Any atheists believe in objective morals?

Question

Where do you believe morality comes from? Who/what ultimately decides right from wrong?

Society, upbringing, and common sense will vary for each person. This can't be objective, can it?

Answer 1

If you mean objectivism like Ayn Rand defined it then NO.
In the sense she used it Objectivism was simple sociopathological behaviour. She was writing for extreme capitalism trying to disprove socialism. What she did was give an intellectual gloss to the politics of self centered amoral greed.

If you mean objective in the terms of cast in stone morality from a higher power that is just pure authoritarianism, fascism if you prefer the term. People who adopt that are usually willing to offer you up as a living sacrafice to their version of the greater good.
That is recorded from Abraham to Hitler.

Answer 2

Yes, I do. I think much of our morals depends on culture and society and can vary, but I believe that there are also things that are objectively right or wrong. I believe that morals come from ourselves and only humanity can decide right from wrong. We do differ in our thinking depending on how we were raised, but there are some things that almost all human beings have in common (except for some with some serious mental disorders), I mean people in all cultures agree that they don't want to be hurt and they have to get along with other people in some way. I don't believe that there is a higher power that sets the rules, but we have to set the rules for ourselves so that we avoid suffering for ourselves and others. And it is an objective truth that people suffer when they are tortured and that most people want to live and don't want to be killed. It is also a fact that a society cannot survive if it becomes normal that people kill each other, if they lie to each other all the time, constantly steal from each other and never help each other. So I also think that morals come from evolution, some morals are simply necessary for survival. There are some basic moral principles that all cultures have in common, e.g. they all have a concept that murder is not allowed (although the definitions of what is murder vary).

Answer 3

Morality is an invention of society.Morality was designed as a basis for allowing large numbers of people to maintain a community without the fear of self destruction.Morality, at it's core, is simply a basic behavior to enhance the common good of all those involved.Early man understood the need for morality and it was they who invented the concept.Morality from a religious stance is merely a perverted version of these basic fundamentals by adding dogma and increasing what is and what is not moral through religious ideology and interpretation.We as a society decide what is right and what is wrong through societal norms and the need to have order out of chaos.Religion seeks to decide what is right and what is wrong by adding the supernatural as an element of that order and including it's own version of order rather then the commonality of basic order.

Answer 4

As an atheist, I believe morals come from the idea that in order for society to succeed, thrive and maintain itself safely, we must adopt an 'unspoken' moral decree. Morality comes from being civilized and the desire to continue to be civilized.

Who or what ultimately decides right from wrong is the future, as odd as that sounds. You learn from your mistakes, but you have to make the mistake first, then in the future you can look back and base your morals on past experience. It is the success (and the desire for future success) of a nation, people or a society that ultimately decides.

Answer 5

Not necessarily an atheist, but I believe that the basis of non-denominational morality is in not infringing upon the basic human rights of others, and in not taking more from the Earth than you give back. In other words, don't lie, cheat, steal, don't force your beliefs on others, don't demand special treatment for your own beliefs, don't exploit for personal gain, and don't assault or otherwise do physical emotional harm to others. And most importantly- offer equal or better restitution for your offenses. No, a few "Hail Mary's" and a couple bucks in the donation box are not restitution; you have to make good with whomever you have wronged. In other words, "do unto others, as you would have done unto you."

Answer 6

Most people are simply born with an innate sense of right or wrong. It doesn't take a lot of thought to know that killing, stealing, and raping are wrong. Those are things that are very painful to people. We have intelligence, common sense, and empathy for our fellow humans that enable us to realize that it is wrong to hurt others. There are other things that are more of a matter of opinion, and over time, society has developed those opinions into a sort of moral law. (Like sex, for example. In and of itself, sex between two consenting adults is not an evil thing. It's a perfectly natural thing. However, people's opinions has turned it from being something perfectly natural into a dirty, evil thing.)

Answer 7

Morality is the result of the social contract, nothing more.

Whatever the majority decides is moral, is moral.

And if there are several different camps who can't agree on that morality, they call the other camps evil and/or declare war on them. Once they kill enough of the other camp, their morality becomes the majority.

The emerging morality in this day and age is increasingly becoming a humanist version. And the old religions aren't liking it one bit.

Answer 8

Certain things are obviously wrong, the main one being taking another's life, but then you get subjective when you add modifiers like "unless it's self defense", "a fetus isn't a 'life'", etc. I believe there are some aspects of morality that are a given and others than must be subjective, but morals are neither solely subjective nor objective.

Answer 9

Yes and no...morality comes from empathy. Kind of golden rule style. But since not everyone HAS empathy, and there is no objective authority, it can't be objective. It can be pretty consistent, though, if it is agreed that suffering is the criteria for immorality.

Answer 10

You're right, none of those things are objective.

But if you notice, morals vary according to time, place, and society, so if you take the long view, they've always been relative.

I don't really mind. I'm a Taoist, relativism doesn't bother me, in fact I can't conceive of it being otherwise.