Spock told you the answer to that when he had to guess the proper trajectory to travel in time. He made the best guess he could because he was Spock. It is like the sign in the bathroom above the urinal. We aim to please, you aim too, please.

 

[Atreus21]

Negative. What is "extra-rational" about it?

Everything. The preciousness of human lives, for example, forms the foundation of many moral assertions. But from a strictly rational approach, a human life can't be said to have any more intrinsic value than that of a dog. It's just another animal, and any belief to the contrary is sheerly arbitrary; claiming that we're more important than dogs because we say so, but with no hope of proof.

In that regard, believing human lives are precious is irrational, or as I put it, extra-rational. It follows then that any moral positions based on this, such as being against murder, are undermined.

 

[sandorski]

Everything. The preciousness of human lives, for example, forms the foundation of many moral assertions. But from a strictly rational approach, a human life can't be said to have any more intrinsic value than that of a dog. It's just another animal, and any belief to the contrary is sheerly arbitrary; claiming that we're more important than dogs because we say so, but with no hope of proof.

In that regard, believing human lives are precious is irrational, or as I put it, extra-rational.

I disagree totally. We value human life more, because it is Our life. We assign these Values, it is only Rational that we assign more value to that which we rely on.

We may not always be conscious of why we assign that value, but it is not "extra-rational". It is completely Rational. What is Irrational is to assign the obvious to a Deity, a completely irrational being.

 

[Zorkorist]

A godless view of human value, is one that understands that all life is beautiful.

He understands himself, first and foremost, and understands that he is happiest when all life is beautiful.

La vida e' dolce.

-John

 

[Moonbeam]

I disagree totally. We value human life more, because it is Our life. We assign these Values, it is only Rational that we assign more value to that which we rely on.

We may not always be conscious of why we assign that value, but it is not "extra-rational". It is completely Rational. What is Irrational is to assign the obvious to a Deity, a completely irrational being.

This is an interesting kettle of fish....

If you are not conscious of why you assign value how can you claim that doing so is rational? Suppose what you are unconscious of is God and other people are just conscious of Him and know why they assign value. To love is to be struck dumb. It is totally irrational but there it is. Man is a moral being because he feels.

 

[sandorski]

This is an interesting kettle of fish....

If you are not conscious of why you assign value how can you claim that doing so is rational? Suppose what you are unconscious of is God and other people are just conscious of Him and know why they assign value. To love is to be struck dumb. It is totally irrational but there it is. Man is a moral being because he feels.

It is because we value our own Life. We don't want to die, because to die is to lose Life. Thus, our Life is more important by default.