Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
A Fine Example of Theocracy Indeed
Options
Comments
-
-
Dunno Sam - its your ball
It's all gone very cosmic
We're down to three choices, each of which explain why people don't do wrong even if they won't get caught.:- The theory of memes. We copied the idea from others.
- The theory that we have an evolutionary instinct for good. The genes that give us good feelings by doing good for those around us helped us survive.
- The theory of God. We will be punished after death. (possibly just another meme)
Each of those theories suffers from the same problem: if we realise that we're only avoiding doing bad even though we won't get caught because we copied the idea, because it's instinctual or because we're afraid of a meme that isn't real, we might just drop the whole morality thing, at least in private.
The only one of those that's foolproof is where we all fully believe in God because neither the spread of memes nor evolution are perfect so I can see why the theory of God is so appealing to people, the alternatives are quite scary but unfortunately that doesn't go anywhere near proving that God actually exists. It just explains why people are inclined to believe he does0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
It doesn't have a defined path, no, but that does not mean that the sense of morality that came out of it is worthless. Our sense of morality allowed us to survive when other animals didn't. We'd do well do pay heed to itYes but evolution to you surely has no overarching purpose, meaning or direction?
The evidence is simply that we don't go around murdering each other all the timeThat it is evidence that the "goodness of man" is a faith based fantasy. Yo have offered no evidence that we should have faith in our fellow man's goodness.
Yes it happens, but not nearly to the extent that you would expect if not getting your morality from religion had a negative effect. Religious people have never been shown to be less likely to break the law than non-religious.
I'm not really sure of your point here. Are you agreeing with me that atheist based morality differs little from religious morality or are you saying it ironically? If you agree with me then why do you insist that I supply evidence to show it?Religious morality differs little from atheist morality. It's not as if the decline in or elimation of religion would make much difference to the state of the world. Indeed, in recent decades of religious decline, capitalism has become ever more pervasive and aggressive. Care to make the point that half the world wouldn't be starving if religion didn't exist?
Again, I'm not sure if you're being sincere here.Because most people are doing selfless good deeds for the happiness you get doing it.
In fact no you haven't. Your point in this thread is that "Religious morality is realistic morality." I then asked you to explain sweden and you said: "Sweden has the rule of law. It has peer pressure and social conventions into which its people are indoctrinated, as every culture does. But the fact remains that the morality of the Swedish people remains untested. Their wealth means that there is no need to steal or kill in order feel secure."I have already explained Sweden. Search the thread.
All that does is completely destroy your point because you showed that a country can trundle along just fine without religious morality as long as they have those other factors. And religious morality has never been shown to fare any better without those factors anyway. Even in a country with religion, those are already the factors that mostly influence people, religious people just like to convince themselves otherwise. The fact that many of them don't disapprove of homosexuality and don't believe that 'women should be silent' shows that they're not really getting their morality from their religion. They're getting it from society like everyone else
I was referring to the above quote where you said "the morality of the Swedish people remains untested". I'm making the point that if someone has no morality because they have no 'better nature', they shouldn't have to have it tested in order for it to come out, it should come out anyway. And religious morality has failed time and time again when it has been tested. All you're doing is showing that non-religious morality is just fine and dandy and that religious morality is no betterNot sure what you're saying here. Forced into what? Who did I accuse of lacking morality?So why is it moral when you list the above reasons for doing good deeds, but a "business transaction" when other people do the same?
It's not particularly moral. I was explaining why people might behave morally without religion even if they didn't have this fabled better nature. The fear of an unseen higher power is not necessaryI'm not thinking of the old fashioned fire and brimstone unless you're good stuff. It's not relevant to actual Christianity anyway, because in that religion salvation is by faith, not by good deeds. I'm more thinking of those Christians I know (not nominal/lapsed Catholics) who are really into pleasing God, and showing his love to other people. It works quite well for them to do good deeds individually and collectively.
It's not a case that they wouldn't behave morally without Christianity, but they get a better feeling, and they go the extra mile out of love rather than fear.
Why can they not be really into pleasing their parents or their friends, or even random people on the street? I know I've done an awful lot of things in my life for people who didn't ask for it, didn't know me and would never do anything for me in return. I simply saw that they needed help and I could provide it.
What, to you, is the fundamental difference between religious morality and non-religious that makes religious people behave better? And do you have any evidence that they behave better? And what criteria are you using because if it's something like having sex outside marriage I'm not interested. Only things that hurt others please
That might be. But, and it's a very important but, even if the world would be a terrifying place without belief in God (which I don't think it would be), that does not mean that God exists. Relgious morality might be more effective but that does not mean it's more realistic.And a terrifying position it is, when one is educated in history.
edit: would you mind giving examples of where atheism was a prime motivation for evil deeds? I'd appreciate examples where atheism itself was to blame because any examples I give where religion was involved in badness will surely be blamed on something else or explained away0
Advertisement