Addressing the argument, made by many Christians, that with no god there can be no morality.
There is No Morality Without God
by whereami 161 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
N.drew
Does morality mean caring for the well being of our neighbor?
Or does it mean refraining from certain things because GOD doesn't like it?
-
NewChapter
Morality can exist without a god. Or a goddess. Or an ancestral spirit. I like his point that those that don't believe in a supernatural being are moral out of CHOICE, and those that do are moral out of being told their choice. Another good point, to us in the West, it is terribly immoral to fly planes into the Trade Centers. But to those that believe as the terrorists did, they did as God told them and were incredibly moral.
NC
-
PSacramento
The argument is that there can be no ABSOLUTE or objective morality, without God.
Of course that leads to the "which God" discussion.
Some, like Harris, say that morality is a naturally evolving thing, which means that it is subjective to the time and to what evolutionary state it is in at the time.
-
Brad Wilson
this may well be one of the best things I have ever watched on this topic and as a result I will change my standing from non-religious to "OBJECTIVE"
beautiful post whereami Thank-you
Peace - Brad
-
DagothUr
What is morality? A transgression against an imaginary being called "God"? Whose God? Transgression against a fellow human? That is a part of survival and is inevitable. Transgression against the planet? Also survival, also inevitable. Either we are all immoral from an earthly perspective, or we are immoral from the perspective of an absolute being who does not exist. When we will be capable of surviving without transgressing against the planet and against other beings (real, not imaginary), we will be moral.
-
cofty
The argument is that there can be no ABSOLUTE or objective morality, without God.
Of course there is no "Absolute" morality without god but there is "objective" morality. Human well being - or the well being of conscious beings - is an objective basis for morality. Faith-based morality leads to morality by divine fiat and leaves the faithful trying to defend all sorts of horrors.
Some, like Harris, say that morality is a naturally evolving thing, which means that it is subjective to the time and to what evolutionary state it is in at the time.
Evolution actually plays a very small part in Harris' thinking on morality.
-
Vanderhoven7
My computer is having trouble showing YouTube videos so I don't have a clue where the presenter is coming from.
But I think there are a number of methodological relativists out there who claim there is no such thing as objective morality....but who adopt a utilitarian approach to ethics...you know..."Its oK to kill people from the neighboring tribe or terrorist group, but very wrong to kill members of your own tribe.
Here's a wee conversation illustrating the plight of godless morality....which I'm sure won't win friends or influence people ...but here goes anyway:
Atheist: It is wrong to murder people
Hit Man: What's wrong with murdering people?
Atheist: Murdering people hinders man's being.
Hit Man: What's wrong with hindering man's being?
Atheist: That hindering mans being is wrong is an axiom that must be accepted or we cannot propose morality altogether.
= = = = = =
Hit Man: You seem to want to propose a morality around man as if man is the center of the universe of value. Why not build a morality around chickens? What if I told you everything that hinders chickens is wrong. How would you disprove my theory? If you can prove man is more valuable than a chicken, I'll agree that murder is wrong.
Atheist: Man is smarter than chickens so therefore more valuable.
Hit Man: Hey, I know some people who are about as smart as chickens. Are they less valueable than the smarter ones? Is it OK to kill them?
Atheist: ???
-
cofty
Why are believers allergic to common sense when it comes to discussions about morality? Is it because its god's last stand and must be defended regardless?
Why do we not hear people arguing that there is no such thing as an objective standard of physical well being and therefore its not possible to have a conversation about health? If somebody argued that I had no basis to assert that vomiting blood until you passed out was "bad" we would not give their opinion the time of day. What is so different about morality?
-
discreetslave
Good post. I find this subject fascinating. Have you seen the Qualia Soup videos? They make some excellent points much like this one.