Atheists, if we lived in a lawless society, how would you draw the line on morality?

Question

How would you convince others that your system of morality is best for everyone, and why should they listen to you?

Answer 1

the line is when you hurt another with intent to do so. No one can argue that it's not wrong to hurt others intentionally.

Answer 2

All systems of morality are social agreements on how people can interact causing the least amount of problems between people. Morality can be but is not always governed by religion. An atheist can be a very moral person in the confines of society just as a religious person can be amoral. Do you mean lawless as in not having any laws of any kind, such a society would be in chaos and would quickly implode or be over run by another more organized society. Perhaps the best way to come up with a code of laws would be to study the philosophers and thinkers of the past and try to retain the best ideas from each one.

Answer 3

What an interesting question! How could you convince others of your ideals? I am Christian, but the question is one that deserves a look from both point of views. I think the reason you say lawless society is because the majority of laws man follows derive from religious texts and backgrounds. Think about it, the laws of many nations in the world derive from the same laws written in the Ten Commandments. True, we have sepereated many laws into sepereate degrees but the backbone are religious ones. What is to say who is and isn't and what is and isn't moral? I hear by being the strongest, but doesn't that sound like a dictatorship or totalitarian form of rule? How many of those have survived? I have to admit, putting religion aside does put a hamper on some things. Hmm...religion of any kind, or lack thereof, is what guides and groups people together when it comes to beliefs. What if some say its okay to murder people while others totally disagree? If your the strongest, how long before someone comes to take you out through use of force or strategy? Again, this is a great question! I'll have to ask my students this question and see what they come up with and how they compare to "mindful and reasonable adults". Kudos on the question!!!

Answer 4

All cultural or societal rules and laws are ultimately based on the mutual agreement of those participating within that society. Therefore, if a group creates rules and laws with punitive measures attached, then the argument for moral authority falls back on the majority opinion of what is right. God per say isn't necessary for the equation.

It would not be incumbent upon one person to convince others of his or her moral superiority but rather the decenter to prove his or her objection to the rules TO the majority.

In short it is how human progress has occurred throughout the history of civilized culture

Answer 5

I think someone can definitely be an ethical, moral human being without attending any church or believing in any "higher power." How would I "draw the line on morality"? Not sure I understand that part of your question, but basically I believe that it's anyone's right to swing their fist, as long as they do not hit my nose. So basically, I think tolerance of any behavior that does not harm another is a good line to draw. I do not believe, however, that I could convince others of anything, and I wouldn't want to. Diversity of thought, especially on morality, is part of human nature.

Answer 6

We would always have laws because the first time someone did something that stepped accross the morality line, someone would become the new territory sheriff, which is really what you are asking in your second question (IMHO). It would definately have to be through a democracy (a true one-- not the Republic the US lives by in terms of laws and voting for Prez). As a side note, you will never convince "everyone" of anything.

Answer 7

Atheism does not preclude morality. Morals are determined by the group. The United States has its government founded in the rights of man, not the dictates of religion. Divine rights of government was rejected by the founding fathers. The rights of the individual shall not be curtailed by neither the majority nor the vocal minority. It is illegal to deny sexual expression to consenting adults, but that gives no one the right to force anyone else to do anything that they haven't the will or capacity to agree to perform. Weather something is moral or immoral is based on the accepted behavior of the current society.

Answer 8

Being an athiest doesnt really mean you don't have morals. Everyone wants to be treated with respect and a non judgemental attitude. I think as humans we have a general way of kindness to others, no lying, cheating, stealing, etc...We would have to set up a "code of conduct" and follow it as a society. There would have to be consequences for those who don't follow the code of conduct. Take an ethics class, or college intro to ethics. It is an eye opener and with a good professor, very interesting to think about.

Answer 9

Because a set of rules that would be put in place for the benefit of society. But anyway are you seriously saying that a fear of god is the only think that keeps you moral? Are you saying that without god you would go around stabbing kittens, rapping toddlers and shooting old people? Religion isn't the source of morals only a complete idiot who is afraid of a fictionally character thinks that.

Answer 10

Good grief, who said morality had to be based on a religion? I've got no faith but more morality than I really need.

Religious people have no monopoly on morality. It is possible to live a moral life because it is right and not because some geriatric delinquent in the sky said to.

Answer 11

Why would atheists suddenly all be in a lawless society? Would that make them anarchists too? If that is the case, the only way to convince people of anything is to be the strongest. Survival of the fittest.