The problem with that sentiment is: it doesn't work. This is a relativist sentiment, and these ethics are always undermined when the desires of two people conflict. For example, who should my sympathy be strongest for, me or you? My religion says that it should be you. A Darwinian ethic says it should be me.
Hitler used Darwinian ethics to justify his slaughter, so did the communists in Russia and China. Humans are basically not all that good if left to themselves.
2007-04-10 14:53:33
·
answer #1
·
answered by 1,1,2,3,3,4, 5,5,6,6,6, 8,8,8,10 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I can only answer on my own behalf. I am good because it takes a lot of energy to be bad. A liar needs an excellent memory, something I have not. A murderer needs to be brave (in case the other guy fights back) and I'm not brave.
Likewise if you cheat or swindle then you need to watch your back for evermore.
If I don't like to be expelled from society then I will not commit any act that is likely to bar me from it.
If I don't like to end up in prison then I will not commit any act likely to send me there.
I don't believe all this needs to be spelled out. It is self explanatory.
2007-04-10 21:58:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by flugelberry 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
We are good because we are created in God's image, and He called us good.
Einstein's laundry list above came over 1900 years after Christ said, "The first and greatest commandment is this: Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and all your mind, and all your soul. The second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself."
What did Einstein say that Christ had not already said?
2007-04-10 21:55:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by Matt 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Put your hand over a fire. It burns.
You have created a word called pain, which in your mind/body framework translates as bad. You seek to find cold water in which you have labeled good because it soothes the pain.
Water is neither good or bad, water is just water.
Fire is neither good or bad, fire is just fire.
It was our own reaction to these impersonal elements that determined one thing as "bad" and one thing as "good".
To see something as neither good or bad is the equivalent to the sentient term, "god".
2007-04-10 22:11:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Great quote! I am always amazed that people think atheists have no morals because they are not afraid of hell.
I am good because it makes life better. We are social creatures. We crave the society of others, so living in a good way makes that work much better.
2007-04-10 21:54:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by in a handbasket 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
in simpler terms motive means and the result or end have good justification outside of the threats and rewards of religions as they fail the objective in motive and means as well as often in the results too. freud said we want to be good i think it is the reasonable judgment of those who see the big picture.
2007-04-10 21:54:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by dogpatch USA 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
We ain't good. Look at the human race so far...... The knowledge of man is limited and we cannot comprehend God to the fullest extent.
2007-04-10 21:51:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Who's to say we are good at all? We can judge one another as good by our own standards, but outside of that is there anything that can judge us as good or evil?
2007-04-10 21:53:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by ChooseRealityPLEASE 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
actually studies have been proven that we can turn bad as easy as we can stay good ....
2007-04-10 21:51:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by Snooter McPrickles 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
humans are not, but a few are getting close... time will tell.
2007-04-10 21:55:00
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋