Without God - Questions?

by Blueblades 53 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  hamilcarr

  The data are conflicting

  Maybe, but they're definitely not as stark as the hype might indicate ...

  I'm not so into these acronyms like SCCBS, ANES and GSS, but this blog article might be interesting.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Maybe, but they're definitely not as stark as the hype might indicate ...

  I'm not so into these acronyms like SCCBS, ANES and GSS, but this blog article might be interesting.

  The blog entry is specifically dealing with the methodology used by the author of the book in assessing the "charity divide" across the political spectrum. Specifically, the criticism is that it ignores political moderates and only focuses on liberal/conservative social differences.

  It really does not touch on the points of the Scientific American article and its reference to Brooks' treatment, which deal with differences in altruism regarding religious/nonreligious people. These are different demographics groups--that overlap the political groups above.

  The Volokh Conspiracy is one of my favorite blogs BTW, I usually go once a week.

  BTS
• 

  Junction-Guy

  Without God, then who is responsible for teaching us morality? Without God, then why should we even listen to them? Without a God what makes them better than us? Who are they to say what is moral and what isn't? The government? Society? since when do Atheists allow society to dictate to them what is right and what is wrong?
  
  Society in one country views morality different than another country would, without a God, who is the ultimate authority to choose which country's morals are right? Would war solve this problem?
• 

  hamilcarr

  Without God, then who is responsible for teaching us morality? Without God, then why should we even listen to them? Without a God what makes them better than us? Who are they to say what is moral and what isn't? The government? Society? since when do Atheists allow society to dictate to them what is right and what is wrong?

  I'd answer that morality is an intrinsic part of our being. Hence, evolutionary biology perfectly describes why we're moral agents. As a matter of fact, we can't escape our moral predispositions.

  4. Evolution explains family values. The following characteristics are the foundation of families and societies and are shared by humans and other social mammals: attachment and bonding, cooperation and reciprocity, sympathy and empathy, conflict resolution, community concern and reputation anxiety, and response to group social norms. As a social primate species, we evolved morality to enhance the survival of both family and community. Subsequently, religions designed moral codes based on our evolved moral natures.

  5. Evolution accounts for specific Christian moral precepts. Much of Christian morality has to do with human relationships, most notably truth telling and marital fidelity, because the violation of these principles causes a severe breakdown in trust, which is the foundation of family and community. Evolution describes how we developed into pair-bonded primates and how adultery violates trust. Likewise, truth telling is vital for trust in our society, so lying is a sin.

  Source: Darwin on the Right. Why Christians and conservatives should accept evolution (Scientific American, 2006).