Atheists - If there is no "good" and "evil"... and there is no aparent "soul"?

Question

Then please explain the conscience (or little voice) to me.

I am having a hard time rationalizing that we are just animals with more smarts, and bigger brains.

Humans naturally have a desire to do (or be) "good", and not "bad". (also known as the conscience) I do not see where this can be an animalistic tendency.

If you were to consider only ONE aspect of the human nature that relates to the little voice.... and that the human being actually feels (natural endorphins are released) better when giving, than when receiving... that would totally go against the evolutionary concept of survival of the fittest. Animals will steal food/shelter etc from other animals. It would be expected that if this nature was to evolve to humans, then it would benefit a human to be selfish and to hoarde food/supplies/shelter etc. And yet, we dont.

Please explain.

Thanks in advance for your answers!

I am confused - Altruism is not an evolutionary concept. It was first created by Auguste Comte and was later used by evolutionist to describe cells that form together to avoid dying.

This has nothing to do with happiness, or making others feel better "just because". It is not an animalistic behavior to "do unto others as you would have them do to you".

Just because I am religious does not mean I am stupid, or unwilling to learn. I dont think it is necessary to belittle me for asking a sincere question.

Answer 1

Conscience is a faculty or sense that leads to feelings of remorse when we do things that go against our moral values, or which informs our moral judgment before performing such an action. Such feelings are not intellectually reached, though they may cause us to 'examine our conscience' and review those moral precepts, or perhaps resolve to avoid repeating the behaviour.

the scientific view is that a capacity for morality is genetically determined in us, but the set of moral values is acquired, through example, teaching, and imprinting from parents and society. Different cultures have very different moral value systems. Moral values, along with traditions, laws, behaviour patterns, and beliefs, are the defining features of a culture.

as for your evolutionary concept; a group wouldn't survive long if all its members were selfish. cooperation and even altruism are valid strategies for survival. See Mullah's answer above.

Answer 2

1

Answer 3

Humans are social animals, there has been much work done on this, anything by Dawkins will contain at least a chapter on it, read the Selfish Gene or The Blind Watchmaker which clearly explains how altruistic behavior can be good for the survival of genes.

Not having a go at you personally but I find it hard to credit that those who are not read up on these subjects assume that the cleverst minds in existence have not thought long and hard about these issues.


Edit:

No-one is belittling you for asking the question but when every Barnes & Noble store carries at least 20 books which address issues like this. It amazes me why you don't just read them, anything by Dawkins will do or any of the books mentioned here.

And in social animals it is precisely 'do unto others...' a moments thought (if you have read the literature) would let you understand why.

Answer 4

Altruism is a evolutionary concept. A very famous book was written about how altruism can evolve through evolution, it is called "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins. It can very clearly answer your question.

But in short we are a social species and behaviors of humans that benefit others can in the big picture benefit our genes and allow for further spreading of these altruistic tendencies.

Answer 5

Humans evolved as social creatures. Concern for the social good is a survival instinct. That's where the conscience comes from. You'll find that most social creatures have something like a conscience. If you've ever owned a dog, you already know that a dog can act ashamed about doing something they had been taught not too.

It's not only Atheists who hold no belief in a soul; Buddhists don't either.

p.s. I'm Buddhist

Answer 6

Common sense tells all of us what is harmful to others and what is not. It is a question of character as to how we act on that knowledge/instinct. A lot of people are just so selfish that they do not care what harm comes to others as long as their wants and desires are filled. Apparently some of us are more evolved than others.
As far as animals go, well there are differences there too. I once had a tomcat which had kittens with a female cat that I also had. Tomcats are notorious for being mean to kittens and sometimes killing them. When ever I would put out a plate of food for the kittens he would sit and watch all 7 of them eat the food and then lick the plate when they finished.

Answer 7

I just posted this to another question, but altruism has been observed in a number of species. And the reasons for its presence within the evolutionary model has been mathematically demonstrated.

http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~strone01/altruism.html


EDIT:

It doesn't matter when humans came up with the notion of altruism. That is a logical fallacy. ARistotle came up with a completely incorrect system of physics which was widely regarded as true for something like 1700 years. During that time,, physics worked the same as it does today. Physics didn't change because of human perception; and more generally, facts exist indepedent of human perception (except perhaps in the field of quantum particles).

Answer 8

there is "good" and "bad" but these are social values not holy values.
we are the most intelligent animals on earth, that is a fact.
monkeys, that live in large troupes, also do what is good, for the troup, for their offspring, for friends and allies, human and chimpanzee behavior is very similar, as well as other features are.
and we are not unique in our social tendencies to share and cooperate, nor are we totally altruistic, like some animals are.

Answer 9

So you're saying if you didnt believe in reward/punishment in another life you'd go around murdering, stealing etc..?

Wow what a wonderful person you are.

There's no such thing as a soul.

If you are interested in how morality can evolve then I suggest you read 'the evolution of cooperation' by Robert Axelrod.

That's if you want to learn something. In my experience, religious people dont want to.

Answer 10

This has been answered countless times. The professional literature is full of studies and analyses explaining why altruism and other positive social behavior provides evolutionary advantages. All you have to do is look. It is very easy really - if you really are interested in the truth.

----------------------------

Edit –

No animal can touch humans when it comes to selfishness and greed, and no social institution can touch organized religion when it comes to greed and selfishness either.

It is irrelevant who coined the term ‘altruism’. I believe Comte was also the first to use the term’ sociology’. Does that mean it did not exist before it was defined, or that only French philosophers can be sociologists?

There are evolutionary advantages & reasons that explain the presence of altruistic (and social) behavior in terms of survival (genetically, behaviorally, and yes, even psychologically). Why is that difficult to understand? In fact, it does apply in non-human species as well, particularly among ‘social’ animals (e.g., wolves).

As for happiness and bringing joy into peoples lives – do you think the victims of the Inquisition, or those burned at the stake for being witches fully appreciated all the joy, love, and happiness religion was bestowing on them?

If religion makes people so happy and well behaved, why is it responsible for so many of society's pathologies?

A recent study of religiosity and its effects in the ‘Journal of Religion & Society’ (Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies by Gregory S. Paul, Volume 7 (2005) http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html ) found among other things, that the United States is the most religious country among all developed nations (n fact, in terms of religiosity, the US is more similar to 2nd- and 3rd –world nations than it is to any of the developed nations.).

What does being a highly religious country mean?

The study revealed that:


-- The LEAST RELIGIOUS and MOST PRO-EVOLUTION countries have FEWER and LOWER RATES OF ABORTION than the United States.

-- The LEAST RELIGIOUS and MOST PRO-EVOLUTION countries have FEWER and LOWER RATES OF HOMOCIDE than the United States.

-- The LEAST RELIGIOUS and MOST PRO-EVOLUTION countries have FEWER and LOWER RATES OF adolescent and adult SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES than the United States.

-- The LEAST RELIGIOUS and MOST PRO-EVOLUTION countries have FEWER and LOWER RATES of EARLY ADOLESCENT PREGNANCY AND BIRTH than the United States.

In summary, that study states:

-- “In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy, and abortion.”


Looking only within the United States, the same pattern emerges:

In a comparison of the more secular New England region against the most pro-religion and anti-evolution regions in America (the South and the Midwest), the study found that:

-- the MOST RELIGIOUS states in America have MORE HOMICIDES than the most secular pro-evolution states,

-- the MOST RELIGIOUS states in America have HIGHER MORTALITY RATES than the most secular pro-evolution states,

-- the MOST RELIGIOUS states in America have MORE SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASESS than the most secular pro-evolution states,

-- the MOST RELIGIOUS states in America have MORE YOUTH PREGNANCIES than the most secular pro-evolution states,

-- the MOST RELIGIOUS states in America have MORE MARITAL, AND RELATED PERSONAL AND SOCIAL PROBLEMS than the most secular pro-evolution states.


According to the National School Safety Center (NSSC), over the last 20 years there have been more mass student murders in the religious US than in all of the secular developed nations of the world – COMBINED.

The study concludes with a severe negative judgment of THE HARMFUL EFFECTS OF RELIGIOSITY ON AMERICAN LIFE AND SOCIETY:

-- “The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developed democracies, sometimes spectacularly so”.