Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

The world is a better place without religion. Discuss Watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hogree)
    Agreed. But just thought I'd say - the very fact that you don't need a book to understand that it's wrong is presupposing an objective standard of wrong. Which transcends and applies to all men - and thus only be put in place by an objective moral law-giver outside our sphere. So if that's an argument against religion; well, let's just say The Bible agrees with you - Rom 2:15.
    I'm not a Christian but just thought that was very nicely said. Only part I would like to add though is without God, some morals can be deduced from evolution which would help us adapt (natural selection). So because killing reduces chances of survival hence we can then say killing is wrong.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I think religion is just founded on the idea of commonality. Just the essence of it is team spirit. You could get that anywhere in the world. In whatever you do.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Retired_Messiah)
    It has pros and cons, like many other things. There's some really good teachings and philosophies among the really quite crappy ones.



    I could've sworn the first crusade started because the Seljuks (muslims) were invading the Byzantines. Although the Pope and his boys did decide to do more and that and invade Jerusalem so really there's blame to assign all over the place.
    Makes sense but we don't need a religion to assign those to, philosopher can come up with that just fine.

    well i'm not really too informed of that, i just typed in google crusades and i didn't really see anything telling me about muslims in the first paragrah after a skim so :dontknow:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champ_mc99)
    I'm not a Christian but just thought that was very nicely said. Only part I would like to add though is without God, some morals can be deduced from evolution which would help us adapt (natural selection). So because killing reduces chances of survival hence we can then say killing is wrong.
    Cheers, but I'm not so sure about that way of thinking. After all, would not our natural adaption tend towards our own survival (after all, survival of the fittest). So surely we would be happy with all of the "weak" to be wiped out if we followed that "evolutionary morals" way of thinking. After all, it's for the best of the race and that's where killing would be positive evolutionarily. In fact, killing can increase chance of survival as you will have more food for yourself to survive, as there are less taking from you. But we know inwardly it's not right... there seems to be a disconnect.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Religion is a key part of many cultures which make our world the diverse and beautiful place that it can be.

    As long as people don't use it as a front for oppression then I see no problem with it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hogree)
    Cheers, but I'm not so sure about that way of thinking. After all, would not our natural adaption tend towards our own survival (after all, survival of the fittest). So surely we would be happy with all of the "weak" to be wiped out if we followed that "evolutionary morals" way of thinking. After all, it's for the best of the race and that's where killing would be positive evolutionarily. In fact, killing can increase chance of survival as you will have more food for yourself to survive, as there are less taking from you. But we know inwardly it's not right... there seems to be a disconnect.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Yeah that's a good point. It's not all down to evolution.

    But if an animal has the genetic characteristic to care about its offspring then this feature will pass on and hence survive. On the other hand an animal that lacks this characteristic and does not have this feature to care about its offspring (the offspring is eaten/dies of hunger etc.) will not survive in future generations. So already we can view caring for your offspring as a good thing and not caring as bad.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fartinugget;[url="tel:65835861")
    6583586[/url]


    How can i have someone who doesn't exist in my life?
    You just need to believe in him and he will make himself known to you
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trill)
    You just need to believe in him and he will make himself known to you
    That's just a cop out answer. Oh just do x and He'll reveal Himself.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fartinugget)
    That's just a cop out answer. Oh just do x and He'll reveal Himself.
    They say if you look for something hard enough, you will find it. Same goes for Jesus, and ghosts and demons. You need to believe, accept Jesus into your heart and he will show himself, not directly, but miracles will happen....

    Don't have to go to church on Sundays - that's overrated.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trill)
    They say if you look for something hard enough, you will find it. Same goes for Jesus, and ghosts and demons. You need to believe, accept Jesus into your heart and he will show himself, not directly, but miracles will happen....

    Don't have to go to church on Sundays - that's overrated.
    I can't look for something which doesn't exist.
    I believe that ghosts and demons exist but that doesn't mean they actually exist. I can believe and look as hard as i want but as long as i believe in ghosts and demons, this doesn't mean they actually exist.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    every young atheist goes through this phase, you'll most likely grow out of it
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champ_mc99)
    Yeah that's a good point. It's not all down to evolution.

    But if an animal has the genetic characteristic to care about its offspring then this feature will pass on and hence survive. On the other hand an animal that lacks this characteristic and does not have this feature to care about its offspring (the offspring is eaten/dies of hunger etc.) will not survive in future generations. So already we can view caring for your offspring as a good thing and not caring as bad.
    Fair enough. Can see that aspect as part of natural selection. But if some morals are not transmitted by our evolution, where could they come from? I mean, it's not as if we say "It's good to keep your own kids alive, but it doesn't matter about other people or their kids". Again, just seems to be a disconnect that points to a transcendent inbuilt moral law. And, even if we ourselves view such activities as good, what makes it objectively good? Someone else could have another opinion on it, and there's no way you can claim yours is a better opinion - after all, who says evolution brings about the perfect "right and wrong" if it's just an unguided process?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hogree)
    Fair enough. Can see that aspect as part of natural selection. But if some morals are not transmitted by our evolution, where could they come from? I mean, it's not as if we say "It's good to keep your own kids alive, but it doesn't matter about other people or their kids". Again, just seems to be a disconnect that points to a transcendent inbuilt moral law. And, even if we ourselves view such activities as good, what makes it objectively good? Someone else could have another opinion on it, and there's no way you can claim yours is a better opinion - after all, who says evolution brings about the perfect "right and wrong" if it's just an unguided process?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Of course. I agree. Evolution can't explain many morals such as telling the difference between a compliment and an insult in terms of right and wrong and we obviously value children more than "carriers of our genes".
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hogree)
    Fair enough. Can see that aspect as part of natural selection. But if some morals are not transmitted by our evolution, where could they come from? I mean, it's not as if we say "It's good to keep your own kids alive, but it doesn't matter about other people or their kids". Again, just seems to be a disconnect that points to a transcendent inbuilt moral law. And, even if we ourselves view such activities as good, what makes it objectively good? Someone else could have another opinion on it, and there's no way you can claim yours is a better opinion - after all, who says evolution brings about the perfect "right and wrong" if it's just an unguided process?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    But there is no evidence for an inbuilt moral law as societies actoss the ages have had wildly different concepts of right and wrong and they even vary now from country to country. While the obvious ones are probably due to evolution, the finer, more arbitrary ones probably come from societal norms and attitudes which are ultimately invented, just like religions and mythologies.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    But there is no evidence for an inbuilt moral law as societies actoss the ages have had wildly different concepts of right and wrong and they even vary now from country to country. While the obvious ones are probably due to evolution, the finer, more arbitrary ones probably come from societal norms and attitudes which are ultimately invented, just like religions and mythologies.
    That's certainly true that many countries have had different concepts of right and wrong - I would see that as merely an example of people choosing to reject their inward consciences as a result of sin's corrupting influence. What's interesting is that all these cultures have had a sense of right and wrong in itself that they claim to apply to all people. The fact that people have always praised certain things and heaped judgement on certain things, That points to me to an inward inbuilt thing that has been throughout cultural history in the world that there is a right and a wrong that applies to all. Would you say that there Is there a scenario where it might be appropriate to torture a baby merely for the fun of it? In anywhere in the world, could you say that would be acceptable? I think there's an element to which the truths are self-evident. Societal norms and attitudes influence morals within a culture, sure, but the fact that these attitudes pervade cultures everywhere point for me to an ultimate moral truth which they either err from or hold towards.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hogree)
    That's certainly true that many countries have had different concepts of right and wrong - I would see that as merely an example of people choosing to reject their inward consciences as a result of sin's corrupting influence. What's interesting is that all these cultures have had a sense of right and wrong in itself that they claim to apply to all people. The fact that people have always praised certain things and heaped judgement on certain things, That points to me to an inward inbuilt thing that has been throughout cultural history in the world that there is a right and a wrong that applies to all. Would you say that there Is there a scenario where it might be appropriate to torture a baby merely for the fun of it? In anywhere in the world, could you say that would be acceptable? I think there's an element to which the truths are self-evident. Societal norms and attitudes influence morals within a culture, sure, but the fact that these attitudes pervade cultures everywhere point for me to an ultimate moral truth which they either err from or hold towards.
    But what moral truths are common to all peoples and civilisations that cannot be explained by evolution?

    I'm pretty sure there have been societies where babies have been sacrificed though, which is essentially worse than torture.
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by fartinugget)
    Specific humans not humanity as a whole
    Sometimes it's hard to tell

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fartinugget)
    Makes sense but we don't need a religion to assign those to, philosopher can come up with that just fine.
    But the ideas of Karma and treat others as you would like to be treated both came out of religious philosophy. It's not a case of "we didn't need religion to do those", but religion did provide those and thus religion has done some good.

    Furthermore, I would argue if a bloke that was "just a philosopher" came up with those, the ideas probably wouldn't have hit the mainstream. For example you don't see many average people consciously following Kant's categorical imperative to make moral decisions.

    (Original post by fartinugget)
    well i'm not really too informed of that, i just typed in google crusades and i didn't really see anything telling me about muslims in the first paragrah after a skim so :dontknow:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Crusade

    Second paragraph, m8
    It was launched on 27 November 1095 by Pope Urban II with the primary goal of responding to an appeal from Byzantine Emperor
    Alexios I Komnenos, who requested that western volunteers come to his aid and help to repel the invading Seljuk Turks from Anatolia.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Well on an individual level people can be good people without a 'god' but as a society the community tends to be more generous if there is a religion (eg everyone in muslim communities pays zakah to the poor: would that happen without religion)
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    But what moral truths are common to all peoples and civilisations that cannot be explained by evolution?

    I'm pretty sure there have been societies where babies have been sacrificed though, which is essentially worse than torture.
    Sure, babies have been sacrificed tragically but that certainly isn't "for fun", but rather for a man-made purpose. I'd suggest the permitting of murder merely for the "fun of it" would not be in any cultures, anywhere. But even if not, the question isn't whether other cultures have taken part in a practice as such but whether it would be appropriate or "morally acceptable" for that to be okay in any situation. Sure, the culture may have done something - that doesn't mean it was a right thing to do.

    As for morals unexplained by evolution, I'd say you'd have to look deeper- I mean, let's give an example - why is it morally wrong to be selfish? Evolutionarily, the answer would be that it hurts the group. Then, why is it morally wrong to hurt the group? I guess the answer would be that the species wouldn't survive? But why should I want the species to survive? Why should I want myself to survive? All of these seem to depend on prior moral notions - that there is something good and something bad.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources
    AtCTs

    Ask the Community Team

    Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

    Welcome Lounge

    Welcome Lounge

    We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.