cofty :romans 8:5,6
Are Evolution & Morality Mutually Exclusive?
by shadow 57 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
adamah
Shadow said-
adamah: I have not lost faith in God and thus have a basis for morality which is absent for the disciple of evolution
I suspect you're confusing obedience to authority with exercising morality. Most JWs (and hence ex-JWs) don't understand the difference, since they only ask, "wait a minute: what are we supposed to believe?"
The problem is the Holy Book offers zippo guidance on many issues, eg stem cell research, nuclear arms control, etc. Such things weren't even a twinkle in the eyes of ancient men, and Bible principles (such as love your neighbor as yourself) don't help much when it comes to defining what is or isn't allowable.
USR said-
adam: laws change from country to country. so which is correct.
Why would assume "one size fits all" is a necessary requirement, or even a worthy goal?
You prefer such totalitarian approaches?
Heck, if you live in the US, on the issue of medicinal use of marijuana, we have a complex web of Federal laws and various state laws.
Most JWs are told not to worry their pretty-little heads getting involved, and are told they have an answer in Jehovah. That's probably why you don't see the value of the democratic process, where local communities are able to hash out such issues on their own, to make laws to fit their needs.
Adam
-
PelicanBeach
Shadow,
While I do not believe life on earth evolved, I don't think it can be proven that evolution and morality are mutually exclusive. Moral behavior has social advantages and mankind being a social animal (whether created or evolved) does generally understand those advantages, though we buck at them at times.
Pelican
-
jgnat
Several researchers have posited a list of universal morals. People are not just individuals; one of the chief advantages of being human is our ability for collective action. We have to be cooperative, persuasive, political, and altruistic on occassion.
Haidt's Moral Foundation Theory lists six ingrained, human morals:
- Care/Harm
- Fairness/Cheating
- Liberty/Oppression
- Loyalty/Betrayal
- Authority/Subversion
- Sanctity/Degradation
Collective advantage means evolutionary advantage. It pays to have a common set of morals.
-
designs
Evolution and morality covers many aspects- intuitive, biological, social. Many species such as our relatives the primates show many social decsions- nuturing, food gathering, even fairness. Homo-sapiens advanced because of social gathering which allowed them to progress from hunter-gatherers to agrarian stages and on into developing villages and cities. These steps involved the development of alteristic aspects to our personalities and brain development. These in turn enhanced humans ability to be creative and with creativity a further development of the need to share which strengthened the community.
-
DJS
Unstop,
You repeat what I hear from theists all of the time. There must be some official anti-atheist canned response and like mindless parrots you repeat the refrains over and over. I suggest you and the other theists conduct some actualy rsearch about how ethics evolved. And why do you give a care what consenting people do? Cheating and lying are not ethical behaviors, and they have nothing to do whatsoever with someone's sexual preferences or habits as long as no one is harmed and there is agreement and consensualtiy. As Cofty points out, it isn't rational to judge gays or lesbians as morally offensive; nor is it rational to judge what straights or bi's do, so long as it is agreed upon and consensual. Really, it isn't complicated.
There are MANY very good studies siggesting atheists or secular peoples and nations are much more ethical than theist and non-secular peoples and natioins. I have referenced several before on this forum. Below is another. I can do this all day long, but it won't matter because it does not appear that any of the theists commenting on this forum actually read anything scientific or think outside of their cherished beliefs. And beliefs are, evolutionarily speaking, right at the bottom of the ladder.
Journal of Religion & Society Volume 7 (2005)
ISSN 1522-5658
Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies
A First Look
Gregory S. Paul, Baltimore, Maryland
Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies: A First Look (2005) (Off Site PDF) by Gregory S. Paul
In this landmark study, Gregory S. Paul compares rates of religiosity and societal dysfunction between 18 democratic nations in the developed world in order to "test whether high rates of belief in and worship of a creator are necessary for high levels of social health." Paul finds that "in almost all regards the highly secular democracies consistently enjoy low rates of societal dysfunction," demonstrating that widespread religious belief does not improve societal health, and that moreover there is a positive correlation between a first-world country's level of religiosity (e.g., the degree of confidence that a traditional monotheistic God exists) and level of social dysfunction (e.g., homicide rates).
-
shadow
So morality is a common set of values agreed to by a group and enforced on any who disagree by threat of punishment. Until that group changes or is compelled to change by a stronger group. Might makes Right. Majority Rules. Morality is a shifting sand without any absolutes. In other words morality is a fiction.
Those who believe in evolution should cooperate with the group only when it is to their advantage. To do otherwise is foolish.
-
designs
After 1700 years of Christian tyranny in Europe many countries began the slow progress, after WWII, toward social fairness and equitability and the other progessive private and governmental models we see today. These are works in progress.
Paine, Voltare and Rousseau and many other philosophers set the groundwork for todays progressives during the Age of Enlightenment.
-
jgnat
I did not say morality by majority. I said we have some ingrained morals. They are testable, too.
There are times when personal sacrifice for the collective good is an advantage from the evolutionary point of view. Bees and ants know this. People do rise to collective effort on occassion, for instance, to win a world war.
-
Billy the Ex-Bethelite
shadow: "It seems to me that the "morality" of evolution should dictate that the individual does what benefits self. Why put community above self unless it benefits self? If an attempt were made to apply to a community, then it would make sense to cull the herd of non-producers like elderly or disabled."
"Ethics" or other courses in humanities/philosophy discuss these things with many different points-of-view, and the class discussions range from fascinating to bizarre. Even courses on religion can be enlightening when considering Eastern religions which are more about thinking and actions, but less about the role of God.
In brief, a strong community is a huge benefit to "self". In a society without common or written law and enforcement, nobody is safe or prospers. Sure, you may think you're benefitting yourself when you steal your neighbors stuff, but what about when he knocks you over the head with a rock while you sleep? Did your "taking what I want" attitude really benefit you? I don't think so. Without even introducing God into the equation there is a strong foundation for ethics and morality.
As far as the thought that evolutionists would gladly see the termination of the elderly or disabled, the fact is that evolutionists realize that they could be disabled at any moment and they will become elderly. It would be of little benefit to themselves to endanger their own future happiness and survival. A person doesn't have to be in fear of "god's jugdment" to understand that bad policy that may benefit me today could undo me tomorrow.
Our classes did have some interesting discussions about the development and role of religion on ethics. The part that was of interest to me as an exJW was that religion has been such a powerful force on undermining the seemingly inherent traditions of ethics and morality... (the blood issue, child molestation, and disfellowshipping come to mind as examples where life and family are highly valued and protected). As far as the evolution issues, we have inherited a large and complex herd mentality (such that we're able to wipe out every other species), and we've developed a huge and complex brain.
One of the bizarre things in current US politics is the republican party's pro-Christian posturing, yet they're taking the lead in letting poor children go hungry, live in dangerous neighborhoods, and get inferior educations.