Your question seems to be based on defining "good" based on what we define as "bad" - and this depends on the social contract laid out by the culture in which you live.
Things defined as "bad" in western culture - like adultery, incest, etc. are practiced in non-western cultures. Since these things are not "bad" in these cultures there is not a sense of internal pain or negative consequence associated with them by their practitioners. And I think that's the answer, what is mutually agreed to as being "bad" is how you feel and struggle internally by doing that which society deems as bad, and so the same goes for what is "good".
My opinion. Just the tip of the iceberg and I'm not sure if I've made sense
2007-01-17 02:46:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by Leahlupita 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, let us consider Adam and Eve. Before sin, they were naked and the nakedness didn't seem to be an issue with anyone. After disobedience, the first sin, they were ashamed and tried to cover up their nakedness and hide. How did it suddenly become apparent to Adam and Eve that nakedness was a bad thing whereas it before it was a good thing? Something must have happened at the time when Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Maybe that is when they obtained a conscious, and an awareness that they had not had before.
2007-01-17 10:47:05
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
First, atheist DO believe in a higher power. What they don't believe is in any organized religion. Is what the word a-the-ist means. People are so stupid to label them as satanists or non believers. And whomever doesn't believe in a higher power is aseptic, not atheist.
And goodness is not a specific trademark of any religion. Is just the action of making the difference to a common purpose which is peace. Is what we all want.
About the ten commandments, is the same as laws. If people used common sense, there wouldn't be the need to create laws. Greeks and Romans abused orgies so damn much they had to create a divine law to stop them.
2007-01-17 10:46:31
·
answer #3
·
answered by M'lady 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
It's good for social reasons. Society cannot work unless certain rules are obeyed. I'm an atheist and but I'm also capable of empathy.
Our basic sense of right and wrong is a product of evolution. A society that puts little value on human life will die out whereas a society that values life will survive to produce offspring, who presumably will have similar values.
It's the religious that can justify many an atrocity by their holy writings (look at any country run under Sharia law)
2007-01-17 10:39:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Since we are rather social animals, the well-being of the whole group contributes to the well-being of the individual and vice versa. Consequently, such behavior as adultery, which disrupts the social order, is condemned by the group. Such things as the 10 Commandments and the Code of Hammurabi were efforts to codify these social pressures as tribal society became more and more urban.
2007-01-17 10:40:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Unfortunately, the philosophy of relativism is pervasive in our culture today. With the rejection of God, and Christianity in particular, absolute truth is being abandoned. Our pluralistic society wants to avoid the idea that there really is a right and wrong. This is evidenced in our deteriorating judicial system that has more and more trouble punishing criminals, in our entertainment media which continues to push the envelope of morality and decency, in our schools which teach evolution and "social tolerance", etc. In addition, the plague of moral relativism is encouraging everyone to accept homosexuality, pornography on TV, fornication, and a host of other "sins" that were once considered wrong, but are now being accepted and even promoted in society. It is becoming so pervasive that if you speak out against moral relativism and its "anything goes" philosophy, you're labeled as an intolerant bigot. Of course, this is incredibly hypocritical of those who profess that all points of view are true, yet reject those who profess absolutes in morality. It seems that what is really meant by the moral relativists is that all points of view are true except for the views that teach moral absolutes, or an absolute God, or absolute right and wrong.
For more on this go to:
http://www.carm.org/relativism/whatisrelativism.htm
2007-01-17 10:38:33
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
Take Jesus' words. He answered someone who addressed him as good master. Jesus said none except God is good. Mind you Jesus is believed by Christian as God and so he is good. So read the whole bible to find out what are things or activities God detests or is angry with. So things of God is good. The Bible's tree of knowledge of good and evil has not helped the people to differentiate or do things that are good in the eyes of God. No wonder God forbid the first parents to eat that fruit. But they disobeyed. They ate and yet none of us can claim we know what are good.for everything we see or do.
2007-01-17 10:44:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by Ptuan 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
good is by being responsible. where you dont get anybody offended or hurt. even when there's no god, you can feel it within you.... in contrast, i think without the guide from god we will be like the lower animals that doesn't know whats right or wrong.
2007-01-17 10:42:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by Luchie V 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
Is it still ok to stone your children for being disobedient?
2007-01-17 10:38:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by fourmorebeers 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
thats a good question i don't think many people can answer that correctly because we may never know
2007-01-17 10:36:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by Me 3
·
0⤊
1⤋