Is religion the source of morality?

Question

Read this article from today's New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/science/18mora.html?th&emc=th

Answer 1

Interesting article, I may have to read the book. I agree to some extent as many social animals seem to follow similar "concepts" in that they do place importance on self and group survival. We probably could also draw parallels with self sacrifice as many herd animals will defend their herds young with their lives.

But to answer the question, no, religion is not the "ultimate" source of morality, but probably used inherent morality as tool to increase it's control as a social institution.

Answer 2

To quote just a small portion from the article for those too lazy to read it:
"The ancient system, which he calls moral intuition, is based on the emotion-laden moral behaviors that evolved before the development of language. The modern system — he calls it moral judgment — came after language, when people became able to articulate why something was right or wrong.

The emotional responses of moral intuition occur instantaneously — they are primitive gut reactions that evolved to generate split-second decisions and enhance survival in a dangerous world. Moral judgment, on the other hand, comes later, as the conscious mind develops a plausible rationalization for the decision already arrived at through moral intuition."

This makes perfect sense. Morality is relative to the culture one lives in. Humans who have no religion or belief in a deity with dogma, still have cultural moral norms.

What we deem moral in one culture may be immoral in another. Or what one age deems moral may be immoral in another, and the same Bible used to justify both behaviors.

A prime example is slavery. The ancient Hebrews were the first of all the ancient peoples to even place LIMITS on the human social institution of slavery. Cruelty was prohibited, it became more of an indentured servitude. This was seen as radical then. The Jews were the first peoples to abolish slavery altogether. Yet, for centuries, the laws regulating slavery found in the Torah were used to JUSTIFY the entire INSTITUTION of slavery across Europe by the church. In the United States, the slave states used the Bible to justify slavery of blacks. Now it is almost universally recognized that slavery is IMMORAL. Three hundred years ago in the United States it would have been difficult to find any Christian clergy in any state that would base that claim on the Bible. Rather, the rationalization would have been to support slavery using religion. Religion wasn't the source of determining whether or not slavery was moral, the society's collective values expressed in their social institutions determined their religious value.

Answer 3

as a manner to totally answer this question, one might might desire to regress in historic past to the 1st congnizant human and locate out how he/she lived and how they performed their lives as damaging to those around him/her and how they got here to parent this habit replaced into constructive and likewise how this beneficiality allowed for his or her continued existence, through fact actually one can not say for particular that human beings behave morally in direction of their prey. Then i ought to extra constructive answer your question. given which you're asking some particular element of human habit, and not picking the fewer favorable behaviors as an occasion. one ought to in all possibility say that morality might have been an common theory-technique or that it replaced right into a random notion that should have been taught or remembered in some particular occasion. If faith (and there are tribal religions that provide occasion that non secular/non secular practices grew up with us) got here approximately on an identical time that we more desirable methods, then one ought to in all possibility end that each physique methods are sacred.

Answer 4

NOn love...I think morality comes from where and how you were brought up. Even those who called themselves "religious" lack of morals, and I think there are more hypocrites than someone who isn't a religious fanatic.
I have my moral standards and ethics but never created by religion. Hugs my love!

Answer 5

Are you speaking of objective morality or subjective morality?

If the former, then it has to come from a non-human source...ie God. Call it religion or whatever, it is. Period.

If the latter, then it comes from man's intellect...which can be a bit wifty. For example, the Nazis considered it a moral imperative to murder millions of Jews, Gypsies, Poles, Gays, the handicapped, etc. The Soviet and Chinese communists considered it moral to murder millions of political dissidents. Some in the muslim world consider it moral to murder innocent people simply because the country they live in or religion they practice 'insults' their god or prophet. The ancient romans basked in the bloodlust of the gladitorial games. Mayans, Incas, Aztecs, etc practiced human sacrifice. The list is endless.

Answer 6

It's always seemed like morality was an evolutionary adaptation. Now there's good evidence.

Thanks for the link.

Answer 7

No. There is evidence to the contrary, in fact. Lots of it.



When you rate my comments, Thumbs up means I'm right. Thumbs down means I'm right and in so being, I've pissed you off.

Answer 8

Only for people who lack a backbone

Answer 9

I didn't read the article, but the answer is no.

Answer 10

It certainly isn't the source of mine.
.