i mean, it's necessary to get all our morality from a god, right? an absolute power?
oh wait, it's not?
you say that there is absolute truth without the existence of god? how so? oh, you mean objective, measurable reality. okay. and that absolute truths like "consciousnesses want happiness" can be the basis of morality? but doesn't that lead to hedonist murdering, killing, etc.?
it doesn't? you mean to tell me that in order for you to be happy, you need to live in a happy society? and that's why we don't murder people?
that in fact a society based on murder would actually be a detriment to your own happiness?
oh.
i guess i don't have a question then. humanism has taken care of it.
2007-09-21
01:02:15
·
27 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
please read the question before answering. jeez atheists are touchy.
2007-09-21
01:11:29 ·
update #1
i probably should not have used the word "morals."
oh well. i still think it's funny how up in arms everyone got.
2007-09-21
01:16:47 ·
update #2
in that case i guess i dont have an answer. your common sense has taken care of it. nice
2007-09-21 01:06:30
·
answer #1
·
answered by andrew r 2
·
11⤊
0⤋
People tend to look to their framework for reality to explain things. Xians and other believers tend to do this to a extreme level as the foundation of their belief is an all powerful, knowing god. For some reason they have a hard time understanding concepts like "Morality doesn't need to come from religion" and "Atheism is *not* a religion".
Edit:
Lion of Judah is a perfect example of what I just said. The only framework of reality or belief system he can work in is his religious one and the concept that reality may not match it is not even a consideration.
Edit 2:
Actually, there is strong indication that morals have an basis in biological mechanism, a quick survey of social animals will illustrate many concepts that we hold as "moral". While the genetics are not totally worked out, it is apparent that morals are not just "created" by man's fertile imagination.
Edit 3:
Ethics is also the study of moral systems, i.e. what does hedonism actually mean, what are absolutes, etc.
2007-09-21 01:12:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by Pirate AM™ 7
·
5⤊
0⤋
Yeah... it's strange that people think that there is some kind of 'absolute' morality that can come only from an invisible, magical sky-fairy (god). As a rule, atheists that I have known live far more ethical lives, and behave much more 'morally' than most so-called 'Christians' that I have known. In other words (behavior-wise), the atheists, in general, are more 'christian' than the Christians.
It is very sad (and scary) to realize that there are people incapable of behaving ethically as a matter of self-realization... and need some imaginary supernatural force to ensure your proper behavior, for rear of some kind of eternal supernatural punishment. I dread to think of what their life will be like... and the lives of everyone around... should they come to realize that all of their controlling beliefs are the product of the myths, superstitions, fairy tales and fantastical delusions of an ignorant bunch of Bronze Age fishermen and wandering goat herders.
Cooperation and altruism are inate properties of human existence... a more sophisticated version of the social organization that you can see among pods of orcas, packs of wolves, lion prides and troops of chimpanzees. Moral consensus, moral conscience and mutual empathy are evolved survival traits. These are social constructs... the social lubrication that allows people to exist together. People come away with the misconception that they don't exist, absent religion. The religious puppet masters try to perpetuate that idea, in order to protect their conduits to wealth and power... but that is a canard. This has to do entirely with human nature.
People who don't agree with that should chew on THIS for a little while. Christians make up about 75% of the US population and 75% of the US prison population. No big surprise there.
Atheists, on the other hand, make up about 10% of the US population... but they only make up 0.2% of the US prison population. Now, isn't THAT a surprise? That means that on a per-capita basis, atheists are FIFTY (50) times LESS LIKELY to be incarcerated than Christians. Pretty strange, huh, for a group that has no god-given guiding moral principals?
I can only think of two possibilities that might reasonably be said to account for this discrepancy:
1. Atheists are of a higher ethical and moral caliber than Christians, and thus are less prone to do the same kinds of nasty things that land so many Christians in the slammer;
OR,
2. Atheists are, overall, a lot smarter than Christians and thus, they are less likely to get caught in the course of their transgressions.
It's GOT to be one or the other... take your pick.
(Statistics from US Bureau of Prisons, 1997)
.
2007-09-21 01:25:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
I'm not up in arms. (Though I'm completely flabbergasted that people think that they would be out committing murder and mayhem without their belief that "God" would punish them for doing so.) The fact is this, the morals that people attribute to "God" and think are not possible without religion are absolutely possible without religion. In fact, the "morals" that are taught in religion (not murdering, not raping, not stealing, etc.) are common sense morals, and religion just adopted them and started calling them "from God". It's that simple. No believe in magical supernatural beings necessary.
2007-09-21 02:20:34
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jess H 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think that morals with a tutoring power monitoring us as if were children who obey for fear of punishment is not morals - it is infantile submission.
Real morality comes from our decisions - as human beings who belong to a world community - on what values we choose to guide our behavior as well as from the ways we use to make these values guide our actions.
Such morality is not guided by absolute truths as religions think it should, but by human historical decisions about our lives in this world.
Morals based on absolute truths has only led to intolerance and destruction as the Crusades, Holy Inquisition, Witch Hunting, Jihad...
2007-09-21 01:23:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by CiberNauta 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Morality comes not from religion but from evolution. When any group of creatures evolve the groups whose brain developed a sense of morality tend to survive longer because they're not killing each other. however the groups who do develope the morality part of the brain survive longer and therefore reproduce more and that species as a whole survives longer.
2007-09-21 01:10:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
Morality does not come from god, it comes from the self. and of course atheists can have morals just as a god fearing person can be with out them. the rest of your question is just a wild tangent though, also i'll not attempt to answer it. ('',)
2007-09-21 01:09:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
You made it all unnecessarily complicated.
Atheists are more moral than religious people.
Compare me to any extremist muslim terrorist. I have never ever killed anyone and I don't want to. Who has the most faith in a god and who has the most moral standing? An extreme example, I know, but it should make the point.
2007-09-21 01:08:13
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
10⤊
1⤋
OK explain this, if Atheists have no morals then why do Atheists make up less than 1% of the prison population while the majority are Catholics and Christians?
2007-09-21 01:08:29
·
answer #9
·
answered by Imagine No Religion 6
·
12⤊
1⤋
I'm not really following your rambling....but morality has nothing to do with believing or not believing in god.
Morality is all about how we treat each other. Everyone is born with an inherent sense of what is right and wrong, how the individual chooses to implement this in their day to day lives is that persons choice.
2007-09-21 01:08:42
·
answer #10
·
answered by Truce 4
·
7⤊
2⤋
what gives you the idea that atheists do not have morals? most so-called atheists are clear thinkers and so would not ascribe powers to a supreme that we do not yet know.
The term atheist is inappropriate because it is defined as someone who dnies the existance of a god. There is a better term, humanist.The focus is doing well within our curret dste of being.
2007-09-21 01:16:48
·
answer #11
·
answered by David A M 2
·
2⤊
3⤋